Impact of Polyvascular Disease in Patients Undergoing Unprotected Left Main Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has demonstrated its safety and efficacy in treating left main (LM) coronary artery disease (CAD) in select patients. Polyvascular disease (PolyVD) is associated with adverse events in all-comers with CAD. However, there is little data examining the interplay between PolyVD and LM-PCI, which we sought to investigate in a retrospective single-center study. We included patients who underwent unprotected LM-PCI at a tertiary center from 2012 to 2019. The patient population was stratified based on the presence or absence of PolyVD (i.e., medical history of cerebrovascular and/or peripheral artery disease in addition to LM-CAD). The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) combining all-cause mortality and spontaneous myocardial infarction within 1 year after index PCI. Overall, 869 patients were included, and 23.8% of the population had PolyVD. Individuals with PolyVD were older and had a greater burden of co-morbidities. After 1-year follow-up, individuals with PolyVD exhibited significantly higher rates of both MACE (22.8% vs 9.4%, p <0.001) and bleeding events compared with those without PolyVD. MACE was primarily driven by an increase in all-cause mortality (18.3% vs 7.1%, p <0.001). Results persisted after adjusting for confounders. In conclusion, in patients who underwent LM-PCI, the presence of PolyVD is linked to an increased risk of MACE and bleeding after 1 year of follow-up, which highlights the vulnerability of this patient population.

Cross-Seal IDE Trial: Prospective, Multicenter, Single-Arm Study of the Cross-Seal Suture-Mediated Vascular Closure Device System.

BACKGROUND: An increasing number of interventional procedures require large-sheath technology (>12F) with a favorable outcome with endovascular rather than open surgical access. However, vascular complications are a limitation for the management of these patients. This trial aimed to determine the effectiveness and safety of the Cross-Seal suture-mediated vascular closure device in obtaining hemostasis at the target limb access site following interventional procedures using 8F to 18F procedural sheaths. METHODS: The Cross-Seal IDE trial (Investigational Device Exemption) was a prospective, single-arm, multicenter study in subjects undergoing percutaneous endovascular procedures utilizing 8F to 18F ID procedural sheaths. The primary efficacy end point was time to hemostasis at the target limb access site. The primary safety end point was freedom from major complications of the target limb access site within 30 days post procedure. RESULTS: A total of 147 subjects were enrolled between August 9, 2019, and March 12, 2020. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement was performed in 53.7% (79/147) and percutaneous endovascular abdominal/thoracic aortic aneurysm repair in 46.3% (68/147) of subjects. The mean sheath ID was 15.5±1.8 mm. The primary effectiveness end point of time to hemostasis was 0.4±1.4 minutes. An adjunctive intervention was required in 9.2% (13/142) of subjects, of which 2.1% (3/142) were surgical and 5.6% (8/142) endovascular. Technical success was achieved in 92.3% (131/142) of subjects. Freedom from major complications of the target limb access site was 94.3% (83/88). CONCLUSIONS: In selected patients undergoing percutaneous endovascular procedures utilizing 8F to 18F ID procedural sheath, Cross-Seal suture-mediated vascular closure device achieved favorable effectiveness and safety in the closure of the large-bore arteriotomy. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03756558.

