Endovascular Repair of Blunt Popliteal Arterial Injuries

Outcomes of Endovascular and Open Surgical Therapy for Popliteal Artery Injury

BACKGROUND

Popliteal arterial injury carries an appreciable risk of limb loss and, despite advances in stent and stent-graft technology, endovascular therapy for popliteal arterial trauma is infrequently used when compared with traditional open repair. Thus, this study aims to assess outcomes of endovascular management (EM) with open surgery (OS) as a historical reference.

METHODS

An electronic search was performed (from January 2010 until June 2023) using multiple databases. Initial records were screened against eligibility criteria. Next, the full-text manuscript of articles that passed the title and abstract assessment was reviewed for relevancy of data points. Data from articles passing the inclusion criteria were extracted and tabulated. Comparative analysis was completed by performing chi-square tests and 2-sampled t-tests (Welch's).

RESULTS

The 24 selected studies described 864 patients (96 EM; 768 OS). In the endovascular group, patients underwent procedures primarily for blunt trauma using covered, self-expanding stents, resulting in universal technical success and patency. Patients had an average length of stay of 7.99 ± 7.5 days and follow-up time of 33.0 ± 7.0 months, with 21% undergoing fasciotomies, 6% undergoing amputation, and 4% having pseudoaneurysms. Patients in the OS group were evenly divided between blunt and penetrating trauma, chiefly undergoing vein graft interposition and exhibiting fasciotomy and amputation rates of 66% and 24%, respectively. Patients had an average length of stay of 5.66 ± 4.6 days and a 96% survival rate at discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

The current evidence sheds light on the nature of treatment offered by EM and OS treatment and suggests EM is associated with several important positive outcomes. Although it is difficult to directly compare endovascular and open surgical techniques, the data with respect to open surgical management of popliteal artery trauma can still provide a powerful frame of reference for the outcomes of EM to date. However, this claim is weak due to the little published data for EM of popliteal trauma, publication bias accompanying the published studies, and general, selection bias. Additional prospective data are necessary to define patients who specifically benefit from endovascular repair.

Five-year outcomes after bypass graft versus Fogarty balloon catheter for the treatment of acute blunt popliteal artery injury

PURPOSE

To evaluate long-term clinical outcomes after revascularization by bypass graft versus Fogarty balloon catheter in acute blunt popliteal artery injury and identify risk factors contributing to amputation.

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted in patients treated for acute blunt PAI between 2011 and 2019. Inclusion criteria were patients who underwent bypass graft and Fogarty balloon catheter. The cumulative limb salvage rate was calculated by the Kaplan-Meier test and compared with Breslow-Wilcoxon test. Cox proportional hazard model was performed to estimate the potential risk factors for amputation. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to determine the optimal cut-off value for the potential risk factors.

RESULTS

The overall limb salvage rate was 60.4% (29/48), including 24 patients (66.7%) in bypass graft, and 5 patients (41.7%) in Fogarty balloon catheter with mean follow-up of 5 years (range, 2-10 years). Among amputees, 15 patients (15/19, 78.9%) received primary amputation due to vascular failure or severe soft tissue damage, and 4 received secondary amputation because of chronic bone infection or neurologic deficit. Kaplan-Meier curves showed patients who received Fogarty balloon catheter had significantly higher amputation rate than those received bypass graft, with a hazard ratio of 3.801 (95% CI: 1.162-12.43, p = 0.009). In addition, Cox proportional hazard model revealed that MESS was the only independent risk factor for patients developing amputation, and the optimal cut-off value of MESS was 8.

CONCLUSION

Five-year outcome demonstrated that Fogarty balloon catheter is not a safe procedure and has significantly higher amputation rate in severe blunt PAI. MESS is the only risk factor for amputation.

