Endovascular Interventions to Superficial Femoral Artery Occlusion: Different Approaches, Technique, and Follow-up

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.

Comparative Analysis of Endovascular Intervention and Endarterectomy in Patients with Femoral Artery Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Peripheral artery disease is a prevalent illness affecting more than 200 million people worldwide. A commonly used technique to manage the condition has been open endarterectomy. However, in recent times, a shift towards minimally invasive techniques has resulted in endovascular intervention as a popular alternative. This review aims to assess the safety and efficacy of endovascular intervention when compared with endarterectomy. A systematic review of the articles published in PubMed, Ovid, Embase, and Scopus within the last 10 years was conducted. The PRISMA guidelines were adhered to, and the Newcastle-Ottawa and NICE quality assessment scales were used. A meta-analysis of proportions was performed using the RStudio software (RStudio Team (2021). RStudio: Integrated Development Environment for R, PBC, Boston, MA, USA). Twenty-six studies were included, with a total of 7126 patients (endovascular, 2496; endarterectomy, 4630). Technical success was greater for endarterectomy than endovascular intervention with an odds ratio of 0.38; 95% CI [0.27–0.54]. In terms of safety as well endovascular intervention was better than endarterectomy with an odds ratio of 0.22; 95% CI [0.15 to 0.31] for wound infection. Endovascular intervention is a safe and effective procedure; however, it cannot be considered superior to endarterectomy.