We have located links that may give you full text access.
Drug-eluting stents are associated with improved outcomes for the treatment of infrainguinal bypass graft stenoses.
Journal of Vascular Surgery 2018 November 27
BACKGROUND: Existing endovascular therapies for failing infrainguinal bypass grafts are associated with modest patency rates. The use of everolimus drug-eluting stents (eDESs) for endovascular bypass graft revision has not yet been reported. The objective of this study was to describe and to compare clinical outcomes of eDESs vs percutaneous cutting balloons (PCBs) vs percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) for the treatment of infrainguinal bypass graft stenoses.
METHODS: A multicenter, single-institution retrospective analysis of patients with infrainguinal bypass graft stenoses treated by endovascular intervention (August 2010-December 2017) was conducted. The primary study outcome was primary patency of the treated lesion. The secondary outcome was limb salvage. Outcomes are described overall and stratified by endovascular treatment modality using Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank tests.
RESULTS: During the 7-year study period, 43 patients with 78 infrainguinal bypass stenoses were treated by endovascular intervention (eDES, 15; PCB, 23; PTA, 40). Mean age was 63.3 ± 1.7 years, 53.5% were male, and 55.8% were black. The majority of patients were diabetic (60.5%) with a history of smoking (74.4%), and nearly all (83.7%) had two or more comorbidities. Half (48.7%) of bypasses treated were femoral-popliteal bypasses, followed by popliteal-distal (25.6%) and femoral-tibial (25.6%) configurations. The location of revision was the proximal anastomosis in 37.2%, midbypass in 25.6%, and distal anastomosis in 37.2%. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics, bypass configuration, or revision location between treatment groups (P ≥ .19). Technical success for endovascular bypass intervention was 100%. At 2 years after intervention, primary patency was significantly better for patients treated with eDES (81.8%) compared with PCB (54.7%) or PTA (33.2%; log-rank, P = .03). Limb salvage was achieved in 93.6% of patients, including 86.7%, 91.3%, and 97.5% for eDES, PCB, and PTA, respectively (P = .30).
CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study reporting the results of eDESs for the treatment of infrainguinal bypass graft stenoses. Use of eDESs for endovascular bypass graft revision not only is feasible but may have better primary patency than other endovascular therapies. These data suggest that eDESs may be considered a safe and efficacious endovascular technique in the armamentarium for treatment of infrainguinal bypass graft stenoses.
METHODS: A multicenter, single-institution retrospective analysis of patients with infrainguinal bypass graft stenoses treated by endovascular intervention (August 2010-December 2017) was conducted. The primary study outcome was primary patency of the treated lesion. The secondary outcome was limb salvage. Outcomes are described overall and stratified by endovascular treatment modality using Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank tests.
RESULTS: During the 7-year study period, 43 patients with 78 infrainguinal bypass stenoses were treated by endovascular intervention (eDES, 15; PCB, 23; PTA, 40). Mean age was 63.3 ± 1.7 years, 53.5% were male, and 55.8% were black. The majority of patients were diabetic (60.5%) with a history of smoking (74.4%), and nearly all (83.7%) had two or more comorbidities. Half (48.7%) of bypasses treated were femoral-popliteal bypasses, followed by popliteal-distal (25.6%) and femoral-tibial (25.6%) configurations. The location of revision was the proximal anastomosis in 37.2%, midbypass in 25.6%, and distal anastomosis in 37.2%. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics, bypass configuration, or revision location between treatment groups (P ≥ .19). Technical success for endovascular bypass intervention was 100%. At 2 years after intervention, primary patency was significantly better for patients treated with eDES (81.8%) compared with PCB (54.7%) or PTA (33.2%; log-rank, P = .03). Limb salvage was achieved in 93.6% of patients, including 86.7%, 91.3%, and 97.5% for eDES, PCB, and PTA, respectively (P = .30).
CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study reporting the results of eDESs for the treatment of infrainguinal bypass graft stenoses. Use of eDESs for endovascular bypass graft revision not only is feasible but may have better primary patency than other endovascular therapies. These data suggest that eDESs may be considered a safe and efficacious endovascular technique in the armamentarium for treatment of infrainguinal bypass graft stenoses.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app