The Role of Endovascular Repair of Popliteal Arterial Injuries in the Acute Setting

OBJECTIVES

The role of endovascular surgery in the treatment of popliteal arterial injuries is not well established. As with other popliteal pathology, open repair has traditionally been considered the gold standard. As data has accumulated and technology advanced, however, a reassessment of the role of endovascular surgery is warranted. The aim of this study is to perform a noninferiority comparison of open versus endovascular management of traumatic popliteal injuries. Our hypothesis is that endovascular management is noninferior to open management of traumatic popliteal injuries.

METHODS

The National Trauma Data Bank was searched for adult patients from 2002-2016 for isolated popliteal arterial injury. The study used a standard noninferiority methodology to compare rates of amputation and compartment syndrome between endovascular and open surgery. Margins for noninferiority were established using established published rates of complications: 17.1% for amputations and 23.0% for compartment syndrome. Endovascular intervention would be considered noninferior to open surgery if the lower bound confidence of the complication proportion (endo/open complication rate) was greater than the pre-defined noninferiority margin.

RESULTS

3698 patients met inclusion criteria, with blunt injury accounting for 2117 (57%) and penetrating injury accounting for 1581 (43%). Within the blunt group, 1976 (93.3%) underwent open and 141 (6.7%) endovascular surgery. The rate of compartment syndrome (percentage and 95% confidence interval) after surgery for open repair was 9.9 (8.6-11.2) and 6.4 (3.2-11.3) for endovascular repair. The complication proportion is 64.6 (59.7-69.5). The rate of amputation for open repair was 15.7 (14.2-17.4) and 14.2 (9.2-20.6) for endovascular repair. The complication proportion is 90.4 (87.4-93.4). Within the penetrating group, 1525 (96.5%) underwent open repair and 56 (3.5%) endovascular surgery. The rate of compartment syndrome after surgery for open repair was 14.9 (13.2-16.7) and 5.4 (1.5-13.6) for endovascular repair. The complication proportion is 36.2 (31.3-41.1). The rate of amputation for open repair was 4.3 (3.3-5.4) and 3.6 (0.7-11.0) for endovascular repair. The complication proportion is 83.7 (75.3-90.6).

CONCLUSION

These data suggest that endovascular repair of popliteal artery injury may be noninferior to open repair with respect to limb preservation . Further examination of endovascular repair in popliteal artery injury is warranted.

Outcomes of popliteal stent-graft placement at the artery hinge point for popliteal artery aneurysm

OBJECTIVES

to assess whether stent-grafts crossing the hinge point (HP) in the popliteal artery are associated with increased complications and decreased patency rates, after endovascular treatment of the popliteal artery aneurysm.

METHODS

This was a single-center, case-control study. Patients were allocated to either the HP group (subjects with stent-grafts crossing the HP) or the control group (subjects with stent-grafts above and/or below the HP) based on stent-graft location in the femoropopliteal artery. HP was defined as the main curve in the popliteal artery in the most acute angle toward the femur that appeared during knee flexion, which was identified by reviewing post-operative angiograms. Independent, blinded reviews were performed for all imaging data. Graft evaluation by CTA or duplex ultrasound was performed at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months and annually thereafter. Outcomes measured included: stent-graft patency, stent-graft fracture, other stent-related complications, and major adverse events, including reintervention, death, amputation, stroke, and myocardial infarction.

