Multidisciplinary approach to the diagnosis and management of patients with peripheral arterial disease.

Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) is frequently diagnosed after permanent damage has occurred, resulting in a high rate of morbidity, amputation, and loss of life. Early and ongoing diagnosis and treatment is required for this progressive disease. Lifestyle modifications can prevent or delay disease progression and improve symptoms. Limb-sparing endovascular interventions can restore circulation based on appropriate diagnostic testing to pinpoint vascular targets, and intervention must occur as early as possible to ensure optimal clinical outcomes. An algorithm for the diagnosis and management of PAD was developed to enable a collaborative approach between the family practice and primary care physician or internist and various specialists that may include a diabetologist, endocrinologist, smoking cessation expert, hypertension and lipid specialist, endovascular interventionalist, vascular surgeon, orthopedist, neurologist, nurse practitioner, podiatrist, wound healing expert, and/or others. A multidisciplinary team working together has the greatest chance of providing optimal care for the patient with PAD and ensuring ongoing surveillance of the patient's overall health, ultimately resulting in better quality of life and increased longevity for patients with PAD.

A prospective, randomized, pivotal trial of a novel extravascular collagen-based closure device compared to manual compression in diagnostic and interventional patients.

OBJECTIVES: The RESPECT trial was aimed at evaluating safety/efficacy of a new extravascular closure system in diagnostic (Dx) and interventional (Ix) procedures performed through 6 or 7 Fr introducer sheaths. BACKGROUND: Although vascular closure devices (VCDs) have been available for two decades, manual compression (MC) remains the standard of care in many institutions. VCDs have not been shown to have greater safety than MC. METHODS: The RESPECT trial was a multicenter, randomized comparison of the Vascade VCD (Cardiva Medical, Inc) versus MC in Dx and Ix patients undergoing femoral access. Endpoints included time to hemostasis (TTH), time to ambulation (TTA), time to discharge eligibility (TTDe), device and procedure success, major and minor complications. Subjects were randomized 2:1 (Vascade vs MC). RESULTS: A total of 420 patients were enrolled (211 Dx, 209 Ix). Mean age was 62 ± 11 years and 29% were female. For Ix Vascade/MC patients, 77%/69% received bivalirudin, 27%/26% received heparin, and 8%/3% received glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, respectively. Patients were followed for 30 ± 7 days. A total of 415 subjects (98.8%) completed follow-up. TTH was 3.0 minutes (range, 0.6-31.6 minutes) for Vascade vs 20.0 minutes (range, 0.0-97.0 minutes) for MC; TTA was 3.2 hours (range, 1.0-78.0 hours) for Vascade vs. 5.2 hours (range, 1.7-22.8 hours) for MC; and TTDe was 3.6 hours (range, 1.4-78.4 hours) for Vascade vs. 5.7 hours (range, 2.2-23.2 hours) for MC. Device and procedure success rates were 98% for Vascade and 100% for MC. Minor events were 1.1% for Vascade and 7% for MC. No major access-site related complications were reported in either arm. CONCLUSION: Despite high percentage of bivalirudin use, there were no major access-site related complications in either arm. Vascade use reduced rates of minor access-site related complications, and significantly shortened TTH, TTA, and TTDe compared to MC.