Outcomes for Patients With Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia After Direct and Indirect Endovascular and Surgical Revascularization: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this review and meta-analysis is to determine the clinical outcome differences between patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia who underwent direct versus indirect angiosome revascularization using either the surgical or endovascular approach. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The data sources used for article selection included PubMed, Embase/Medline, Cochrane reviews, and Web of Science (All studies were in English and included up to September 2023). All articles included were comparative in design, including retrospective, prospective, and randomized controlled trials that compared the clinical outcomes between direct and indirect angiosome-guided revascularization in chronic limb-threatening ischemia. A random-effects model was used to determine the measure of association between direct revascularization and amputation-free survival, wound healing, and overall survival. Publication bias was assessed with both Begg's and Egger's test, and heterogeneity was calculated using an I2. RESULTS: Data from 9 articles were analyzed and reported in this review. Direct revascularization was associated with improved amputation-free survival (odds ratio [OR]=2.632, confidence interval [CI]: 1.625, 4.265), binary wound healing (OR=2.262, CI: 1.518, 3.372), and overall survival (OR=1.757, CI: 1.176, 2.625). Time until wound healed was not associated with either direct or indirect revascularization (Standard Mean Difference [SMD]=-2.15, p=0.11). There was a low risk of bias across all studies according to the RoB 2.0 tool. CONCLUSION: Direct revascularization is associated with improved amputation-free survival, overall survival, and wound healing in chronic limb-threatening ischemic patients compared to the indirect approach. CLINICAL IMPACT: Preservation of the lower extremity is critical for preventing mortality and maintaining independence. The benefit of angiosome-guided revascularization for chronic limb-threatening ischemia remains controversial. The authors of this article aim to review the current literature and compare direct and indirect angiosome-guided intervention for preserving the lower extremity. Current findings suggest direct angiosome-guided intervention reduces amputation rates and improves survival; however, many trials neglect to address the multifactorial approach needed in wound care management.

Single Center Outcomes of Percutaneous Deep Vein Arterialization in Patients with End-Stage Peripheral Artery Disease.

Background: Peripheral artery disease (PAD) can present as chronic limb threatening ischemia (CLTI) with ischemic pain and tissue loss. Progression of distal disease can lead to a "no option" or end-stage disease without traditional open or endovascular revascularization due to lack of pedal targets. Innovations in endovascular technology allow for the use of percutaneous deep vein arterialization (pDVA) to treat patients with CLTI. Purpose: We describe our experience and technique for treating four patients with end-stage PAD with pDVA. Research Design: Four patients with end-stage PAD were followed during and after pDVA creation. Technical success, complications, wound healing, and freedom from major amputation were analyzed. Data Collection and Analysis: Patient data and outcomes were collected via chart review and at time of follow up appointments in vascular surgery clinic. Results: Technical success was 100%, without post-procedural complications, and patients were continued on antiplatelet and anticoagulation. Three patients (75%) had successful wound healing, with 2 patients healing after transmetatarsal amputation (TMA), and 1 healing a distal foot ulceration that did not require surgery. One patient had worsening ischemic breakdown of a TMA, despite re-intervention on the pDVA, which required a below knee amputation (BKA). Freedom from major amputation was 75% overall, with an average follow-up time of 410 days post-procedure (Range: 113-563 days). Conclusions: Percutaneous deep vein arterialization attempts to provide blood flow to the preserved venous bed in patients with end-stage PAD. Exploration and utilization of this technique continues to expand in the modern vascular era. This case series highlights 4 patients with end-stage PVD who underwent pDVA, with 100% procedural success, and 75% limb salvage rate.

Drug-Eluting Resorbable Scaffold versus Angioplasty for Infrapopliteal Artery Disease.

BACKGROUND: Among patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) and infrapopliteal artery disease, angioplasty has been associated with frequent reintervention and adverse limb outcomes from restenosis. The effect of the use of drug-eluting resorbable scaffolds on these outcomes remains unknown. METHODS: In this multicenter, randomized, controlled trial, 261 patients with CLTI and infrapopliteal artery disease were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive treatment with an everolimus-eluting resorbable scaffold or angioplasty. The primary efficacy end point was freedom from the following events at 1 year: amputation above the ankle of the target limb, occlusion of the target vessel, clinically driven revascularization of the target lesion, and binary restenosis of the target lesion. The primary safety end point was freedom from major adverse limb events at 6 months and from perioperative death. RESULTS: The primary efficacy end point was observed (i.e., no events occurred) in 135 of 173 patients in the scaffold group and 48 of 88 patients in the angioplasty group (Kaplan-Meier estimate, 74% vs. 44%; absolute difference, 30 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 15 to 46; one-sided P<0.001 for superiority). The primary safety end point was observed in 165 of 170 patients in the scaffold group and 90 of 90 patients in the angioplasty group (absolute difference, -3 percentage points; 95% CI, -6 to 0; one-sided P<0.001 for noninferiority). Serious adverse events related to the index procedure occurred in 2% of the patients in the scaffold group and 3% of those in the angioplasty group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with CLTI due to infrapopliteal artery disease, the use of an everolimus-eluting resorbable scaffold was superior to angioplasty with respect to the primary efficacy end point. (Funded by Abbott; LIFE-BTK ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04227899.).