RESULTS

A total of 44 limbs treated with placement of heparin-bonded Viabahn endoprostheses were included in this study. Twenty and Twenty Four patients were allocated to the HP group and the control group, respectively. Primary patency rates of the HP group at 1, 2, 3, and 5 years were 84.1±8.4%, 84.1±8.4%, 84.1±8.4%, and 72.1±13.3%, respectively. The primary patency rates of the control group were 87.0±7.0%, 82.4±8.0%, 82.4±8.0%, and 82.4±8.0%, respectively. There was no significant difference between the two groups (P=0.81). No reintervention was performed in the control group. In the HP group, 5 limbs (25.0%) developed endoleak, 3 (15.0%) developed thrombosis, and one (5.0%) developed a stent fracture followed by thrombosis. Thrombosis occurred in 2 limbs (8.3%) of the control group, and stent-graft migration was observed in another 2 cases (8.3%). Neither group demonstrated stent-graft infection or acute popliteal artery embolism. Overall, incidence of stent-related complications were significantly higher in the HP group (P=0.04). Event-free survival rates of the HP group at 1, 2, 3, and 5 years were 75.0±9.7%, 69.6±10.4%, 61.9±11.8%, and 29.0±12.8%, respectively. Corresponding rates in the control group were 79.2±8.3%, 79.2±8.3%, 79.2±8.3%, and 79.2±8.3%, respectively. The difference was not statistically significant between the two groups (P=0.20) CONCLUSIONS: crossing the HP with femoropopliteal artery stent-grafts increased the risk of stent-related complications and reinterventions but did not decrease stent patency or event-free survival.

Endovascular interventions in the management of acute extremity trauma: a narrative review

Minimally invasive endovascular interventions including stenting and embolization have been widely adopted for the treatment of emergent and traumatic thoracoabdominal injuries. In recent years, these techniques have been utilized in the setting of extremity vascular trauma with promising outcomes. By allowing for the rapid diagnosis and subsequent treatment of penetrating or blunt vascular extremity trauma, these techniques can help to minimize blood loss, reduce operative complications, and potentially prevent limb amputation. Here, we present a narrative review of the ever-increasing role of minimally invasive interventions in the management of extremity trauma and compare its use and outcomes to open surgical repair. A special focus is placed on diagnostic imaging modalities in trauma and the role of interventional radiologists in the work-up and treatment of extremity trauma. We discuss diagnostic imaging modalities that aid in the triaging of extremity trauma, such as Doppler sonography, CT angiography, and catheter-based angiography. We present an overview on the literature related to endovascular interventions such as embolotherapy and stent grafting as well as the technical challenges associated with each technique. Finally, we present our own cases on the workup and endovascular treatment of extremity trauma, including CT angiography, particulate and coil embolization, and stent graft placement.

[Interventional management of peripheral vascular injuries : From the exclusion indication to the procedure of first choice]

BACKGROUND

Approximately one third of all traumatic peripheral artery injuries affect the upper extremities, while two thirds involve the arteries of the lower extremities. Historically, these injuries were treated by open surgical repair. Nowadays, interventional treatment, such as embolization or stent grafting are increasingly used to treat peripheral artery injuries.

OBJECTIVE

Determination of the current state of interventional treatment options for injuries of peripheral arteries.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Selective literature review on the current state of interventional management of peripheral artery injuries.

RESULTS

Although scarce, the available data confirm the efficacy of interventional techniques for managing peripheral artery injuries; however, despite improvements in treatment techniques and interventional devices, not all patients are equally well suited for endovascular or open surgical treatment. Consequently, a multidisciplinary decision on the best treatment has to be made on a case by case basis.

CONCLUSION

According to the promising clinical data, interventional treatment should be considered more often. Diagnostic algorithms need to be adapted accordingly.

Endovascular versus open repair of isolated superficial femoral and popliteal artery injuries

OBJECTIVE

Despite the increasing use of endovascular therapy for traumatic arterial injuries, little is known about the outcomes of endovascular repair of superficial femoral artery (SFA) and popliteal artery (PA) injuries. In the present study, we compared the characteristics and outcomes of endovascular vs open repair of traumatic SFA and PA injuries.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective National Trauma Data Bank analysis of trauma patients with a blunt or penetrating injury of the SFA and/or PA who had undergone endovascular or open repair from 2007 to 2014. Multivariate logistic regression was used to compare the outcomes, with propensity score matching used for sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

