Cargando…

Subintimal Versus Intraluminal Approach for Femoropopliteal Chronic Total Occlusions Treated With Intravascular Ultrasound Guidance

BACKGROUND: The subintimal approach (SA) is widely used in endovascular therapy for femoropopliteal chronic total occlusion lesions. However, when compared with the intraluminal approach (IA), the safety and efficacy of SA in real‐world practice are not well characterized. Furthermore, there is a pa...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tomoi, Yusuke, Takahara, Mitsuyoshi, Kuramitsu, Shoichi, Soga, Yoshimitsu, Iida, Osamu, Fujihara, Masahiko, Kawasaki, Daizo, Ando, Kenji
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8751881/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34612052
http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.121.021903
_version_ 1784631771881537536
author Tomoi, Yusuke
Takahara, Mitsuyoshi
Kuramitsu, Shoichi
Soga, Yoshimitsu
Iida, Osamu
Fujihara, Masahiko
Kawasaki, Daizo
Ando, Kenji
author_facet Tomoi, Yusuke
Takahara, Mitsuyoshi
Kuramitsu, Shoichi
Soga, Yoshimitsu
Iida, Osamu
Fujihara, Masahiko
Kawasaki, Daizo
Ando, Kenji
author_sort Tomoi, Yusuke
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The subintimal approach (SA) is widely used in endovascular therapy for femoropopliteal chronic total occlusion lesions. However, when compared with the intraluminal approach (IA), the safety and efficacy of SA in real‐world practice are not well characterized. Furthermore, there is a paucity of data on the clinical impact of subintimal and intraluminal wire passage (SWP and IWP, respectively) assessed by intravascular ultrasound. METHODS AND RESULTS: From the IVORY (Intravascular Ultrasound‐Supported Endovascular Therapy in Superficial Femoral Artery) registry, this study included 500 patients undergoing endovascular therapy for femoropopliteal chronic total occlusion lesions (SA, n=67; IA, n=433; and SWP, n=186; IWP, n=314). The primary end point was the cumulative 1‐year incidence of restenosis. The rate of perioperative complications was also assessed. Propensity score matching analysis was performed to adjust for the intergroup differences. After propensity score matching, the final study population consisted of 59 pairs (SA, n=59; IA, n=348) and 170 pairs (SWP, n=170; IWP, n=293), respectively. Cumulative 1‐year incidence of restenosis was comparable between the SA and IA groups (41.0% versus 43.4%, P=0.40). No significant difference in 1‐year restenosis rate between the SWP and IWP groups was observed (48.2% versus 40.8%, P=0.40), although the SWP group tended to be a higher rate of perioperative complications than the IWP group (8.2% versus 4.1%, P=0.07). CONCLUSIONS: At 1 year, both SA and IA showed acceptable results for femoropopliteal chronic total occlusion lesions. Cumulative 1‐year incidence of restenosis was not significantly different between SWP and IWP, whereas perioperative complications occurred more frequently in SWP than in IWP. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.umin.ac.jp; Unique identifier: UMIN000020472.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8751881
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-87518812022-01-14 Subintimal Versus Intraluminal Approach for Femoropopliteal Chronic Total Occlusions Treated With Intravascular Ultrasound Guidance Tomoi, Yusuke Takahara, Mitsuyoshi Kuramitsu, Shoichi Soga, Yoshimitsu Iida, Osamu Fujihara, Masahiko Kawasaki, Daizo Ando, Kenji J Am Heart Assoc Original Research BACKGROUND: The subintimal approach (SA) is widely used in endovascular therapy for femoropopliteal chronic total occlusion lesions. However, when compared with the intraluminal approach (IA), the safety and efficacy of SA in real‐world practice are not well characterized. Furthermore, there is a paucity of data on the clinical impact of subintimal and intraluminal wire passage (SWP and IWP, respectively) assessed by intravascular ultrasound. METHODS AND RESULTS: From the IVORY (Intravascular Ultrasound‐Supported Endovascular Therapy in Superficial Femoral Artery) registry, this