Perioperative management of infant inguinal hernia surgery; a review of the recent literature.

Inguinal hernia surgery is one of the most common electively performed surgeries in infants. The common nature of inguinal hernia combined with the high-risk population involving a predominance of preterm infants makes this a particular area of interest for those concerned with their perioperative care. Despite a large volume of literature in the area of infant inguinal hernia surgery, there remains much debate amongst anesthetists, surgeons and neonatologists regarding the optimal perioperative management of these patients. The questions asked by clinicians include; when should the surgery occur, how should the surgery be performed (open or laparoscopic), how should the anesthesia be conducted, including regional versus general anesthesia and airway devices used, and what impact does anesthesia choice have on the developing brain? There is a paucity of evidence in the literature on the concerns, priorities or goals of the parents or caregivers but clearly their opinions do and should matter. In this article we review the current clinical surgical and anesthesia practice and evidence for infants undergoing inguinal hernia surgery to help clinicians answer these questions.

Chocolate Touch Versus Lutonix Drug-Coated Balloon for Femoropopliteal Lesions in Diabetes: The Chocolate Touch Study.

BACKGROUND: The randomized Chocolate Touch Study demonstrated that in patients undergoing treatment of femoropopliteal artery lesions, the Chocolate Touch drug-coated balloon (DCB) was safe and had superior efficacy at 12 months compared with the Lutonix DCB. We report the prespecified diabetes subanalysis comparing outcomes among patients with and without diabetes mellitus (DM). METHODS: Patients with claudication or ischemic rest pain (Rutherford class 2-4) were randomized to Chocolate Touch or Lutonix DCB. The primary efficacy endpoint was DCB success defined as primary patency at 12 months (peak systolic velocity ratio <2.4 by duplex ultrasound without clinically driven target lesion revascularization in the absence of bailout stenting). The primary safety endpoint was freedom from major adverse events at 12 months, a composite of target limb-related death, major amputation, or reintervention. RESULTS: A total of 313 patients (38% DM [n=119]) were randomized to either Chocolate Touch (n=66/152) or Lutonix DCB (n=53/161). Among patients with DM, DCB success was 77.2% and 60.5% (p=0.08), and in non-DM patients, DCB success was 80% and 71.3% (p=0.2114) for the Chocolate Touch and Lutonix DCB, respectively. The primary safety endpoint was similar for both cohorts regardless of DM status (interaction test, p=0.96). CONCLUSIONS: This randomized trial demonstrated similar safety and efficacy for the treatment of femoropopliteal disease with the Chocolate Touch DCB compared with using the Lutonix DCB regardless of DM status at 12 months. CLINICAL IMPACT: This substudy of the Chocolate Touch Study demonstrated similar safety and efficacy for treatment of femoropopliteal disease of the Chocolate Touch DCB compared with the Lutonix DCB regardless of diabetes (DM) status at 12 months. Endovascular therapy has become the therapy of choice for the treatment of most symptomatic femoropopliteal lesions regardless of DM status. These results give clinicians another option when treating femoropopliteal disease in this high-risk patient population.

IVUS Improves Outcomes With SUPERA Stents for the Treatment of Superficial Femoral-Popliteal Artery Disease.

