Short-term outcomes of endovascular management of acute limb ischemia using aspiration mechanical thrombectomy

OBJECTIVE

Management of acute limb ischemia (ALI) has seen greater utilization of catheter-based interventions over the last two decades. Data on their efficacy is largely based on comparisons of catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) and open thrombectomy. During this time, many adjuncts to CDT have emerged with different mechanisms of action, including pharmacomechanical thrombolysis (PMT) and aspiration mechanical thrombectomy (AMT). However, the safety and efficacy of newer adjuncts like AMT have not been well established. This study is a retrospective analysis of the contemporary management of ALI comparing patients treated with aspiration mechanical thrombectomy to patients treated with the more established CDT adjunct, pharmacomechanical thrombolysis.

METHODS

Patients undergoing peripheral endovascular intervention for ALI using an adjunctive device were identified through query of the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) Peripheral Vascular Intervention (PVI) module from 2014 to 2019. Patients with a nonviable extremity (Rutherford ALI Stage 3), prior history of ipsilateral major amputation, popliteal aneurysm, procedures that were deemed elective (>72 h from admission), procedures that did not utilize an endovascular adjunctive device, and patients without short-term follow-up were all excluded from analysis. The primary outcome was a composite outcome of freedom from major amputation and/or death in the perioperative time period.

RESULTS

We identified 528 patients with Rutherford ALI Stage 1 or 2 who were treated with an endovascular adjunct. 433 patients did not undergo aspiration mechanical thrombectomy (no AMT group) and 95 patients did undergo aspiration mechanical thrombectomy (AMT group). The amputation-free survival across all patients was 93.4%. There were significant differences in demographic, comorbidity, and treatment variables between groups (e.g., gender, prior percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), history of prior peripheral artery disease intervention, and history of prior infra-inguinal PVI), so a propensity score matched analysis was included to account for these group differences. In the propensity score matched analysis, there was no significant difference in major amputation (AMT 7.4% vs no AMT 3.2%, p = 0.13) or death (AMT 95.8% survival vs no AMT 98.4% survival, p = 0.23) with the use of aspiration mechanical thrombectomy. However, there was significantly worse amputation-free survival with the use of aspiration mechanical thrombectomy (AMT 88.4% vs no AMT 95.3%, p = 0.03). On multivariate analysis, prior supra-inguinal bypass (OR 4.85, 1.70-13.84, p = 0.003), Rutherford ALI Stage 2B (OR 3.13, 1.47-6.67, p = 0.003), and aspiration mechanical thrombectomy (OR 2.71, 1.03-7.17, p = 0.05) were associated with the composite outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Short-term amputation-free survival rates of endovascular management of acute limb ischemia are adequate across all modalities. However, aspiration mechanical thrombectomy was associated with significantly worse amputation-free survival compared to other endovascular adjuncts alone (i.e., pharmacomechanical thrombolysis). Severe limb ischemia (Rutherford ALI Stage 2B) and prior supra-inguinal bypass were associated with worse amputation-free survival regardless of the choice of endovascular intervention.

AngioJet rheolytic thrombectomy for the treatment of deep vein thrombosis in elderly patients: Increase the risk of acute kidney injury?

Objective

The objective of this study was to investigate the risk of acute kidney injury in elderly patients compared with nonelderly patients undergoing AngioJet rheolytic thrombectomy for treatment of acute deep vein thrombosis.

Methods

A retrospective review of all patients who underwent AngioJet rheolytic thrombectomy for the treatment of acute deep vein thrombosis between November 1, 2014 and August 1, 2022 was conducted. Their baseline demographics, comorbidities, clinical characteristics, procedural details, and postoperative course were reviewed.

Results

A total of 105 eligible patients were reviewed; 45 patients were in the elderly group, and 60 were in the nonelderly group. Except for age (p < 0.001), no significant differences regarding demographics were detected (p >0.05). Transient macroscopic hemoglobinuria occurred in all patients during the first 24 h post-AngioJet rheolytic thrombectomy. The overall morbidity of acute kidney injury in the two groups was 11.4%, and the nonelderly group had a similar rate of acute kidney injury (8.3%) to the elderly group (15.6%). None of the 12 patients progressed to dialysis within the postoperative period, and the mean acute kidney injury recovery time of the elderly group was 5.86 ± 1.57 days, which was longer than the 3.60 ± .89 days of the nonelderly group (p = 0.017).

Conclusion

The use of AngioJet rheolytic thrombectomy for the treatment of patients with acute deep vein thrombosis is associated with a potential risk of acute kidney injury, which seems to have a comparable rate in elderly and nonelderly patients. acute kidney injury in the elderly group tends to need a longer recovery time, which requires postoperative vigilance for this population.

Pharmacologic and Pharmacomechanical Thrombolysis for Acute Deep Vein Thrombosis: Focus on ATTRACT CME

Systemically delivered pharmacologic thrombolysis for acute deep vein thrombosis long ago gave way to catheter delivery of plasminogen activators within the clot. This simple concept resulted in markedly improved efficacy and safety. In an effort to accelerate thrombus dissolution or extraction, mechanical methods were developed, but the initial techniques left substantial residual thrombus that required subsequent catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT). It was soon observed that combined pharmacomechanical thrombolysis was more effective than either one alone. Randomized trials of catheter-based strategies for thrombus removal have documented objective benefit, including improved patency, preserved valve function, and reduced post-thrombotic syndrome. The largest randomized study is the ATTRACT trial published at the end of 2017. Although mild post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS) was no different between the pharmacomechanical catheter-directed thrombolysis (PCDT) and control groups, acute pain and swelling and moderate-to-severe PTS were reduced with PCDT. Additional analyses from this robust data set are forthcoming.