The incidence of SFA and PA injuries was 0.2%, with an overall increase in the annual use of endovascular stent repair from 3.2% in 2007 to 7.6% in 2014 (P = .002). A total of 2,873 patients with an isolated SFA and/or PA injury were included in the present study, of whom 163 (5.7%) had undergone endovascular repair. SFA injuries were more frequently treated with endovascular repair (70% vs 27%) and PA injuries were more often associated with open repair (41.1% vs 54.7%). Open repair was more frequently associated with a concomitant femur fracture or knee dislocation (30.7% vs 38.8%; P = .039). Endovascular repair was not associated with worse in-hospital amputation-free survival (AFS) compared with open repair on univariate analysis (91.1% vs 89.7%; P = .573) or multivariate logistic regression (odds ratio [OR], 1.053; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.551-2.012; P = .876). Propensity score matching revealed that in-hospital mortality was higher (OR, 3.69; 95% CI, 1.37-9.82; P = .01) and fasciotomy was lower (OR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.14-0.37; P < .001) in the endovascular repair group, with no significant differences in AFS (OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.48-1.67; P = .65).

CONCLUSIONS

Endovascular repair of SFA and PA injuries has in-hospital AFS comparable to that for open repair, supporting the increasing use of endovascular repair for traumatic SFA and PA injuries in appropriately selected cases. Given the unexpected finding of increased in-hospital mortality after endovascular repair, further studies are necessary to determine the appropriate patient selection and the durability of endovascular repair.

Four-year outcomes following endovascular repair in patients with traumatic isolated popliteal artery injuries

OBJECTIVE

The effectiveness of endovascular treatment for popliteal arterial injury has not been well-documented. This study was aimed to investigate the midterm outcomes of endovascular repair of traumatic isolated popliteal arterial injury.

METHODS

Medical records of the patients who underwent endovascular repair for traumatic popliteal arterial injuries from January 2012 to February 2020 were reviewed retrospectively. Clinical data including patient demographics, Injury Severity Score, type of injury, classification of acute limb ischemia, concomitant extremity fracture, runoff vessel status, complications, time of endovascular procedure, time interval from injury to blood flow restoration, length of hospital stay, reintervention, and follow-up were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

Endovascular repair was performed in 46 patients with traumatic popliteal arterial injuries. The mean Injury Severity Score was 15.8 ± 6.2. The overall limb salvage rate was 89.1%. There were 10 penetrating and 36 blunt injuries (78.3%). The initial angiographic findings revealed occlusion in 34 patients (73.9%), pseudoaneurysm in 2 (4.4%), active extravasation in 9 (19.5%), and arteriovenous fistulas in 1 (2.2%). Technical success was achieved in all 46 patients, via antegrade access in 24 patients (52.2%) and concurrent retrograde access in 22 (47.8%). The mean time interval from popliteal artery injury to blood flow restoration was 10.6 ± 4.9 hours and mean operative time was of 54.9 ± 10.0 minutes. The mean follow-up was 36.1 ± 14.5 months. The primary patency rate was 75.3% at 12 months, 61.9% at 24 months, and 55.7% at 48 months. The secondary patency rate was 92.2% at 12 and 24 months and 85.2% at 48 months. A Cox multivariate analysis revealed that single vessel runoff was an independent risk factor for primary patency loss.

CONCLUSIONS

Endovascular repair of an isolated popliteal artery injury may be a safe and effective alternative treatment in select patients, with acceptable midterm outcomes. Single vessel runoff was an independent risk factor for primary patency loss.

A Nationwide Analysis of Popliteal Vascular Injuries and Outcomes by Hospital Teaching Status

BACKGROUND

Popliteal artery injuries are the second most common arterial injuries below the inguinal ligament. We aimed to compare outcomes in patients with popliteal injuries by hospital teaching status utilizing the National Trauma Data Bank Research Data Set (NTDB-RDS) 2013-2016.

METHODS

Four-year retrospective study using the NTDB-RDS, evaluating popliteal vascular injuries. Patients were divided by popliteal injury type and teaching status into; nonteaching hospital (NTH), community teaching (CTH), or University teaching (UTH). Demographics and outcome measures were compared between groups. Risk-adjusted mortality odds ratios (ORs) were calculated. Significance was defined as P < 0.05.

