Retrospective Case Control Matched Comparison of the Antegrade Versus Retrograde Strategy After Antegrade Recanalisation Failure in Complex de novo Femoropopliteal Occlusive Lesions.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate dissection severity, need for bailout stenting and limb outcomes in patients undergoing antegrade vs. retrograde revascularisation. METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent either antegrade or retrograde revascularisation after failed antegrade recanalisation of long femoropopliteal chronic total occlusion (CTO) due to symptomatic peripheral artery disease between January 2017 and June 2022 were studied. Retrospective case control matching was used to adjust for lesion length and calcification using the peripheral artery calcification scoring system (PACSS). Procedural outcomes included severity of dissection (Type A to F dissections, numerically graded on a scale from 0 - 6 with increasing severity) after angioplasty and number and location of stents needed to be implanted during the index procedure. Additionally, clinically driven target lesion revascularisation (CD-TLR) and major (above ankle) amputation rates were assessed during follow up. RESULTS: A total of 180 patients were analysed who underwent antegrade (n = 90) or retrograde after failed antegrade (n = 90) recanalisation. The median patient age was 76.0 (interquartile range [IQR] 67.0, 82.0) years and 76 (42.2%) were female. Moreover, 78 patients (43.3%) had intermittent claudication, whereas 102 (56.7%) had chronic limb threatening ischaemia (CLTI). The mean lesion length was 30.0 (IQR 24.0, 36.0) cm with moderate to severe (3.0 [IQR 2.0, 4.0]) lesion calcification. Dissection severity after angioplasty was higher in the antegrade than retrograde after failed antegrade recanalisation group (4.0 [IQR 3.0, 4.0] vs. 3.0 [IQR 2.0, 4.0]; p < .001). Additionally, the number of stents in all segments and the rate of bailout stenting in popliteal segments was significantly higher with the antegrade strategy (2.0 [IQR 1.0, 3.0] vs. 1.0 [IQR 0, 2.0], p < .010; and 37% vs. 14%, p < .001). During a median follow up of 1.48 (IQR 0.63, 3.09) years, CD-TLR rates (p = .90) and amputation rates in patients with CLTI (p = .15) were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: In complex femoropopliteal CTOs, retrograde after failed antegrade recanalisation, is safe for endovascular revascularisation, which in experienced hands may result in less severe dissections and lower rates of stent placement. However, considering the relatively short follow up, CD-TLR and amputation rates were not statistically different between the two approaches. [German Clinical Trials Register: DRKS00015277.].

Safety and effectiveness of the Phoenix atherectomy device for endovascular treatment of common femoral and popliteal arteries: Results of the EN-MOBILE trial.

Background: This study aimed to assess the peri- and postprocedural outcomes of atherectomy-assisted endovascular treatment of the common femoral (CFA) and popliteal arteries. Methods: Phoenix atherectomy was used for the treatment of 73 and 53 de novo CFA and popliteal artery lesions, respectively, in 122 consecutive patients. Safety endpoints encompassed perforation and peripheral embolization. Postprocedural endpoints included freedom from clinically driven target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR) and clinical success (an improvement of ⩾ 2 Rutherford category [RC]). In addition, 531 patients treated for popliteal artery stenosis or occlusion without atherectomy were used as a comparator group. Results: Procedural success (residual stenosis < 30% after treatment) was 99.2%. The need for bail-out stenting was 2 (2.7%) and 3 (5.7%) in CFA and popliteal artery lesions, respectively. Only one (1.4%) embolization occurred in the CFA, which was treated by catheter aspiration. No perforations occurred. After 1.50 (IQR = 1.17-2.20) years, CD-TLR occurred in seven (9.2%) and six (14.6%) patients with CFA and popliteal artery lesions, respectively, whereas clinical success was achieved in 62 (91.2%) and 31 (75.6%), respectively. Patients treated with atherectomy and DCB in the popliteal artery after matching for baseline RC, lesion calcification, length, and the presence of chronic total occlusion, exhibited higher freedom from CD-TLR compared to the nondebulking group (HR = 3.1; 95% CI = 1.1-8.5, p = 0.03). Conclusion: Atherectomy can be used safely and is associated with low rates of bail-out stenting in CFA and popliteal arteries. CD-TLR and clinical success rates are clinically acceptable. In addition, for the popliteal artery, atherectomy combined with DCB demonstrates lower CD-TLR rates compared to a DCB alone strategy. (German Clinical Trials Register: DRKS00016708).