Comparison of outcomes of percutaneous deep venous arterialization in multiple practice settings.

OBJECTIVE: We compared the efficacy of percutaneous deep venous arterialization (pDVA) in patients with no-option chronic limb-threatening ischemia in the hospital vs in office-based laboratory (OBL) settings. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed of all patients who underwent pDVA using off-the-shelf devices from January 2018 to March 2023 in a hospital and an OBL. We identified 73 eligible patients, 41 from a hospital setting (59% male; median age, 72 years; interquartile range, 18 years) and 32 from an OBL setting (59% males; 67 years; interquartile range, 16 years). All eligible patients were deemed to have no-option critical limb ischemia, had at least one patent proximal tibial artery available for the creation of an arteriovenous anastomosis, and were classified as having Rutherford classification IV or higher peripheral arterial disease. Patients were ineligible if classified as Rutherford classification III or lower, had active infection, did not have at least one appropriate venous target, and/or had rapidly progressing wounds requiring immediate major amputation. The primary outcome was major amputation-free survival (AFS). Secondary outcomes included technical success, limb salvage, survival, primary patency, reintervention rate, adverse events, and partial and complete wound healing. Outcomes were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier method, log-rank, and two-stage procedure tests. RESULTS: Technical success was achieved in 70 patients (96%) with 1 hospital (2.4%) and 2 OBL (6.3%) patients lost to follow-up. Major AFS estimates at 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years were 51.4%, 40.4%, and 30.2% in the hospital group and 69.4%, 54.0%, and 49.5% in the OBL group, respectively. Partial wound healing estimates at 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years were 27.5%, 71.7%, and 81.2% in the hospital group and 62.7% at all time points in the OBL group. Complete wound healing estimates at 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years were 6.7%, 33.3%, and 33.3% in the hospital group and 5.3%, 37.7%, and 41.6% in the OBL group, respectively. There was no significant difference in major AFS (P = .13), limb salvage (P = .07), survival (P = .69), primary patency (P = .53), partial (P = .08), or complete wound healing (P = .79) between groups. Reintervention was performed in 8 hospital (20.5%) and 14 OBL (45.2%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: pDVA is a feasible and safe procedure for no-option critical limb ischemia in the hospital and OBL setting without significant differences in outcomes at ≤2 years.

Case report: Deep vein arterialization for limb salvage in a patient with subacute limb ischemia.

BACKGROUND: Successful revascularization of the lower extremity is key to avoiding amputation in patients with subacute limb ischemia. Percutaneous deep vein arterialization (DVA) is a novel endovascular technique which allows the shunting of blood through an arteriovenous fistula and native vein into the lower limb, typically employed in no-option chronic limb-threatening ischemia. METHOD: We present a case illustrating the unconventional use of DVA for limb salvage in a patient presenting with subacute limb ischemia refractive to surgical treatment, endovascular revascularization, and medical therapy. RESULT AND CONCLUSION: The arteriovenous anastomosis allowed for the reconstitution of arterial inflow to the patient's foot, thereby avoiding major limb amputation. CONCLUSION: The conventional knowledge that DVA neo-conduits require maturation limiting its role in the treatment of subacute limb ischemia is challenged. However, further research is needed to establish its role and effectiveness for subacute limb ischemia.

Intravascular lithotripsy-assisted percutaneous deep vein arterialization for no-option chronic limb-threatening patients and heavily calcified tibial occlusive disease.

PURPOSE: To report the first chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) patients who underwent an intravascular lithotripsy (IVL)-assisted percutaneous deep vein arterialization (pDVA). CASE REPORT 1: An 81-year-old patient presented with CLTI and a heavily calcified lesion of the popliteal artery and tibioperoneal trunk (TPT), with a distal tibial and foot arch occlusion. The patient underwent IVL and drug-coated balloon angioplasty for the distal popliteal artery and of the TPT to improve the inflow prior to pDVA. The wound situation remained stable without secondary procedure until the patient`s deaths due to complications of urosepsis 3 months later. CASE REPORT 2: A 64-year-old patient with rest pain of the left limb with a single-vessel tibial run-off (peroneal artery) and occluded pedal arch was treated with 3.5 mm IVL followed by a successful pDVA as mentioned above. IVL performed in the proximal posterior tibial artery to optimize the inflow to the circuit and change the compliance of the crossing point from the arterial to the vein system. The patient underwent repeat angioplasty of the plantar vein arch 5 months after the index procedure and thereafter remained asymptomatic during 2 years of follow-up. CONCLUSION: The combined use of IVL and pDVA could improve the patency of the reconstruction with clinical benefits in no-option CTLI patients.