BACKGROUND: Nitinol interwoven bare metal stents represent an advancement in stent technology; however, nominal deployment remains an area of focus. Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) has been shown to improve outcomes in both the coronary and peripheral vasculature by providing the operator with greater vessel detail; however, the use of adjunctive IVUS with nitinol bare metal stents has not been widely studied. This studies aims to determine the effect of IVUS when used adjunctively with nitinol interwoven bare metal stents in the management of femoropopliteal lesions. DESIGN: Retrospective study. METHODS: This study included a cohort of 200 consecutive patients with peripheral artery disease. All patients were treated with ≥1 Supera bare metal stent, and 91 received adjunctive IVUS imaging prior to stent deployment. Deployment conditions of nominal, compressed, and elongated were measured, and the primary clinical outcomes included target lesion reintervention, amputation, and mortality. This study also showed that 8.3 number needed to treat (NNT) patients must be treated with IVUS to avoid an additional revascularization event. RESULTS: The patients who received IVUS had a significantly greater number of nominally deployed stents (p<0.001). Patients who had IVUS imaging also had significantly lower reintervention rates compared with those who did not receive IVUS imaging (p=0.047). CONCLUSION: The IVUS and angiography decreases clinically-driven target lesion reintervention and increases nominal deployment compared with angiography alone in femoropopliteal lesions treated with interwoven bare metal nitinol stents. CLINICAL IMPACT: Endovascular surgones may conisder the adjuctive use of IVUS when using the Supera stent for the treatment of infra inguinal superficial femoral artery lesions. The adjunct use of IVUS may lead to improved sizing, vessel prep, deployment, and ultiamtely reduction in CD-TLR.

Pooled study-level analysis of randomized controlled trials analyzing the effect of negative pressure wound therapy with irrigation vs traditional negative pressure wound therapy on diabetic foot outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: The benefits of NPWT-T for the diabetic foot have been established. The addition of regular periodic irrigation with broad-spectrum antiseptic solution has been shown to reduce bioburden and total bacterial colonies; however, debate remains as to the clinical effect on diabetic foot outcomes. OBJECTIVE: This study investigated the differences between NPWT-T and NPWT-I for treatment of the diabetic foot and the associated clinical outcomes. METHODS: PubMed, Medline/Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched for relevant literature published between January 1, 2002, and March 1, 2022. Keywords included "Negative Pressure Wound Therapy" AND "Instillation" OR "Irrigation." Three studies with a total of 421 patients (NPWT-T [n = 223], NPWT-I [n = 198]) were included in the meta-analysis. RESULTS: No significant differences were observed between NPWT-T and NPWT-I for BWC (OR, 1.049; 95% CI, 0.709-1.552; P =.810), time to wound closure (SMD, -0.039; 95% CI, -0.233-0.154; P =.691), LOS (SMD, 0.065; 95% CI, -0.128-0.259; P =.508), or AEs (OR, 1.092; 95% CI, 0.714-1.670; P =.69). CONCLUSION: Results of this systematic review and meta-analysis indicate that further RCTs are required to assess the role of NPWT-I in the management of DFU and DFI.

A comparison of operative and anesthetic techniques for inguinal hernia repair in infants.

BACKGROUND: Pediatric inguinal hernia repair (IHR) is increasingly performed using minimally invasive surgery (MIS) but has only recently been described using caudal block without endotracheal intubation. We evaluated the surgical outcomes and resource utilization of infants undergoing hernia repair, comparing both the operative approach (open/MIS) and anesthetic technique (general anesthesia [GA]/caudal). METHODS: All infants <1 year-of-age undergoing elective IHR without concomitant procedures from July 2016 to July 2021 at a single tertiary care teaching center were retrospectively reviewed. Eight surgeons and 25 anesthesiologists contributed patients, with approach dictated by practitioner preference. Data collected included patient demographics, surgical and anesthetic details, and operating room (OR) utilization metrics. Post-operative complications were evaluated and aggregated, including recurrent hernia, metachronous hernia, hematoma, hydrocele, testicular atrophy, and acquired cryptorchidism. Descriptive statistics were performed with R Studios (p < 0.05). RESULTS: Of the 338 patients included for analysis, most underwent an open procedure (n = 275) while anesthetic technique was evenly split between GA (n = 185) and caudal (n = 153). Most patients were male (87.6%) and born premature: mean gestational age of 31.4 ± 4.1 weeks. MIS-to-Open conversion was noted once (3.3%) in the GA MIS group, but none in caudal. Median follow up was 2.5 (1.4-3.8) years. No differences were noted in aggregate surgical complication rates (p = 0.4). The Caudal Open group had the shortest total OR time (p < 0.01); caudal anesthesia shortened post-procedure times (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: MIS IHR performed under caudal block and sedation yields comparable complication rates compared to the open approach or GA. Open IHR with caudal blockade was the most efficient operative room utilization. TYPE OF STUDY: Original Article, Clinical Research. LEVELS OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Impact of complex percutaneous coronary intervention features on clinical outcomes in patients with or without chronic kidney disease.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) are at higher risk of ischemic and bleeding events after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Complex PCI (CPCI) is associated with higher rates of ischemic complications. Whether CPCI confers an additive risk of adverse events in CKD patients is unclear. METHODS: Patients who underwent PCI at a single tertiary-care-center between 2012 and 2019 were stratified by CKD status and CPCI. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACE), a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), and target-vessel revascularization (TVR) at 1-year follow-up. Secondary outcomes included the individual components of the primary outcome and major bleeding. RESULTS: Out of 15,071 patients, 4537 (30.1%) had CKD and 10,534 (69.9%) had no CKD. Patients undergoing CPCI were 1151 (25.4%) and 2983 (28.3%) in the two cohorts, respectively. At one year, CPCI compared with no CPCI was associated with higher risk of MACE in both CKD (Adj. HR 1.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.45-2.06, p < 0.001) and no-CKD patients (Adj. hazard ratios [HR] 2.19, 95% CI 1.91-2.51, p < 0.001; p of interaction 0.057), determined by an excess of death, MI and TVR in CKD patients and of TVR and MI only in no-CKD. CPCI was related with a consistent increase of major bleeding in the CKD (Adj. HR 1.49, 95% CI 1.18-1.87, p < 0.001) and no-CKD group (Adj. HR 1.23, 95% CI 0.98-1.54, p = 0.071, p of interaction 0.206). CONCLUSION: At 1-year follow-up, CPCI was associated with higher risk of MACE and major bleeding irrespective of concomitant CKD. CPCI predicted mortality in CKD patients only.

