ADVERTISEMENT
Superficial Femoral Artery Endovascular Therapy: 12-Month Primary Patency Rates of Contemporary Endovascular Devices from 25,051 Patients
Abstract
Background. Approximately 5.8 million people experience peripheral arterial disease (PAD) in the United States today. Superficial femoral artery (SFA) disease is the most common cause of symptomatic PAD. New-generation nitinol stents, drug-coated stents, drug-coated balloons (DCB), covered stents, and directional or orbital atherectomy devices have shown promising results. However, clinical equipoise persists regarding the optimal selection of devices, largely attributable to the different inclusion criteria, study populations, length of lesions treated, definitions of “patency” and “restenosis,” and follow-up methods in the up-to-date pivotal trials. Methods. A prospective protocol was developed. We performed a literature search using PubMed from January 2011 to July 2021. All published articles including endovascular interventions in the SFA with reported 12-month “primary patency” rates as endpoints were included. Results. We identified 25,051 patients in 124 studies reporting 12-month primary patency rates in patients with SFA disease. Primary patency rates were (weighted average) 82.6% for drug-eluting stents, 77.2% for drug-coated balloons, 75.2% for covered stents, 73.9% for nitinol self-expanding stents, 66.1% for atherectomy, and 44.5% for bare balloon angioplasty. Conclusion. The most frequently used endovascular devices yielded various 12-month primary patency rates ranging from 44.5% to 82.6%. The increased variation in inclusion criteria, lesion length, and complexity of lesions between studies does not allow direct comparison between the individual devices. Larger randomized trials in specific patient populations comparing these modalities are needed well before we can make proper recommendations on the superiority of one device over the other.
Keywords: endovascular therapies, peripheral arterial disease
Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) affects 5.8%-10.7% of the population 40 years and older. Approximately 5.8 million people today experience PAD, defined as an ankle-brachial index (ABI) <0.9 in the United States.1 Despite advancements in medical therapies, identification and control of risk factors, and percutaneous and surgical revascularization techniques, the rate of non-traumatic lower-extremity amputation has increased by 50% between 2009 and 2015 in adults with diabetes.1 The average healthcare costs over 2 years for vascular-related hospitalizations in patients with PAD ranges from $7000 to $11,693, while in patients with critical limb ischemia (CLI), the average annual healthcare cost ranged from $49,200 to $55,700. Superficial femoral artery (SFA) disease is the most common cause of symptomatic PAD, and may progress to lifestyle-limiting claudication, CLI, or limb amputation.2
With optimal use of new technologies, endovascular revascularization has been feasible even in patients with complex SFA lesions. Chronic total occlusion (CTO) devices, orbital or rotational atherectomy, new-generation stents, drug-eluting stents, drug-coated balloons, and covered stents have all been studied with varying success rates in different patient groups.
Data comparing each of those modalities with plain old balloon angioplasty or medical therapy are available; however, head-to-head comparisons between advanced endovascular treatment modalities have been scarce. Moreover, accurate conclusions comparing published data are difficult due to important differences in included samples. Variations in patient risk factors (diabetes, kidney disease, and smoking), clinical presentation (claudication, acute, or CLI), lesion characteristics (CTO, extent of calcification, multisegmental disease, and long segments), studied outcomes (primary or secondary patency, length of follow up, target-lesion revascularization, target-vessel revascularization), and follow-up methods (clinical, ultrasound, ABI, or angiography) make such comparisons imprecise.
In 2018, the Society of Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) published a consensus guidelines document for device selection in femoropopliteal arterial interventions.3 A quantitative evaluation and synthesis of the data is hence essential and timely in helping to define and quantify the durability of various endovascular devices (other than balloon angioplasty). In this study, we attempted to investigate the 12-month primary patency rates of various endovascular therapies in patients with femoropopliteal PAD using published registries, case reports, and trials.
