A novel method to manage a dislodged self-expanding transcatheter aortic valve.

Despite advancements in technology, operator experience, and procedural planning, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) procedures are complex, and complications remain inevitable. Valve embolization may prove to be fatal and conventional rescue techniques are dependent on the anatomy of the aorta. We describe a case of postimplant embolization of a self-expanding valve during valve-in-valve application where the valve could not be stabilized due to the anatomy of the aorta and a novel technique was utilized to stabilize the valve in the aortic arch using a wire fixed to the left axillary artery.

Benzodiazepine Discharge Prescriptions from Emergency Departments across the United States between 2012 and 2019: A National Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Benzodiazepines are commonly misused medications frequently implicated in overdose deaths. Data show that benzodiazepine prescribing is associated with increased misuse. We sought to determine national trends in benzodiazepine prescribing from the emergency department (ED). METHODS: This is a retrospective review of the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey from 2012 to 2019. Our primary outcome was to evaluate trends in ED visits where a benzodiazepine was prescribed at discharge. Secondarily, we identified commonly prescribed benzodiazepines and assessed trends over time. We examined demographic data and used descriptive statistics and Spearman rho or Pearson correlation coefficient as applicable. RESULTS: Between 2012 and 2019, there were 13,848,578 visits where benzodiazepines were prescribed at ED discharge. In 2012 and 2019, there were 1,407,478 visits (1.1% of all ED visits) and 1,361,372 visits (0.9%), respectively, where benzodiazepines were prescribed (mean [SD], 1,731,072 [287,623] [1.26%]), with no trend (P = 0.31). Common benzodiazepines prescribed were diazepam (5,980,279 visits, 43.2% of all prescriptions), alprazolam (3,306,549, 23.9%), and clonazepam (2,105,963, 15.2%), with no changes over time. Fifteen percent of prescriptions were for patients 65 years or older. CONCLUSION: Despite reports of increased misuse, there was no change in ED discharge benzodiazepine prescribing. Concerningly, alprazolam, a benzodiazepine with high misuse potential, was frequently prescribed despite limited ED indications, and there was a large percentage of visits where benzodiazepines were prescribed to older adults despite warnings for adverse effects in this population. Future studies should assess rational prescribing and the role of targeted interventions to curb inappropriate use.

Intercostal Nerve Transfer for Biceps Reinnervation in Obstetrical Brachial Plexus Palsy: A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis for Individual Patient Data Systematic Review using Individualized Fusion and Comparison to Supraclavicular Exploration and Nerve Grafting.

Introduction: The objective of this study was to search existing literature on nerve reconstruction surgery in patients with obstetric brachial plexus palsy to determine whether treatment with supraclavicular exploration and nerve grafting produced better elbow flexion outcomes compared to intercostal nerve transfer. Methods: This study was a systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis for Individual Patient Data guidelines. A systematic search was conducted using multiple databases. An ordinal regression model was used to analyze the effect of using supraclavicular exploration and nerve grafting or intercostal nerve on elbow flexion with the two scores measured: elbow flexion Medical Research Council scores and Toronto active movements scale scores for elbow flexion. Results: A final patient database from 6 published articles consisted of 83 supraclavicular exploration and nerve grafting patients (73 patients with Medical Research Council and 10 patients with Toronto score) and 7 published articles which consisted of 131 intercostal nerve patients (84 patients with Medical Research Council and 47 patients with Toronto scores). Patients who underwent supraclavicular exploration and nerve grafting presented with an average Medical Research Council score of 3.9 ± 0.72 and an average Toronto score of 6.2 ± 2.2. Patients who underwent intercostal nerve transfer presented with an average Medical Research Council score of 3.9 ± 0.71 and an average Toronto score of 6.4 ± 1.2. There was no statistical difference between supraclavicular exploration and nerve grafting and intercostal nerve transfer when utilizing Medical Research Council elbow flexion scores (ordinal regression: 0.3821, standard error: 0.4590, p = 0.2551) or Toronto Active Movement Scale score for elbow flexion (ordinal regression: 0.7154, standard error: 0.8487, p = 0.2188). Conclusion: Regardless of surgical intervention utilized (supraclavicular exploration and nerve grafting or intercostal nerve transfers), patients had excellent outcomes for elbow flexion following obstetric brachial plexus palsy when utilizing Medical Research Council or Toronto scores for elbow flexion. The difference between these scores was not statistically significant. Type of study/Level of evidence: Therapeutic Study: Investigating the Result of Treatment/level III.