Revascularization Strategies for Patients With Femoropopliteal Peripheral Artery Disease.

BACKGROUND: No adequately powered studies exist to compare major clinical outcomes after endovascular therapy (EVT) with stent implantation vs bypass surgery (BSx) for symptomatic femoropopliteal peripheral artery disease. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to perform a pooled analysis of individual patient data from all randomized controlled trials comparing EVT vs BSx. METHODS: Principal investigators of 5 of 6 available randomized controlled trials agreed to pool individual patient data. The primary endpoint was major adverse limb events, a composite of all-cause death, major amputation, or target limb reintervention. Secondary endpoints included amputation-free survival, individual major adverse limb event components, and primary patency. Early complications were bleeding, infection, or all-cause death within 30 days. RESULTS: A total of 639 patients were analyzed with a mean age of 68.1 ± 9.1 years and 29.0% women. Baseline characteristics were comparable between groups. At 2 years, there were no significant differences between patients who received EVT and those who received BSx regarding major adverse limb events (40.1% vs 36.4%; log-rank P = 0.447; adjusted HR [aHR]: 1.04; 95% CI: 0.80-1.36), amputation-free survival (88.1% vs 90.0%; log-rank P = 0.455; aHR for death or amputation: 1.04; 95% CI: 0.63-1.71) and the other secondary endpoints except for primary patency, which was lower in patients who received EVT vs those who received BSx (51.2% vs 61.3%; log-rank P = 0.024; aHR for loss of primary patency: 1.31; 95% CI: 1.02-1.69). EVT was associated with significantly lower rates of early complications (6.8% vs 22.6%; P < 0.001) and shorter hospital stay (3.1 ± 4.2 days vs 7.4 ± 4.9 days; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: These findings further support the efficacy and safety of EVT as an alternative to BSx in patients with symptomatic femoropopliteal peripheral artery disease.

Comparison of Drug-Coated Balloons vs Bare-Metal Stents in Patients With Femoropopliteal Arterial Disease.