Methods
A prospective protocol using a detailed literature search using PubMed from January 2011 to July 2021 was performed. Randomized trials and outcome registries with the following characteristics were included: (1) evaluation of endovascular intervention; (2) report of 12-month primary patency; (3) sample >30 patients; and (4) published in English. The primary outcome of interest was primary patency at 12 months. The medical subject heading (MeSH) terms (“superficial femoral artery” OR “sfa” OR “superficial femoral”) OR (“superficial femoral and popliteal” OR “femoropopliteal”) AND (“primary patency” OR “binary restenosis”) AND (“atherectomy” OR “angioplasty” OR “DCB” OR “drug coated balloon” OR “stent” OR “balloon angioplasty” OR “cryoplasty” OR “lithotripsy” OR “cutting balloon”) were used.
After completion of this electronic search, 2 reviewers screened all titles and abstracts to assess the eligibility of each article and studies that fulfilled the inclusion criteria were retrieved in full text for further evaluation. Only studies with a minimum sample size of 30 patients and with a follow-up of at least 12 months were included in this report. Studies evaluating common femoral artery, deep femoral artery, and aortoiliac arteries were excluded. The search was limited to human studies and restricted to articles in English. Abstracts and presentations were also excluded. The outcome of interest was primary patency at 12 months.
Data extraction. Studies were selected and data were extracted independently by 2 reviewers (IDK and MA) and disagreements were resolved by consensus. The studies were evaluated carefully for duplicate or overlapping data. We reported the type of endovascular device, sample size, and 12-month primary patency rates.
Results
A total of 124 studies (25,051 patients) met the selection criteria and were included in our study. The results involving stent studies and alternative endovascular devices are listed in the tables. Weighted average 12-month patency rates and length of femoropoliteal lesions treated with each endovascular modality are described in Figure 1. In the balloon angioplasty group, 12 studies including 1606 patients formed the data.4-14 The mean 12-month patency rate was 44.5% (Table 1). In the stent group, 68 studies with 17,829 patients were evaluated.15-69 The mean 12-month patency rate was 73.9% (Table 2). In the drug-eluting stent group, we included 12 studies with 2501 patients.11,15,16,70-78 The mean 12-month patency rate was 82.6% (Table 3). The drug-coated balloon group was formed with 17 studies and 1915 patients.4,6,7,13,14,79-86 The mean 12-month patency rate was 77.2% (Table 4). The covered stent group included 12 studies and 1092 patients. The mean 12-month patency rate was 75.2% (Table 5). Finally, the atherectomy group comprised 3 studies and 108 patients (Table 6). The mean 12-month patency rate was 66.1%.
A small group of 2 studies and 104 patients that evaluated biodegradable stents demonstrated a 12-month patency rate of 50.5%. One study evaluated the combination of orbital atherectomy with drug-coated balloon and showed a 12-month patency 77.0%.
Discussion
SFA endovascular interventions are subject to restenosis, which often appears within the first 12 months after the initial procedure. Despite advances in device optimization to achieve successful recanalization for the majority of arterial lesions, long-term primary patency rates remain relatively low in these patients. In contrast to the coronary circulation, PAD of the SFA includes longer segments, often at many levels, high prevalence of calcification, decreased flow rates and mechanical compression from adjacent anatomy with various range of motion, triggering restenosis, stent fracture, or occlusion even after highly satisfactory initial angiographic results.
Newer-generation stents. Currently, nitinol self-expanding stents are widely used in patients with SFA disease. Newer stent platforms are designed to maintain flexibility, radial strength to tolerate vessel bending, torsion, and elongation or shortening, with reduced rates of stent fracture and restenosis.
Drug-coated balloons. Drug-coated balloons provide significant benefits through local drug delivery to prevent intimal hyperplasia, without the risk of thrombosis from exposed metal struts or stent fracture. They provide a higher patency rate compared with traditional angioplasty balloons. The use of drug-coated balloon significantly decreased in 2019 after concerns about late mortality in patients who received drug-coated balloon treatment of PAD.4 According to the latest United States Food and Drug Administration recommendations, patients treated with paclitaxel-coated balloons and paclitaxel-coated stents should be carefully monitored. Moreover, “when making treatment recommendations, and as part of the informed consent process, consider that there may be an increased rate of long-term mortality in patients treated with paclitaxel-coated balloons and paclitaxel-eluting stents.”
