Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty of the Peripheral Arteries

Covered vs Uncovered Stents for Aortoiliac and Femoropopliteal Arterial Disease

Purpose: To evaluate outcomes of covered vs bare metal stents for the treatment of lower limb peripheral artery disease. Methods: A search of electronic databases was performed to identify all studies comparing outcomes of covered vs bare metal stents for treatment of aortoiliac and femoropopliteal arterial disease. The Cochrane tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale were used to assess the risk of bias in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies, respectively. Fixed or random effects models were applied to analyze pooled outcome data. The results for dichotomous outcome variables are presented as the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI); intergroup comparisons of continuous clinical variables are reported as the mean difference (MD) and 95% CI. Results: Two RCTs and 4 retrospective cohort studies, enrolling 744 patients (mean age 67 years; 477 men) and 918 diseased arteries, were identified. For aortoiliac disease, treatment with a covered stent showed no significant improvement in primary patency (OR 2.10, 95% CI 0.48 to 9.11, p=0.32), but it was associated with higher ankle-brachial index (ABI) (MD 0.08, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.09, p<0.001) and a lower reintervention rate (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.42, p<0.001). For femoropopliteal disease, use of covered stents was associated with increased primary patency (OR 1.84, 95% CI 1.11 to 3.06, p=0.02), higher ABI (MD 0.08, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.16, p=0.04), and a lower reintervention rate (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.87, p=0.01). No significant differences in technical success, complications, limb salvage, or survival were identified between the groups in either segment. Conclusion: Theoretically, the use of covered stents may increase the patency rate due to decreased restenosis after stent placement. This analysis found that the primary patency was improved with the use of a covered stent in femoropopliteal lesions but not in aortoiliac disease. Improved outcomes were seen with covered stents compared with bare metal stents as indicated by a lower need for reintervention and an improved ABI. It remains to be investigated whether such beneficial effects can be translated into improved clinical outcomes, such as limb salvage and amputation-free survival. Long-term results of the comparative efficacy of covered stents over bare metal stents are not currently available.

Endovascular therapies for peripheral arterial disease: an evidence-based review

Peripheral arterial disease is one manifestation of systemic atherosclerosis. The prevalence of peripheral arterial disease increases with the age of the population. It is important to remember the significant association of coincident coronary artery disease, which is the major cause of mortality in these patients. Remarkable technological advances in the past decade, along with patient preference, have shifted revascularization strategies from traditional open surgical approaches toward lower-morbidity percutaneous endovascular treatments. The availability of stents, more than any other advance, has fueled the growth of catheter-based procedures by improving the safety, durability, and predictability of percutaneous revascularization.

Non-surgical treatment of patients with peripheral vascular disease

Dotter first described percutaneous revascularization of peripheral vascular disease (PVD) in 1964. In 1974, Gruentzig developed a balloon catheter for dilation of vascular lesions. Currently, percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) employs a variety of devices ranging from implantable stents to endovascular radiation devices for re-stenosis and is recognized as a safe and effective alternative to surgery for selected patients. In addition to the general efficacy of peripheral angioplasty, which is comparable to that of bypass surgery for selected lesions, angioplasty offers several distinct advantages over surgery. It is performed under local anaesthesia, making it feasible to treat patients who are at high risk for general anaesthesia. When compared to surgical revascularization, the morbidity from angioplasty is low, generally related to problems at the vascular access site, and mortality is extremely rare. Unlike vascular surgery, there is no recovery period after angioplasty, and most patients can return to normal activity within 24-48 h of an uncomplicated procedure. Finally, angioplasty can be repeated if necessary usually without increased difficulty or increased patient risk compared to the first procedure, and does not preclude surgery as adjunctive or definitive therapy.

Options for percutaneous coronary and peripheral revascularization

Angioplasty has become an established treatment for both coronary and peripheral atherosclerosis, and a number of new techniques and devices promise to improve the results of percutaneous intervention during the coming decades. It is likely that balloon angioplasty will remain the percutaneous treatment of choice for both coronary and peripheral intervention; however, we look with hope toward the development of new devices that will expand the role of percutaneous angioplasty and improve the long-term success of these procedures. As technical expertise grows with the new procedures, prospective randomized trials comparing them with standard PTCA will be required to enable physicians to judge their clinical utility.