RESULTS

3,577,168 patients were in the NTDB-RDS, with 1120 having a popliteal injury, (incidence = 0.03%). There was no significant difference in the amputation rate between patients treated in NTHs, CTHs, or UTHs (P > 0.05). There was no significant difference in the raw mortality rate between patients treated in NTHs, CTHs, or UTHs. After adjusting for confounders; compared to NTH, the odds ratio for mortality for popliteal artery injuries in the CTH group was significantly higher (OR: 15.95, 95% CI: 1.19-213.84), and for the UTH group the mortality was also significantly higher (OR: 5.74, 95% CI: 0.45-72.95).

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of popliteal vascular injuries was 0.03% for 2013-2016. Patients with popliteal artery injuries treated at community teaching hospitals have a 16 times higher risk of mortality and at university teaching hospitals have a 5.7 times higher risk of mortality than patients treated at nonteaching hospitals.

Endovascular Therapy of Vascular Trauma—Current Options and Review of the Literature

Objective:

To review the current use of endovascular techniques in trauma.

Summary Background Data:

Multiple studies have demonstrated that, despite current guidelines, endovascular therapies are used in instances of arterial trauma.

Methods:

The existing literature concerning arterial trauma was reviewed. Studies reviewed included case reports, single-center case series, large database studies, official industry publications and instructions for use, and society guidelines.

Results:

Endovascular therapies are used in arterial trauma in all systems. The use of thoracic endografts in blunt thoracic aortic trauma is accepted and endorsed by society guidelines. The use of endovascular therapies in other anatomic locations is largely limited to single-center studies. Advantages potentially include less morbidity due to smaller incisions as well as shorter operating room times. Many report using endovascular therapies even with hard signs of injury. Long-term results are limited by a lack of long-term follow-up but, in general, suggest that these techniques produce acceptable outcomes. The adoption of these techniques may be limited by resource and surgeon availability.

Conclusions:

The use of endovascular therapies in trauma has gained acceptance despite not yet having a place in official guidelines.

The Epidemiology of Micro-arteriovenous Fistulas in the Lower Legs

BACKGROUND

Patients presenting with edema, skin redness, pain, and itching in their lower legs are common and encountered often in daily practice. However, although commonly recognized diseases such as deep venous thrombosis, stasis dermatitis due to varicose veins, lymphedema, and cellulitis are diagnosed correctly in most cases, micro-arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) may often be overlooked due to low awareness and rarity. This study was carried out to evaluate the prevalence of micro-AVF in patients presenting with foot skin symptoms.

METHODS

A total of 134 patients (184 limbs) visited the Department of Vascular Surgery at Kesennuma City Hospital with edema, skin redness, pain, and itching in their lower legs from January to September 2017 and were enrolled and followed up until November 2017. All patients received ultrasonic inspection of their symptomatic limb, and a blood test (white blood cell count, C-reactive protein, and d-dimer) was performed if needed. When micro-AVF was detected in one limb, the other limb was routinely inspected by ultrasonography. A computed tomography scan was performed with the patient's consent. Patients diagnosed with micro-AVF started compression therapy immediately and were followed up for at least 2 months. A surgical procedure was considered if the symptoms worsened.

RESULTS

Micro-AVFs were detected in 24 limbs (13%, 24/184) of 14 patients (7 males and 7 females; age 70 ± 11.7 years). Four patients had unilateral skin symptoms with unilateral micro-AVFs and 7 patients had unilateral skin symptoms and bilateral micro-AVFs. Three patients had bilateral skin symptoms and bilateral micro-AVFs. Asymptomatic micro-AVFs were detected in 7 limbs. Subjective symptoms disappeared and skin appearance normalized in 14 limbs of 12 patients during the first 2 months with compression therapy only. Compression therapy was not effective in 3 limbs of 2 patients and they underwent vein ligation surgery. None of the patients had a surgical history or history of trauma in their lower legs.