study included 500 patients undergoing endovascular therapy for femoropopliteal chronic total occlusion lesions (SA, n=67; IA, n=433; and SWP, n=186; IWP, n=314). The primary end point was the cumulative 1‐year incidence of restenosis. The rate of perioperative complications was also assessed. Propensity score matching analysis was performed to adjust for the intergroup differences. After propensity score matching, the final study population consisted of 59 pairs (SA, n=59; IA, n=348) and 170 pairs (SWP, n=170; IWP, n=293), respectively. Cumulative 1‐year incidence of restenosis was comparable between the SA and IA groups (41.0% versus 43.4%, P=0.40). No significant difference in 1‐year restenosis rate between the SWP and IWP groups was observed (48.2% versus 40.8%, P=0.40), although the SWP group tended to be a higher rate of perioperative complications than the IWP group (8.2% versus 4.1%, P=0.07). CONCLUSIONS: At 1 year, both SA and IA showed acceptable results for femoropopliteal chronic total occlusion lesions. Cumulative 1‐year incidence of restenosis was not significantly different between SWP and IWP, whereas perioperative complications occurred more frequently in SWP than in IWP. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.umin.ac.jp; Unique identifier: UMIN000020472. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-10-06 /pmc/articles/PMC8751881/ /pubmed/34612052 http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.121.021903 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Original Research
Tomoi, Yusuke
Takahara, Mitsuyoshi
Kuramitsu, Shoichi
Soga, Yoshimitsu
Iida, Osamu
Fujihara, Masahiko
Kawasaki, Daizo
Ando, Kenji
Subintimal Versus Intraluminal Approach for Femoropopliteal Chronic Total Occlusions Treated With Intravascular Ultrasound Guidance
title Subintimal Versus Intraluminal Approach for Femoropopliteal Chronic Total Occlusions Treated With Intravascular Ultrasound Guidance
title_full Subintimal Versus Intraluminal Approach for Femoropopliteal Chronic Total Occlusions Treated With Intravascular Ultrasound Guidance
title_fullStr Subintimal Versus Intraluminal Approach for Femoropopliteal Chronic Total Occlusions Treated With Intravascular Ultrasound Guidance
title_full_unstemmed Subintimal Versus Intraluminal Approach for Femoropopliteal Chronic Total Occlusions Treated With Intravascular Ultrasound Guidance
title_short Subintimal Versus Intraluminal Approach for Femoropopliteal Chronic Total Occlusions Treated With Intravascular Ultrasound Guidance
title_sort subintimal versus intraluminal approach for femoropopliteal chronic total occlusions treated with intravascular ultrasound guidance
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8751881/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34612052
http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.121.021903
work_keys_str_mv AT tomoiyusuke subintimalversusintraluminalapproachforfemoropoplitealchronictotalocclusionstreatedwithintravascularultrasoundguidance
AT takaharamitsuyoshi subintimalversusintraluminalapproachforfemoropoplitealchronictotalocclusionstreatedwithintravascularultrasoundguidance
AT kuramitsushoichi subintimalversusintraluminalapproachforfemoropoplitealchronictotalocclusionstreatedwithintravascularultrasoundguidance
AT sogayoshimitsu subintimalversusintraluminalapproachforfemoropoplitealchronictotalocclusionstreatedwithintravascularultrasoundguidance
AT iidaosamu subintimalversusintraluminalapproachforfemoropoplitealchronictotalocclusionstreatedwithintravascularultrasoundguidance
AT fujiharamasahiko subintimalversusintraluminalapproachforfemoropoplitealchronictotalocclusionstreatedwithintravascularultrasoundguidance
AT kawasakidaizo subintimalversusintraluminalapproachforfemoropoplitealchronictotalocclusionstreatedwithintravascularultrasoundguidance
AT andokenji subintimalversusintraluminalapproachforfemoropoplitealchronictotalocclusionstreatedwithintravascularultrasoundguidance
AT subintimalversusintraluminalapproachforfemoropoplitealchronictotalocclusionstreatedwithintravascularultrasoundguidance