BACKGROUND: Endovascular treatment of femoropopliteal artery disease has shifted toward drug-coated balloons (DCB). However, limited data are available regarding the safety and efficacy of DCB vs bare-metal stents (BMS). OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to compare DCB vs BMS outcomes in a propensity-adjusted, pooled analysis of 4 prospective, multicenter trials. METHODS: Patient-level data were pooled from 4 prospective, multicenter studies: the IN.PACT SFA I/II and IN.PACT SFA Japan randomized controlled DCB trials and the Complete SE and DURABILITY II single-arm BMS studies. Outcomes were compared using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). Clinical endpoints were 12-month primary patency, freedom from 36-month clinically driven target lesion revascularization, and cumulative 36-month major adverse events (MAE). RESULTS: The primary analysis included 771 patients (288 DCB, 483 BMS). IPTW-adjusted demographic, baseline lesion, and procedural characteristics were matched between groups. The adjusted mean lesion length was 8.1 ± 4.7 cm DCB and 7.9 ± 4.5 cm BMS. The IPTW-adjusted Kaplan-Meier estimates of 12-month primary patency (90.4% DCB, 80.9% BMS, P = 0.007), freedom from 36-month clinically driven target lesion revascularization (85.6% DCB, 73.7% BMS, P = 0.001), and cumulative incidence of 36-month MAE (25.3% DCB, 38.8% BMS, P < 0.001) favored DCB. There were no statistically significant differences observed in all-cause mortality, target limb major amputation, or thrombosis through 36 months. CONCLUSIONS: In a patient-level, IPTW-adjusted pooled analysis of prospective, multicenter pivotal studies, DCB demonstrated significantly higher patency, lower revascularization and MAE rates, and no statistically significant differences in mortality, amputation, or thrombosis vs BMS. This analysis supports DCB use vs BMS in moderately complex femoropopliteal lesions amenable to both treatments.

Health Disparities in Nontraumatic Lower Extremity Amputations. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Chronic diseases and their associated health outcomes have been known to disproportionately affect people of low socioeconomic status (SES) around the world. The authors aim to examine the association between SES and nontraumatic lower extremity amputation. METHODS: A search of current literature was performed in March 2022 across PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Medline for relevant literature. Keywords included "socioeconomics", "income", "amputation", and "lower extremities". RESULTS: A total of 1,164,630 patients across 5 studies were incorporated into the meta-analysis of nontraumatic lower extremity amputation and SES. An additional 3 citations were used in the secondary analyses between gender and ethnicity and their relationship with amputation. An association was observed between low SES and nontraumatic lower extremity amputations, odds ratio (OR) = 1.168, (confidence interval [CI]: 1.153, 1.183) P ≤ 0.05. Gender and race subanalyses were also conducted, with associations found with men and non-Caucasians with amputation: OR = 1.044; [CI: 1.036, 1.053] P ≤ 0.05; race OR = 2.893; [CI: 2.866, 2.920] P ≤ 0.05. CONCLUSIONS: SES along with gender and race are associated with nontraumatic lower extremity amputation. These findings add additional perspectives for which populations are disproportionately affected by disease and subsequent health outcomes. The authors anticipate the results presented may further assist in future public health screening methods and interventions. LEVEL OF CLINICAL EVIDENCE: 2.

Drug coated balloon improves outcomes of sub-optimal Supera deployment in the intermediate term.

Sub-Optimal deployment of Self expanding interwoven stents (Supera) has been shown to increase the rate of Clinically Driven Target Lesion Revascularization (CD-TLR). Meanwhile, drug coated balloons (DCB) have been shown to reduce CD-TLR in the femoral-popliteal segment in de- novo and restenotic lesions. However, the clinical effects of vessel preparation with DCB in nominal, compressed, and elongated Supera has not been widely studied. The purpose of this study is to assess the outcomes of clinically driven re-intervention, major amputations, and mortality in relation to the use of DCB as vessel preparation in different deployment conditions (nominal, compressed, elongated) of the Supera stent. Patient chart data was collected at a single center hospital between March 2015 and May 2020. All patients were adults (≥ 18 years old) and were treated with at least one (≥ 1) Supera stent. Deployment status was extrapolated from anonymized angiograms. The primary endpoint of this study was CD-TLR. Secondary endpoints included amputation and mortality rates associated with each deployment condition. A total of 670 limbs were treated and patients were followed for 36 months. Nominal stent deployment was observed in 337 limbs, followed by elongated condition (n = 176), then by compressed conditions (n = 159). CD-TLR was observed most frequently with elongated deployment. Drug coated balloons were used as vessel prep prior to stenting and showed a protective effect regardless of deployment status; O.R = 0.44 (CI 0.30-0.66, p < .05).

