Giovanni Battista Torsello, Ryan Gouveia E Melo, Thomas Zeller, Tanja Böhme, Grigorios Korosoglou, Raphael Coscas, Konstantinos Stavroulakis, Dimitrios Kapetanios, Giovanni Federico Torsello, Bahaa Nasr
{"title":"对有症状的股深动脉动脉硬化症进行动脉粥样硬化切除术后再进行药物涂层球囊血管成形术与手术治疗的对比。","authors":"Giovanni Battista Torsello, Ryan Gouveia E Melo, Thomas Zeller, Tanja Böhme, Grigorios Korosoglou, Raphael Coscas, Konstantinos Stavroulakis, Dimitrios Kapetanios, Giovanni Federico Torsello, Bahaa Nasr","doi":"10.1177/15266028241284443","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Limited data are available regarding endovascular therapy of arteriosclerotic lesions of the deep femoral artery (DFA). In this study, we compare the outcomes of atherectomy combined with drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty and open repair of DFA lesions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a multicenter retrospective registry of patients with peripheral artery occlusive disease Rutherford categories 2 to 5 treated by surgical profundaplasty (SP) or atherectomy followed by DCB for DFA lesions (symptomatic DFA). The primary endpoint was clinically driven target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR). Overall mortality, target limb reinterventions, major amputation, and major adverse limb events (MALEs) were additionally analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 373 patients treated for an arteriosclerotic lesion of the DFA between February 2015 and August 2021 were included, 301 treated by SP and 72 with atherectomy and DCB. The rates of chronic limb threatening ischemia (CLTI) were 42.2% and 22.2% (p<0.002) for the surgical and endovascular groups, respectively. A previous DFA intervention was more frequent in the endovascular group (30.6% vs 15.3%; p<0.003). Patients who had an open repair were more likely to have an occlusion of the profunda (34.9% vs 19.7%, p=0.014), severe calcified lesions (26.5% vs 5.6%, p=0.001), and lesions longer than 20 mm (95.7% vs 88.7%, p=0.024). After propensity score matching, no significant differences were found with regard to technical and hemodynamic success. At 24 months, no difference was found in terms of freedom from CD-TLR (95.7% vs 96.8%), freedom from all-cause mortality (94.2% vs 98.5%), freedom from MALE (90.4% vs 93.9%), and amputation-free survival (93.8% vs 97%). Following endovascular therapy, length of stay was significantly lower (p<0.001) and any reintervention on the index limb was more frequent (p=0.039).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Patients with CLTI, occlusion of profunda, severe calcified lesions, and longer lesions are more frequently treated by open surgery, while reinterventions are more commonly treated by atherectomy and DCB. In patients with comparable clinical and lesion characteristics after matching, endovascular and surgical reconstruction of DFA lesions showed similar mid-term clinical outcomes. However, the risk of reintervention at the index limb is higher after endovascular treatment. Randomized studies are now warranted to compare both techniques in terms of medical and financial aspects.</p><p><strong>Clinical impact: </strong>Atherectomy followed by DCB of symptomatic DFA is safe and effective. In patients with comparable clinical and lesion characteristics, outcomes are comparable with surgery. However, the risk of reintervention at the index limb is higher after endovascular treatment. Therefore, whenever possible an additional outflow vessel revascularization should be performed by the time of the primary intervention. Randomized studies are warranted to compare endovascular techniques and open surgery also under economic aspects.</p>","PeriodicalId":50210,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Endovascular Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"15266028241284443"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Atherectomy Followed by Drug-Coated Balloon Angioplasty Versus Surgery for Symptomatic Deep Femoral Artery Arteriosclerotic Disease.\",\"authors\":\"Giovanni Battista Torsello, Ryan Gouveia E Melo, Thomas Zeller, Tanja Böhme, Grigorios Korosoglou, Raphael Coscas, Konstantinos Stavroulakis, Dimitrios Kapetanios, Giovanni Federico Torsello, Bahaa Nasr\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/15266028241284443\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Limited data are available regarding endovascular therapy of arteriosclerotic lesions of the deep femoral artery (DFA). In this study, we compare the outcomes of atherectomy combined with drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty and open repair of DFA lesions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a multicenter retrospective registry of patients with peripheral artery occlusive disease Rutherford categories 2 to 5 treated by surgical profundaplasty (SP) or atherectomy followed by DCB for DFA lesions (symptomatic DFA). The primary endpoint was clinically driven target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR). Overall mortality, target limb reinterventions, major amputation, and major adverse limb events (MALEs) were additionally analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 373 patients treated for an arteriosclerotic lesion of the DFA between February 2015 and August 2021 were included, 301 treated by SP and 72 with atherectomy and DCB. The rates of chronic limb threatening ischemia (CLTI) were 42.2% and 22.2% (p<0.002) for the surgical and endovascular groups, respectively. A previous DFA intervention was more frequent in the endovascular group (30.6% vs 15.3%; p<0.003). Patients who had an open repair were more likely to have an occlusion of the profunda (34.9% vs 19.7%, p=0.014), severe calcified lesions (26.5% vs 5.6%, p=0.001), and lesions longer than 20 mm (95.7% vs 88.7%, p=0.024). After propensity score matching, no significant differences were found with regard to technical and hemodynamic success. At 24 months, no difference was found in terms of freedom from CD-TLR (95.7% vs 96.8%), freedom from all-cause mortality (94.2% vs 98.5%), freedom from MALE (90.4% vs 93.9%), and amputation-free survival (93.8% vs 97%). Following endovascular therapy, length of stay was significantly lower (p<0.001) and any reintervention on the index limb was more frequent (p=0.039).