Opioid and Benzodiazepine Co-Prescribing Trends from the Emergency Department from 2012 to 2019: A National Analysis.

BACKGROUND: In 2016, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued its strongest safety warning ("Black Box Warning") for concomitant use of prescription opioids and benzodiazepines due to overdose deaths. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to look at trends of opioid and benzodiazepine co-prescribing in the emergency department (ED) using national data, because recent data are sparse. METHODS: This is a retrospective review of data collected by the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey between 2012 and 2019. Our primary outcome was to determine whether there was a trend in ED visits when opioids and benzodiazepines were co-prescribed at discharge. We also compared the rate of visits when co-prescribing occurred before (2012-2015) and after (2017-2019) the 2016 FDA warning. We identified commonly co-prescribed benzodiazepines and opioids, and the rate of naloxone co-prescribing. We used descriptive statistics and bivariate tests to describe data. RESULTS: Between 2012 and 2019, there were 4,489,613 ED visits (0.41% of ED visits) when benzodiazepines and opioids were co-prescribed. There was no trend in the rate of co-prescribing overall, but a decrease in visits after the 2016 FDA Black Box Warning (2012-2015: mean 0.49%; 2017-2019: mean 0.29%; p < 0.0001). There were 7980 ED visits (0.18%) when naloxone was co-prescribed for these visits within this time frame and an increase over time (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our study found that between 2012 and 2019, there was no overall reduction in co-prescribing of opioids and benzodiazepines across EDs nationwide, but a decrease after the 2016 Black Box Warning.

Troponin Elevation in Sickle Cell Disease.

OBJECTIVE: Sickle cell disease is associated with cardiovascular abnormalities. Troponin is not typically measured in this population, and thus the significance of abnormal levels of troponin is unknown. We wanted to evaluate the use of troponin and factors that predispose troponin elevation in patients admitted with sickle cell pain crisis (SCPC). METHODS: We reviewed data of consecutive patients admitted to a tertiary care hospital between 2006 and 2011 with a diagnosis of SCPC. Subjects with elevated troponin (ET) (troponin I >0.04 ng/mL) were compared with those with normal troponin (NT) for demographics, risk factors, presence of echocardiography-derived tricuspid regurgitant jet velocity (TRV) ≥3 m/s suggesting pulmonary hypertension, and laboratory tests. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare groups. RESULTS: Two hundred eighty-three of 724 patients admitted with SCPC had chest pain. Troponin I was measured in 63 patients: 51 had NT and 12 had ET ranging from 0.06 to 3.42 ng/ml. ET was associated lower hemoglobin (p = 0.02), lower hematocrit (p = 0.02), lower platelet number (p < 0.001), higher LDH (p = 0.012), higher AST levels (p = 0.004), higher bilirubin levels (p = 0.006), and TRV ≥3 m/s (p = 0.028). CONCLUSIONS: Troponin was measured in <10% of patients with SCPC, and 1 out of 5 of them had ET. Troponin elevation was not associated with traditional cardiovascular risk factors but was associated with lower hematocrit, elevated LDH, bilirubin levels, and TRV ≥3 m/s.