PROMISE I: Early feasibility study of the LimFlow System for percutaneous deep vein arterialization in no-option chronic limb-threatening ischemia: 12-month results.

OBJECTIVE: We report the 6- and 12-month outcomes of the PROMISE I early feasibility study after treatment of no-option chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) with percutaneous deep vein arterialization (pDVA) using the LimFlow System. METHODS: Thirty-two patients with no-option CLTI, previously offered major amputation, were enrolled in this single-arm early feasibility study of the LimFlow pDVA System. No-option CLTI was defined as being ineligible for surgical or endovascular arterial revascularization. Patients were assessed for clinical status, pain, wound healing, and duplex ultrasound at 30 days, 6 months, and 12 months post-treatment. Primary endpoint analysis was amputation-free survival (AFS) at 30 days and 6 and 12 months. AFS was defined as freedom from above-ankle amputation of the index limb and freedom from all-cause mortality. Secondary endpoints evaluated included technical success of the procedure, and wound healing at 6 and 12 months. RESULTS: Of 32 enrolled patients, 31 (97%) were successfully treated with the LimFlow System at the time of the procedure, and two (6.3%) were lost to follow-up. The 30-day, 6-month, and 12-month AFS rates were 91%, 74%, and 70% respectively. The wound healing status of fully healed or healing was 67% at 6 months, and 75% at 12 months. Reintervention was performed in 16 patients (52%) with 14 (88%) of the maintenance reinterventions occurring within the first 3 months. The majority of reinterventions (n = 12; 75%), involved the arterial inflow tract proximal to the stented LimFlow circuit, and no in-stent stenoses were determined to have been the cause of reintervention. CONCLUSIONS: The LimFlow pDVA System was utilized in treating patients with no-option CLTI. A high technical success rate was observed, with a significant percentage of patients surviving free of major amputation at 12 months. These results suggest early safety and provide an initial assessment of the efficacy of the LimFlow pDVA System that supports the expansion of carefully executed studies to determine whether this is a viable option that can be used in this critically disadvantaged and growing patient population.

Midterm Outcomes From a Pilot Study of Percutaneous Deep Vein Arterialization for the Treatment of No-Option Critical Limb Ischemia.

PURPOSE: To report the initial clinical experience with percutaneous deep vein arterialization (PDVA) to treat critical limb ischemia (CLI) via the creation of an arteriovenous fistula. METHODS: Seven patients (median age 85 years; 5 women) with CLI and no traditional endovascular or surgical revascularization options (no-option CLI) were recruited in a pilot study to determine the safety of PDVA. All patients were diabetic; 4 had Rutherford category 6 ischemia. Six were classified at high risk of amputation based on the Society for Vascular Surgery WIfI (wound, ischemia, and foot infection) classification. The primary safety endpoints were major adverse limb events and major adverse coronary events through 30 days and serious adverse events through 6 months. Secondary objectives included clinical efficacy based on outcome measures including thermal measurement, transcutaneous partial pressure of oxygen (TcPO2), clinical improvement at 6 months, and wound healing. RESULTS: The primary safety endpoints were achieved in 100% of patients, with no deaths, above-the-ankle amputations, or major reinterventions at 30 days. The technical success rate was 100%. Two myocardial infarctions occurred within 30 days, each with minor clinical consequences. All patients demonstrated symptomatic improvement with formation of granulation tissue, resolution of rest pain, or both. Complete wound healing was achieved in 4 of 7 patients and 5 of 7 patients at 6 and 12 months, respectively, with a median healing time of 4.6 months (95% confidence interval 84-192). Median postprocedure peak TcPO2 was 61 mm Hg compared to a preprocedure level of 8 mm Hg (p=0.046). At the time of wound healing, 4 of 5 of patients achieved TcPO2 levels of >40 mm Hg. There were 2 major amputations, 1 above the knee after PDVA thrombosis and 1 below the knee for infection. Three patients died of causes unrelated to the procedure or study device at 6, 7, and 8 months, respectively. Limb salvage was 71% at 12 months. CONCLUSION: PDVA is an innovative approach for treating no-option CLI and represents an alternative option for the "desert foot," potentially avoiding major amputation. Our results demonstrate its safety and feasibility, with promising early clinical results in this small cohort.