Determinants of Drug-Coated Balloon Failure in Patients Undergoing Femoropopliteal Arterial Intervention.

BACKGROUND: Drug-coated balloons (DCB) are frequently used to treat femoropopliteal artery disease. However, patency loss occurs in ≥10% of patients within 12 months posttreatment with poor understanding of the underlying mechanisms. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to investigate the determinants of DCB failure in femoropopliteal disease. METHODS: Data from randomized clinical trials (IN.PACT SFA, MDT-2113 SFA Japan) and 2 prespecified imaging cohorts of the IN.PACT Global Clinical Study were included. Influential procedural characteristics were evaluated by an independent angiographic core laboratory. The primary endpoint was DCB failure (patency loss during follow-up). Additional endpoints were binary restenosis and clinically driven target lesion revascularization. Multivariable analyses evaluated the clinical, anatomical, and procedural predictors of DCB failure. RESULTS: Included were 557 participants with single lesions and 12-month core laboratory-adjudicated duplex ultrasonography. Key clinical characteristics were as follows: mean age 68.8 years, 67.5% male, 87.6% with hypertension, 76.9% with hyperlipidemia, 40.5% with diabetes mellitus, 90.5% in Rutherford Classification Category (RCC) 2 to 3, and 9.5% in RCC 4 to 5. Average length and reference vessel diameter (RVD) were 16.37 cm and 4.66 mm, respectively; 49.7% of lesions were totally occluded. In multivariable analysis, only residual stenosis >30% was associated with patency loss, whereas residual stenosis >30% and smaller preprocedure RVD were associated with increased binary restenosis risk. RCC >3 and residual stenosis >30% were associated with increased 12-month clinically driven target lesion revascularization risk. CONCLUSIONS: Patency loss after DCB treatment was influenced by procedural and clinical factors. Residual stenosis >30%, smaller preprocedure RVD, and higher RCC may be considered predictors of increased risk of DCB failure and its components in femoropopliteal artery disease. (Randomized Trial of IN.PACT Admiral® Drug Coated Balloon vs Standard PTA for the Treatment of SFA and Proximal Popliteal Arterial Disease [INPACT SFA I]; NCT01175850; IN.PACT Admiral Drug-Coated Balloon vs. Standard Balloon Angioplasty for the Treatment of Superficial Femoral Artery [SFA] and Proximal Popliteal Artery [PPA] [INPACT SFA II]; NCT01566461; MDT-2113 Drug-Eluting Balloon vs. Standard PTA for the Treatment of Atherosclerotic Lesions in the Superficial Femoral Artery and/or Proximal Popliteal Artery [MDT-2113 SFA]; NCT01947478; IN.PACT Global Clinical Study; NCT01609296).

The RANGER II superficial femoral artery trial: 1-year results of the long lesion cohort.

BACKGROUND: The objective of the RANGER II SFA long lesion cohort analysis was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the Ranger drug-coated balloon (DCB) in patients with lesion lengths greater than 100 mm. METHODS: Patients from the RANGER II SFA randomized controlled trial and long balloon sub-study were included in the long lesion cohort if their baseline lesion measurement was > 100 mm and if they had been treated with a RANGER DCB. Patients had symptomatic lower limb peripheral artery disease and Rutherford classification 2-4 symptomatology. The endpoints of interest included the 12-month target lesion primary patency and freedom from major adverse events (MAEs).Additional patient outcomes including changes in Rutherford classification were also evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 129 patients met the inclusion criteria and were included in the long lesion cohort. Mean lesion length was 144.5 ± 31.7 mm. Seventy-five lesions had Peripheral Arterial Calcium Scoring System (PACSS) grades 3 (33.3%, 43/129) and 4 (24.8%, 32/129). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the primary patency rate at 12 months was 88.0%. The rate of freedom from MAEs at 12 months was 95.1% (117/123; 95% CI: 89.7%, 98.2%); all MAEs were clinically driven target lesion revascularization (4.9%, 6/123). The 12-month mortality rate was 2.4% (3/125). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with lesions > 100 mm treated with Ranger DCBs demonstrated excellent 1-year safety and efficacy results, comparable to those of the overall RANGER II SFA randomized clinical trial. This suggests that the Ranger DCB can provide consistent results regardless of lesion length. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03064126).