End-stage renal disease patients undergoing angioplasty and bypass for critical limb ischemia have worse outcomes compared to non-ESRD patients: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: End-stage renal disease (ESRD) is associated with increased morbidity and mortality following lower extremity amputation for critical limb ischemia (CLI). Angioplasty and bypass are used in ESRD patients with CLI; however, the treatment of choice remains controversial. We compared the long-term outcomes in patients with CLI undergoing angioplasty or bypass to evaluate the differences between patients with ESRD and those without ESRD. METHODS: Established databases were searched for observational studies comparing outcomes following bypass or angioplasty for CLI in patients with ESRD to those in non-ESRD patients. End points included survival, limb salvage, amputation-free survival (AFS), and primary and secondary patency at 1-year post-procedure. Pooled odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using a random effect model. RESULTS: We included 20 studies with a total of 24,851 patients. ESRD patients compared to non-ESRD patients with CLI had significantly lower survival post-angioplasty (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.36-0.72, p < .001) and post-bypass (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.15-0.45, p < .001). ESRD patients had lower rates of limb salvage post-bypass (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.21-0.53, p < .001) and post-angioplasty (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.41-0.70, p < .001). AFS was significantly lower in ESRD patients compared to non-ESRD patients following angioplasty (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.32-0.71, p < .001) and bypass (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.16-0.47, p < .001) despite no significant differences in primary patency. ESRD patients had overall worse secondary patency post-angioplasty and/or bypass (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.32-0.94, p = .03) compared to non-ESRD patients. A meta-analysis of four studies directly comparing survival in ESRD patients with CLI based on whether they underwent angioplasty or bypass showed no difference (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.64-1.35, p = .69). CONCLUSION: ESRD patients have worse survival, limb salvage, and AFS outcomes following angioplasty and bypass for CLI compared to non-ESRD patients. Large randomized controlled trials comparing these two modalities of treatment in this patient population are needed for further clarity.

Renal Denervation in the Management of Hypertension: A Meta-Analysis of Sham-Controlled Trials.

INTRODUCTION: Sympathetic renal denervation (RD) can potentially reduce blood pressure (BP) in people with resistant hypertension (RH) and uncontrolled hypertension (UH). While a large sham-controlled trial (SCT) showed similar outcomes of RD vs. sham control, in the recent trials, RD was effective in reducing BP in hypertensive people. We performed a meta-analysis of SCTs of RD vs. sham in hypertensive patients. METHODS: Multiple electronic databases were searched since inception through September 2018 for SCTs that compared RD vs. sham. Change in 24-hour, daytime and nighttime ambulatory and office BP were efficacy outcomes. Various adverse events were safety outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 7 SCTs were included in the analysis. RD vs. sham significantly reduced 24-hour ambulatory SBP by 3.45 mmHg [95% CI (-5.01, -1.88); P < 0.0001] and DBP by 1.87 mmHg [(-3.59, -0.15); P = 0.01], office DBP by 2.97 mmHg [(-4.76, -1.18); P = 0.001] and daytime ambulatory SBP by 4.03 mmHg [(-6.37, -1.68); P = 0.0008] and DBP by 1.53 mmHg [(-2.69, -0.37); P = 0.01]. RD vs. sham caused non-significant reduction in office SBP by 3.99 mmHg [(-8.10, 0.11); P = 0.06] and nighttime ambulatory SBP by 3.05 mmHg [(-6.86, 0.75), P = 0.12] and DBP by 1.03 mmHg [(-3.01, 0.96); P = 0.31]. There was no difference in the risk of hypertensive crisis/emergency [0.62; 0.24-1.60; P = 0.33] between the two strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Current meta-analysis shows that RD reduces ambulatory BP and office DBP in patients with hypertension. Future trials with longer follow-up should confirm these findings.

Outcomes of cardiac resynchronisation therapy in patients with heart failure with atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.