Short-Term Outcomes and Efficacy of Percutaneous Deep Vein Arterialization for No-Option Critical Limb Ischemia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous deep vein arterialization (pDVA) is considered a treatment modality in patients with no-option critical limb ischemia. However, there is still a paucity of evidence regarding its safety and efficacy. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE (via PubMed), Embase and Web of Science databases as well as the CENTRAL registry up to the end of June 2023. METHODS: This review adhered to the PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO registration no. CRD42023445171). The risk of bias was assessed using the methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS). Primary endpoints included technical success, overall survival and limb salvage during the follow-up. Amputation-free survival at 30 days, 6 months and 1 year as well as complete wound healing, major adverse limb events and reintervention were investigated as secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Five observational studies, comprising 208 patients (142 Rutherford class 5/77 Rutherford class 6), were included. MINORS revealed a low risk of bias. The meta-analysis reached a pooled technical success rate of 96.2% (95% CI: 91.5-98.4), an overall survival of 82.8% (95% CI: 70.5-95.2) and a limb salvage rate of 77.2% (95% CI: 65.2-89.1) during the follow-up. The amputation-free survival at 30 days, 6 months and 1 year was 87.8%, 68.7% and 65.6%, respectively. Furthermore, pDVA resulted in a complete wound healing rate of 53.4% (95% CI: 30.3-76.5). The pooled reintervention rate was as high as 46.7% (37.1-56.3%). CONCLUSIONS: PDVA seems a feasible bail-out strategy for patients with no option for routine treatment of CLTI. However, due to the small number of studies, the strength of the evidence is low.

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.

Percutaneous deep vein arterialization using off-the-shelf devices for chronic limb threatening ischemia.

We present the case of a young man with severe comorbidities who presented with gangrene and rest pain of his right foot. He had already undergone a contralateral below knee amputation for a nonsalvageable left foot due to chronic limb threatening ischemia. We performed percutaneous deep vein arterialization using off-the-shelf devices to attempt limb salvage of his right foot.

Hybrid superficial venous arterialization and endovascular deep venous arterialization.

We report on two venous arterialization (VA) techniques for treatment of CLTI in patients traditionally considered as having no treatment options for standard arterial endovascular or surgical bypass procedures. Screening and the preprocedural workup findings are outlined as deciding factors in determining a patient's fitness for the two techniques, with a focus on careful preprocedure arterial duplex ultrasound and assessment for vein suitability. Cardiac and infection screening are also factors in determining patient suitability for VA. In addition, radiographic assessment for the presence of medial artery calcification, which is used as a marker of technical difficulty and is a predictor of poor outcomes, is required. Ultimately, anatomic factors are used to determine the decision between hybrid superficial VA and or endovascular deep VA. Those with an occluded anterior tibial artery and suitable great saphenous vein are prioritized to hybrid superficial VA, and those with an occluded posterior tibial artery to endovascular deep VA. Both procedures are described in detail in this report of vascular and surgical techniques.

Utility of BeBack crossing catheter in fistula creation during percutaneous deep vein arterialization.

For patients with "no-option" chronic limb-threatening ischemia, a final attempt can be made for limb salvage in the form of percutaneous deep vein arterialization (pDVA). In the present study, we describe five cases of pDVA using a BeBack crossing catheter (Bentley InnoMed GmbH; previously, the GoBack crossing catheter; Upstream Peripheral Technologies). From November 2021 to July 2022, five patients underwent pDVA using the BeBack crossing catheter. The demographic data, procedural details, and patient outcomes were recorded. Successful vascular crossing was achieved in all five cases using the BeBack device. No surgical complications were encountered. The limb salvage rate was 60%, and the wound closure rate was 40%. No mortalities occurred during the follow-up period. The findings from the present study demonstrate that the use of the BeBack crossing catheter for pDVA is safe and feasible.

Duplex and Angiographic-Assisted Evaluation of Outcomes of Endovascular Embolization after Surgical Deep Vein Arterialization for the Treatment No-Option Critical Limb Ischemia Patients.