Drug-eluting and drug-coated stents. Drug-eluting therapy has been extensively investigated in patients with coronary artery disease. Based on the success of drug-eluting stents in the coronary circulation, it has been hypothesized that they may provide higher patency rates in PAD patients as well. Early trials demonstrated discrepant outcomes due to the type and quantity of the stent medication used. As with drug-coated balloons, the use of drug-eulting stents has decreased since 2019 due to concerns about potential late mortality.5
Covered stents. Covered stents have been commonly used in the peripheral circulation. A covered stent completely “covers” the diseased vessel in long PAD lesions, preventing ingrowth of intimal hyperplasia. Covered stents are made of an expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) liner attached to an external nitinol stent structure, while newer devices have an additional heparin bioactive surface. They are believed to offer higher patency rates by preventing ingrowth from intimal hyperplasia.
Directional and orbital atherectomy. Directional and orbital atherectomy are now widely used to treat calcified femoropopliteal lesions by offering minimal arterial wall stretch injury. These modalities avoid the uncontrolled vascular mechanical damage caused by angioplasty balloons, the exposure of stent struts, or stent fracture. Moreover, no medication remains on the vessel endothelium, which has been a concern with drug-coated balloons and drug-eluting stents. It is important to point out that directional atherectomy has been successfully used in the most complex femoropopliteal lesions, including TransAtlantic InterSociety Consensus (TASC) D and heavily calcified vessels, with excellent results;6 although, adjunctive percutaneous transluminal angioplasty or drug-coated balloon have been used in 59%-76.5% of the cases and bailout stenting in 6%-23% of the lesions.
Relatively small patient sample size in each study and the lack of uniformly defined endpoints make comparisons between different endovascular treatment modalities very challenging. Furthermore, the number of well-designed randomized controlled trials is limited. Angiographic success, clinical success, ABI, target-lesion revascularization, target-vessel revascularization, Rutherford class, freedom from claudication, and limb-salvage rates are some of the endpoints that have been used to demonstrate the effectiveness of variable endovascular treatment strategies. Primary patency is defined by the TASC document as uninterrupted patency following an endovascular intervention and is the most commonly used endpoint in most of the well-designed clinical trials.
With the existing data, the highest 12-month primary patency rates are achieved with drug-eluting stents (82.6%), followed by drug-coated balloons (77.2%), covered stents (75.2%), nitinol self-expanding stents (73.9%), atherectomy (66.1%), and balloon angioplasty alone (44.5%). These results should be interpreted with caution because of important differences in their use regarding patient demographic and risk factors, clinical presentation, Rutherford class, angiographic severity, and degree of calcification.
Study limitations. The most important limitation of our current review is that the data were obtained from registries, single-center case series, databases, and trials with various inherent biases. As with any quantitative systematic review, the conclusions drawn from such data are subject to the limitations of the original studies. The included studies had significant heterogeneity as well as differences in design, patient selection, and methods. We did not have access to patient-level data, which precluded the possibility of performing meta-regression analysis. However, this is currently the best available information about the long-term patency rates with the currently used endovascular modalities in the treatment of SFA-PAD lesions.
Conclusion
Newer-generation nitinol self-expanding stents, covered stents, drug-eluting stents, drug-coated balloons, and atherectomy devices offer an extensive variety of endovascular options for the treatment of femoropopliteal disease. We present the best available information about the 12-month patency rates with the currently used endovascular modalities. Since the inclusion and exclusion criteria were not uniform among the original studies, it is impossible to precisely determine the effectiveness of one device compared with others. It is of prime importance to recognize the benefits and shortfalls of each device and choose an appropriate treatment modality. Larger randomized trials in specific patient populations comparing different endovascular treatment options are needed to demonstrate the superiority of one device over another.