Background: Cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) is beneficial in selected patients with heart failure (HF) in normal sinus rhythm (NSR). We sought to evaluate the impact of CRT with or without atrioventricular junction (AVJ) ablation in patients with HF with concomitant atrial fibrillation (AF). Methods and results: Literature was searched (inception through 30 August 2017) for observational studies that reported outcomes in patients with HF with CRT and AF that reported all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. Thirty-one studies with 83, 571 patients were included. CRT did not decrease mortality compared with internal cardioverter defibrillator or medical therapy alone in patients with HF and AF with indications for CRT (OR: 0.851, 95% CI 0.616 to 1.176, p=0.328, I2=86.954). CRT-AF patients had significantly higher all-cause and cardiovascular mortality than CRT-NSR patients ([OR: 1.472, 95% CI 1.301 to 1.664, p=0.000] and [OR: 1.857, 95% CI 1.350 to 2.554, p=0.000] respectively). Change in left ventricular ejection fraction was not different between CRT patients with and without AF (p=0.705). AVJ ablation, however, improved all-cause mortality in CRT-AF patients when compared with CRT-AF patients without AVJ ablation (OR: 0.485, 95% CI 0.247 to 0.952, p=0.035). With AVJ ablation, there was no difference in all-cause mortality in CRT-AF patients compared with CRT-NSR patients (OR: 1.245, 95% CI 0.914 to 1.696, p=0.165). Conclusion: The results of our meta-analysis suggest that AF was associated with decreased CRT benefits in patients with HF. CRT, however, benefits patients with AF with AVJ ablation.

Aldosterone Antagonist Therapy and Mortality in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Without Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Importance: Treatment with aldosterone antagonists is recommended and has been shown to have beneficial effects in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) less than 40%. However, the role of aldosterone antagonists in patients with ejection fraction greater than 40% or without congestive heart failure is not well known. Objectives: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis using standard techniques to determine the role of therapy with aldosterone antagonists in this patient population. Data Sources: PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane Central databases were searched and a manual search for relevant references from the selected articles and published reviews was performed from database inception through June 2017. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials that evaluated treatment with aldosterone antagonists in patients with STEMI without clinical heart failure or LVEF greater than 40% were included. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines were used to conduct and report the meta-analysis, which used a random-effects model. Two investigators independently performed the database search and agreed on the final study selection. A manual search was performed for relevant references from the selected articles and published reviews. Main Outcomes and Measures: The outcomes analyzed were mortality, new congestive heart failure, recurrent myocardial infarction, ventricular arrhythmia, and changes in LVEF, serum potassium level, and creatinine level at follow-up. Results: In all, 10 randomized clinical trials with a total of 4147 unique patients were included in the meta-analysis. In patients who presented with STEMI without heart failure, treatment with aldosterone antagonists compared with control was associated with lower risk of mortality (2.4% vs 3.9%; odds ratio [OR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.42-0.91; P = .01) and similar risks of myocardial infarction (1.6% vs 1.5%; OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.57-1.86; P = .91), new congestive heart failure (4.3% vs 5.4%; OR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.56-1.20; P = .31), and ventricular arrhythmia (4.1% vs 5.1%; OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.45-1.31; P = .33). Similarly, treatment with aldosterone antagonists compared with control was associated with a small yet significant increase in LVEF (mean difference, 1.58%; 95% CI, 0.18%-2.97%; P = .03), a small increase in serum potassium level (mean difference, 0.07 mEq/L; 95% CI, 0.01-0.13 mEq/L; P = .02), and no change in serum creatinine level (standardized mean difference, 1.4; 95% CI, -0.43 to 3.24; P = .13). Conclusions and Relevance: Treatment with aldosterone antagonists is associated with a mortality benefit in patients with STEMI with LVEF greater than 40% or without heart failure.

Long term outcomes of new generation drug eluting stents versus coronary artery bypass grafting for multivessel and/or left main coronary artery disease. A Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Most data guiding revascularization of multivessel disease (MVD) and/or left main disease (LMD) favor coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) over percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, those data are based on trials comparing CABG to bare metal stents (BMS) or old generation drug eluting stents (OG-DES). Hence, it is essential to outcomes of CABG to those of new generation drug eluting stents (NG-DES). METHODS: We searched PUBMED and Cochrane database for trials evaluating revascularization of MVD and/or LMD with CABG and/or PCI. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed to calculate odds ratios (OR) and 95% credible intervals (CrI). Primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) at 3-5 years. Secondary outcomes were mortality, cerebrovascular accidents (CVA), myocardial infarction (MI) and repeat revascularization. RESULTS: We included 10 trials with a total of 9287 patients. CABG was associated with lower MACE when compared to BMS or OG-DES. However, MACE was not significantly different between CABG and NG-DES (OR 0.79, CrI 0.45-1.40). Moreover, there were no significant differences between CABG and NG-DES in mortality (OR 0.78, CrI 0.45-1.37), CVA (OR 0.93 CrI 0.35-2.2) or MI (OR 0.6, CrI 0.17-2.0). On the other hand, CABG was associated with lower repeat revascularization (OR 0.55, CrI 0.36-0.84). CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that NG-DES is an acceptable alternative to CABG in patients with MVD and/or LMD. However, repeat revascularization remains to be lower with CABG than with PCI.