OBJECTIVE: To report early and mid-term outcomes of the arterialization of the deep venous system in no-option critical limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) using duplex ultrasound and angiographic evaluation to improve limb perfusion. METHODS: A single-center prospective study of patients with no-option CLTI treated with hybrid surgical arterialization of the deep venous circulation and staged endovascular embolization of the venous collateral. Embolization was performed using a controlled-release spiral, within two weeks after bypass surgery. Patients were assessed for clinical status, wound healing, median transcutaneous partial pressure of O2 (TcPO2), and post-operative duplex ultrasound evaluating peak systolic velocity (PSV), end diastolic velocity (EDV), and resistance index (RI) to assess foot perfusion and bypass features. Primary endpoint analysis was primary technical success, limb salvage, patency rates, and clinical improvement. Secondary endpoints were 30-day and long-term mortality, major cardiovascular events (MACE), including myocardial infarction or stroke, and serious adverse events (SAE). RESULTS: Five patients with no-option CLTI were treated at our center using the hybrid deep vein arterialization technique. Clinical stage was grade 3 in one patient and grade 4 in the remaining four. Mean age was 65.8 years (range 49-76 years), and two patients were affected by Buerger's disease. Primary technical success was achieved in all patients, and all the bypasses were patent at the angiographic examination. At 30-day and at average follow-up of 9.8 months (range 2-24 months), mortality, major cardiovascular events (MACE), and serious adverse events (SAE) were not reported, with a primary patency and limb salvage rates of 100%. Three patients required minor amputation. Clinical improvement was demonstrated in all patients with granulation, resolution of rest pain, or both. Median TcPO2 values rose from 10 mm Hg (range 4-25) before the procedure to 35 (range 31-57) after surgery, and to 59 mm Hg (range 50-76) after the staged endovascular procedure. CONCLUSIONS: In our initial experience, the arterialization of the deep venous circulation, with subsequent selective embolization of the venous escape routes from the foot, seems a feasible and effective solution for limb salvage in patients with no-option CLTI and those in the advanced wound, ischemia, and foot infection (WIfI) clinical stage.

Technical Approach to Percutaneous Femoropopliteal Bypass and Deep Vein Arterialization.

In the management of patients with critical limb ischemia endovascular revascularization plays a crucial role improving amputation-free survival, ischemic rest pain, and wound healing. Endovascular standard of care of peripheral arterial occlusive disease involves angioplasty and/or stent placement. The following discussion is intended to familiarize interventional physicians with the rationale, physiological concepts, and technical approach to developing endovascular procedures-percutaneous femoropopliteal bypass and percutaneous deep vein arterialization. Percutaneous arterial bypass procedure is designed to treat long complex Trans-Atlantic Inter-Society Consensus C and D hemodynamically significant superficial femoral artery lesions by redirecting the flow of blood from the diseased arterial segment through a femoral vein conduit. Percutaneous deep vein arterialization is used for selected "no-option" critical limb ischemia patients who cannot undergo or have failed conventional endovascular and/or surgical revascularization due to extensive occlusion of the outflow arteries. It involves creation of an arteriovenous fistula between a tibial artery and a tibial vein, disruption of venous valves, and elimination of venous collaterals. The consequent arterialization of the distal venous bed enables delivery of oxygenated pressurized arterial blood to the ischemic tissues, stimulating angiogenesis and increasing flow in the existent collateral vessels, which in turn will improve limb salvage and amputation free survival.

Percutaneous Deep Foot Vein Arterialization IVUS-Guided in No-Option Critical Limb Ischemia Diabetic Patients.

PURPOSE: To report our clinical experience with IVUS-guided percutaneous deep vein arterialization (pDVA) to treat chronic critical limb ischemia (cCLI) patients with no-endovascular or surgical options approach due to creation of an arteriovenous fistula (AVF). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a 2 years period, 14 no-option cCLI patients were treated with percutaneous deep vein arterialization (pDVA) by creating an AVF with a IVUS-guided system between posterior tibial artery and its satellite deep vein. Technical success was defined as successful AVF creation and venous perfusion of the wound site. Patients' characteristics, procedure details, mortality and wound outcomes were assessed prospectively. RESULTS: Successful pDVA was successfully performed in all patients (mean age 82 years) without any procedural complications. Clinical improvement was achieved in all patients with resolution of rest pain, tissue formation of granulation tissue or both; only 3 major amputations were performed within the study period with a limb salvage rate of 78%. Median wound healing time was 4.8 months. CONCLUSION: pDVA is a safe and feasible revascularization technique alternative in no-option cCLI patients.