CONCLUSIONS

Among the lower legs presenting with skin symptoms, we detected micro-AVFs in 13% of limbs; therefore, micro-AVF of the lower leg is not as rare as previously thought. In addition, 10 of 14 patients (71%) had micro-AVFs of the lower leg bilaterally.

Diagnostic workup and endovascular treatment of popliteal artery trauma

Although management paradigms for certain arterial trauma, such as aortic injuries, have moved towards an endovascular approach, the application of endovascular techniques for the treatment of peripheral arterial injuries continues to be debated. In the realm of peripheral vascular trauma, popliteal arterial injuries remain a devastating condition with significant rates of limb loss. Expedient management is essential and surgical revascularization has been the gold standard. Initial clinical assessment of vascular injury is aided by readily available imaging techniques such as duplex ultrasonography and high resolution computed tomographic angiography. Conventional catheter based angiography, however, remain the gold standard in the determination of vascular injury. There are limited data examining the outcomes of endovascular techniques to address popliteal arterial injuries. In this review, we examine the imaging modalities and current approaches and data regarding endovascular techniques for the management popliteal arterial trauma.

Popliteal vessel trauma: Surgical approaches and the vessel-first strategy

BACKGROUND

In this study, we analyzed long-term outcomes following treatment of traumatic popliteal vascular injuries in an urban level I trauma center, using a vessel-first approach in the case of combined vascular and bony/ligamentous injuries and discussing the relative merits of the medial and posterior approach to popliteal vessels.

METHODS

Data including patient demographics, mechanism and type of injury, severity of limb ischemia, Injury Severity Score (ISS), limb ischemia time, time to revascularization from admission, treatment strategy, type of vascular reconstruction, limb salvage and mortality were retrospectively collected in patients treated for traumatic popliteal vessel lesions. All patients in this study were operatively treated using medial and posterior approaches. A vessel-first approach was used where possible.

RESULTS

Twenty-four patients (13 male) with a median age of 45 years (range 21-88) and popliteal vessel injury after traumatic knee dislocation (n = 10, 42%), proximal tibia fracture (n = 5, 21%), distal femur fracture (n = 4, 17%), blunt popliteal injury (n = 3, 12%) and penetrating trauma (n = 2, 8%) were identified. Twelve (50%) patients were treated via a medial approach and 12 (50%) via a posterior approach. All had injury of the popliteal artery (15 complete transection, eight local intimal disruption and one pseudoaneurysm) with seven having additional popliteal vein and five with nerve injury. Nineteen patients (88%) presented with limb ischemia Rutherford category ≥II. Vessel reconstruction (four direct sutures, four patch plasties, 16 venous interposition/bypasses) was performed prior to bone/joint stabilization in 22 patients (92%). Thirty-day mortality was zero. Two above-knee amputations were performed within 30 days due to severe infection. During a median follow-up of 59 (range 12-143) months, there were no deaths and no amputations. At the end of follow-up, all patients denied claudication.

CONCLUSIONS

The vessel-first strategy promises an excellent outcome, independent of the surgical approach needed to repair traumatic popliteal vessel injuries.

Management of Major Vascular Injuries: Neck, Extremities, and Other Things that Bleed

Vascular injuries represent a significant burden of mortality and disability. Blunt injuries to the neck vessels can present with signs of stroke either immediately or in a delayed fashion. Most injuries are detected with computed tomography angiography and managed with either antiplatelet medications or anticoagulation. In contrast, patients with penetrating injuries to the neck vessels require airway management, hemorrhage control, and damage control resuscitation before surgical repair. The keys to diagnosis and management of peripheral vascular injury include early recognition of the injury; hemorrhage control with direct pressure, packing, or tourniquets; and urgent surgical consultation.