Digoxin Is Associated With Increased Shock Events and Electrical Storms in Patients With Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators.

AIM: Recently, digoxin use has been found to associate with higher mortality. Yet, potential mechanisms by which digoxin use increases mortality remain unclear. Increased arrhythmogenicity from digoxin use is one possibility. Thus, we aimed to evaluate the relation between digoxin and shock events in patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs). METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review of all patients with ICDs and at least 1 device interrogation at our institution between January 1, 2012, and January 1, 2015. We aimed to cover 1 year of interrogation period. Patients with heart failure, atrial fibrillation, or both were included in the analysis. Patients were divided into 2 groups based on digoxin use, defined as use of digoxin for any period of time during ICD interrogation period. Incidence of ICD shock events and electrical storms and hospitalizations were compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: The study included 202 patients. Of those, 55 patients were on digoxin and 147 were not on digoxin. Patients on digoxin were more likely to receive ICD shocks (odds ratio [OR] = 2.5, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] = 1.01-6.18, P = .04) and have increased risk of electrical storms ( P = .02). Moreover, total hospitalizations were higher in digoxin users ( P = .02). Multivariate logistic regression analysis also showed that digoxin use was an independent predictor of shock events (OR = 4.07, 95% CI = 1.43-11.58, P = .009). CONCLUSION: Digoxin is associated with increased shock events and electrical storms in patients with ICDs; however, large randomized controlled studies are needed to confirm our findings.

Diabetes mellitus is associated with increased acute kidney injury and 1-year mortality after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: A meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes mellitus (DM) is associated with adverse outcomes after surgical aortic valve replacement. However, there are conflicting data on the impact of DM on outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). HYPOTHESIS: DM is associated with poor outcomes after different cardiac procedures. Therefore, DM can also be associated with poor outcomes after TAVR. METHODS: We searched PubMed and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for studies that evaluated outcomes after TAVR and stratified at least 1 of the studied endpoints by DM status. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality at 1 year. Secondary endpoints were early (up to 30 days) mortality, acute kidney injury (AKI), cerebrovascular accident (CVA), major bleeding, and major vascular complications. Pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using random effects models. RESULTS: We included 64 studies with a total of 38 686 patients. DM was associated with significantly higher 1-year mortality (OR: 1.14, 95% CI: 1.04-1.26, P = 0.008) and periprocedural AKI (OR: 1.28, 95% CI: 1.08-1.52, P = 0.004). On the other hand, there were no significant differences between diabetics and nondiabetics in early mortality, CVAs, major bleeding, or major vascular complications. CONCLUSIONS: DM is associated with increased 1-year mortality and periprocedural AKI in patients undergoing TAVR. The results of this study suggest that DM is a predictor of adverse outcomes in patients undergoing TAVR.