A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Total Ankle Arthroplasty or Ankle Arthrodesis for Treatment of Osteoarthritis in Patients With Diabetes.

Background: End-stage ankle osteoarthritis often requires one of 2 major surgical procedures: total ankle arthroplasty or ankle arthrodesis. Although the gold standard has been arthrodesis, patients with diabetes represent a unique cohort that requires additional considerations because of their decreased mobility and risk factors for cardiovascular complications. The purpose of this study is to review odds of major and minor adverse events for patients with diabetes and patients without diabetes in both total ankle arthroplasty and ankle arthrodesis. Methods: A total of 14 articles published between 2010 and 2020 were included in this review. Databases included PubMed, Scopus, MEDLINE/Embase, and Cochrane Library. Key words included ankle arthroplasty, total ankle arthroplasty, ankle arthrodesis, and diabetes. Results: The total number of procedures was 26 287, comprising 13 830 arthroplasty and 12 457 arthrodesis procedures. There was a significant association between patients with diabetes treated with arthrodesis and major adverse events (odds ratio [OR] 1.880, 95% CI 1.279, 2.762), whereas no significant association was observed between patients with diabetes treated with arthroplasty and major adverse events (OR 1.106, 95% CI 0.871, 1.404). Conclusion: This meta-analysis suggests patients with diabetes to be at significantly higher risk for major and minor adverse events after undergoing ankle arthrodesis. However, it suggests no significant differences in major adverse events between patients with diabetes and patients without diabetes having undergone total ankle arthroplasty. Level of Evidence: Level III, systematic review and meta-analysis.

Randomized Trial of Chocolate Touch Compared With Lutonix Drug-Coated Balloon in Femoropopliteal Lesions (Chocolate Touch Study).

BACKGROUND: First-generation drug-coated balloons (DCBs) have significantly reduced the rate of restenosis compared with balloon angioplasty alone; however, high rates of bailout stenting and dissections persist. The Chocolate Touch DCB is a nitinol constrained balloon designed to reduce acute vessel trauma and inhibit neointima formation and restenosis. METHODS: Patients with claudication or ischemic rest pain (Rutherford class 2-4) and superficial femoral or popliteal disease (≥70% stenosis) were randomized 1:1 to Chocolate Touch or Lutonix DCB at 34 sites in the United States, Europe, and New Zealand. The primary efficacy end point was DCB success, defined as primary patency at 12 months (peak systolic velocity ratio <2.4 by duplex ultrasound without clinically driven target lesion revascularization in the absence of clinically driven bailout stenting). The primary safety end point was freedom from major adverse events at 12 months, a composite of target limb-related death, major amputation, or reintervention. Both primary end points were tested for noninferiority, and if met, sequential superiority testing for efficacy followed by safety was prespecified. An independent clinical events committee, and angiographic and duplex ultrasound core laboratories blinded to treatment allocation reviewed all end points. RESULTS: A total of 313 patients were randomized to Chocolate Touch (n=152) versus Lutonix DCB (n=161). Follow-up at 1 year was available in 94% of patients. The mean age was 69.4±9.5 years, the average lesion length was 78.1±46.9 mm, and 46.2% had moderate-to-severe calcification. The primary efficacy rates of DCB success at 12 months was 78.8% (108/137) with Chocolate Touch and 67.7% (88/130) with Lutonix DCB (difference, 11.1% [95% CI, 0.6-21.7]), meeting noninferiority (Pnoninferiority<0.0001) and sequential superiority (Psuperiority=0.04). The primary safety event rate was 88.9% (128/144) with Chocolate Touch and 84.6% (126/149) with Lutonix DCB (Pnoninferiority<0.001; Psuperiority=0.27). CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective, multicenter, randomized trial, the second-generation Chocolate Touch DCB met both noninferiority end points for efficacy and safety and was more effective than Lutonix DCB at 12 months for the treatment of femoropopliteal disease. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT02924857.