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Patients with CLTI, occlusion of profunda, severe calcified lesions, and longer lesions are more frequently treated by open surgery, while reinterventions are more commonly treated by atherectomy and DCB. In patients with comparable clinical and lesion characteristics after matching, endovascular and surgical reconstruction of DFA lesions showed similar mid-term clinical outcomes. However, the risk of reintervention at the index limb is higher after endovascular treatment. Randomized studies are now warranted to compare both techniques in terms of medical and financial aspects.</p><p><strong>Clinical impact: </strong>Atherectomy followed by DCB of symptomatic DFA is safe and effective. In patients with comparable clinical and lesion characteristics, outcomes are comparable with surgery. However, the risk of reintervention at the index limb is higher after endovascular treatment. Therefore, whenever possible an additional outflow vessel revascularization should be performed by the time of the primary intervention. Randomized studies are warranted to compare endovascular techniques and open surgery also under economic aspects.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50210,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Endovascular Therapy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"15266028241284443\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Endovascular Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/15266028241284443\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Endovascular Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15266028241284443","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Atherectomy Followed by Drug-Coated Balloon Angioplasty Versus Surgery for Symptomatic Deep Femoral Artery Arteriosclerotic Disease.
Purpose: Limited data are available regarding endovascular therapy of arteriosclerotic lesions of the deep femoral artery (DFA). In this study, we compare the outcomes of atherectomy combined with drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty and open repair of DFA lesions.
Methods: This is a multicenter retrospective registry of patients with peripheral artery occlusive disease Rutherford categories 2 to 5 treated by surgical profundaplasty (SP) or atherectomy followed by DCB for DFA lesions (symptomatic DFA). The primary endpoint was clinically driven target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR). Overall mortality, target limb reinterventions, major amputation, and major adverse limb events (MALEs) were additionally analyzed.
Results: A total of 373 patients treated for an arteriosclerotic lesion of the DFA between February 2015 and August 2021 were included, 301 treated by SP and 72 with atherectomy and DCB. The rates of chronic limb threatening ischemia (CLTI) were 42.2% and 22.2% (p<0.002) for the surgical and endovascular groups, respectively. A previous DFA intervention was more frequent in the endovascular group (30.6% vs 15.3%; p<0.003). Patients who had an open repair were more likely to have an occlusion of the profunda (34.9% vs 19.7%, p=0.014), severe calcified lesions (26.5% vs 5.6%, p=0.001), and lesions longer than 20 mm (95.7% vs 88.7%, p=0.024). After propensity score matching, no significant differences were found with regard to technical and hemodynamic success. At 24 months, no difference was found in terms of freedom from CD-TLR (95.7% vs 96.8%), freedom from all-cause mortality (94.2% vs 98.5%), freedom from MALE (90.4% vs 93.9%), and amputation-free survival (93.8% vs 97%). Following endovascular therapy, length of stay was significantly lower (p<0.001) and any reintervention on the index limb was more frequent (p=0.039).
Conclusion: Patients with CLTI, occlusion of profunda, severe calcified lesions, and longer lesions are more frequently treated by open surgery, while reinterventions are more commonly treated by atherectomy and DCB. In patients with comparable clinical and lesion characteristics after matching, endovascular and surgical reconstruction of DFA lesions showed similar mid-term clinical outcomes. However, the risk of reintervention at the index limb is higher after endovascular treatment. Randomized studies are now warranted to compare both techniques in terms of medical and financial aspects.
Clinical impact: Atherectomy followed by DCB of symptomatic DFA is safe and effective. In patients with comparable clinical and lesion characteristics, outcomes are comparable with surgery. However, the risk of reintervention at the index limb is higher after endovascular treatment. Therefore, whenever possible an additional outflow vessel revascularization should be performed by the time of the primary intervention. Randomized studies are warranted to compare endovascular techniques and open surgery also under economic aspects.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Endovascular Therapy (formerly the Journal of Endovascular Surgery) was established in 1994 as a forum for all physicians, scientists, and allied healthcare professionals who are engaged or interested in peripheral endovascular techniques and technology. An official publication of the International Society of Endovascular Specialists (ISEVS), the Journal of Endovascular Therapy publishes peer-reviewed articles of interest to clinicians and researchers in the field of peripheral endovascular interventions.