Gender-based outcomes of bivalirudin versus heparin in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions: Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to perform a gender-based meta-analysis of the outcome of bivalirudin versus heparin in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). BACKGROUND: Bivalirudin has been shown to decrease major bleeding when compared to heparin ± glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPI) in patients undergoing PCI. It is unclear, however, if those differences in outcomes are the same for men and women. METHODS: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared bivalirudin to heparin with or without GPI in patients undergoing PCI and reported outcome data that were stratified by gender. Random effect model was used to pool odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: We included 9 trials with 33,224 patients. Bivalirudin decreased major bleeding when compared to heparin plus routine GPI in both men (OR: 0.51, P < 0.001) and women (OR: 0.55, P < 0.001). However, when GPI were used selectively with heparin, the bleeding lowering effect of bivalirudin was statistically significant in men (OR: 0.69, P = 0.02) but not in women (OR: 0.71, P = 0.21). When compared to heparin ± GPI, there was a nonstatistically significant trend toward lower all-cause mortality with bivalirudin in both men (OR: 0.76, P = 0.055) and women (OR: 0.79, P = 0.21). There were no significant differences in major adverse cardiovascular events between heparin and bivalirudin in both men and women. CONCLUSION: Bivalirudin decreases major bleeding in both men and women when compared to heparin plus routine GPI. However, when compared to heparin alone, the bleeding lowering benefit of bivalirudin is less evident in women. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Combined Use of Bivalirudin and Radial Access in Acute Coronary Syndromes Is Not Superior to the Use of Either One Separately: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this meta-analysis was to study the relation between access site and bivalirudin use on outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). BACKGROUND: Bivalirudin and radial access use are 2 strategies that are increasingly used to lower major bleeding in patients with ACS undergoing invasive approaches. The interaction between these 2 strategies and the benefit of using them in combination are unclear. METHODS: This analysis included randomized controlled trials that compared bivalirudin to heparin with or without glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors in patients with ACS and reported outcomes stratified by arterial access site. Meta-analyses of outcome data were performed on the basis of access site and anticoagulation regimen. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated from event rates using random-effects models. RESULTS: Eight trials with a total of 27,491 patients were included. Bivalirudin reduced major bleeding risk in patients with femoral access (OR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.46 to 0.6; p < 0.001) but not in patients with radial access (OR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.45 to 1.26; p = 0.28). Moreover, radial access reduced major bleeding risk in patients treated with heparin (OR: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.43 to 0.77; p < 0.001) but not in patients treated with bivalirudin (OR: 0.96; 95% CI: 0.65 to 1.41; p = 0.83). There were no differences in major adverse cardiovascular events or all-cause mortality between bivalirudin and heparin, regardless of access site. CONCLUSIONS: Bivalirudin reduces bleeding risk only with femoral access, and radial access reduces bleeding risk only with heparin anticoagulation. Therefore, there is no additional benefit to the combined use of bivalirudin and radial access strategies in patients with ACS.

Using 7.5 frames per second reduces radiation exposure in lower extremity peripheral vascular interventions.

BACKGROUND: Peripheral vascular interventions can be associated with significant radiation exposure to the patient and the operator. OBJECTIVE: In this study, we sought to compare the radiation dose between peripheral vascular interventions using fluoroscopy frame rate of 7.5 frames per second (fps) and those performed at the standard 15 fps and procedural outcomes. METHODS: We retrospectively collected data from consecutive 87 peripheral vascular interventions performed during 2011 and 2012 from two medical centers. The patients were divided into two groups based on fluoroscopy frame rate; 7.5 fps (group A, n = 44) and 15 fps (group B, n = 43). We compared the demographic, clinical, procedural characteristics/outcomes, and radiation dose between the two groups. Radiation dose was measured as dose area product in micro Gray per meter square. RESULTS: Median dose area product was significantly lower in group A (3358, interquartile range (IQR) 2052-7394) when compared to group B (8812, IQR 4944-17,370), p < 0.001 with no change in median fluoroscopy time in minutes (18.7, IQR 11.1-31.5 vs. 15.7, IQR 10.1-24.1), p = 0.156 or success rate (93.2% vs. 95.3%), p > 0.999. CONCLUSION: Using fluoroscopy at the rate of 7.5 fps during peripheral vascular interventions is associated with lower radiation dose compared to the standard 15 fps with comparable success rate without associated increase in the fluoroscopy time or the amount of the contrast used. Therefore, using fluoroscopy at the rate of 7.5 fps should be considered in peripheral vascular interventions.