Affiliations and Disclosures
From the 1University of Texas, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas; 2University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida; 3Pamukkale University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Cardiology, Denizli, Turkey; 4Kırıkkale Yuksek Ihtisas Hospital, Kırıkkale, Turkey; and 5Banner University of Arizona Medical Center, Tucson, Arizona.
Disclosure: The authors have completed and returned the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. The authors report no conflicts of interest regarding the content herein.
Manuscript accepted June 23, 2022.
Address for correspondence: Konstantinos Marmagkiolis, MD, MBA, FACC, FSCAI, Interventional Cardiologist, Tampa Heart, 2727 Martin Luther King Jr, Ste 800, Tampa, FL 33607. Email: c.marmagiolis@gmail.com
References
1. Virani SS, Alonso A, Aparicio HJ, et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics-2021 update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2021;143(8):e254-e743. doi:10.1161/CIR.0000000000000950
2. Kasapis C, Gurm HS. Current approach to the diagnosis and treatment of femoral-popliteal arterial disease. a systematic review. Curr Cardiol Rev. 2009;5(4):296-311. doi:10.2174/157340309789317823
3. Feldman DN, Armstrong EJ, Aronow HD, et al. SCAI Consensus guidelines for device selection in femoral-popliteal arterial interventions. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2018;92(1):124-140. doi:10.1002/ccd.27635
4. Rocha-Singh KJ, Duval S, Jaff MR, et al. Mortality and paclitaxel-coated devices: an individual patient data meta-analysis. Circulation. 2020;141(23):1859-1869. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.119.044697
5. Katsanos K, Spiliopoulos S, Kitrou P, Krokidis M, Karnabatidis DJ. Risk of death following application of paclitaxel‐coated balloons and stents in the femoropopliteal artery of the leg: a systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Am Heart Assoc. 2018;7(24):e011245. doi:10.1161/JAHA.118.011245
6. Roberts D, Niazi K, Miller W, et al. Effective endovascular treatment of calcified femoropopliteal disease with directional atherectomy and distal embolic protection: final results of the DEFINITIVE Ca++ trial. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2014;84(2):236-244. doi:10.1002/ccd.25384
7. Schroeder H, Werner M, Meyer DR, et al. Low-dose paclitaxel-coated versus uncoated percutaneous transluminal balloon angioplasty for femoropopliteal peripheral artery disease: one-year results of the ILLUMENATE European randomized clinical trial (randomized trial of a novel paclitaxel-coated percutaneous angioplasty balloon). Circulation. 2017;135(23):2227-2236. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.116.026493
8. Tsuchiya T, Takamura T, Soga Y, et al. Clinical impact and risk stratification of balloon angioplasty for femoropopliteal disease in nitinol stenting era: retrospective multicenter study using propensity score matching analysis. SAGE Open Med. 2016;4:2050312116660116. doi:10.1177/2050312116660116
9. Jia X, Zhang J, Zhuang B, et al. Acotec drug-coated balloon catheter: randomized, multicenter, controlled clinical study in femoropopliteal arteries: evidence from the AcoArt I trial. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9(18):1941-1949. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2016.06.055
10. Tepe G, Laird J, Schneider P, et al. Drug-coated balloon versus standard percutaneous transluminal angioplasty for the treatment of superficial femoral and popliteal peripheral artery disease: 12-month results from the IN.PACT SFA randomized trial. Circulation. 2015;131(5):495-502. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.114.011004
11. Armstrong EJ, Saeed H, Alvandi B, et al. Nitinol self-expanding stents vs. balloon angioplasty for very long femoropopliteal lesions. J Endovasc Ther. 2014;21(1):34-43. doi:10.1583/13-4399MR.1
12. Chalmers N, Walker PT, Belli AM, et al. Randomized trial of the SMART stent versus balloon angioplasty in long superficial femoral artery lesions: the SUPER study. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2013;36(2):353-361. doi:10.1007/s00270-012-0492-z
13. Bosiers M, Deloose K, Callaert J, et al. Superiority of stent-grafts for in-stent restenosis in the superficial femoral artery: twelve-month results from a multicenter randomized trial. J Endovasc Ther. 2015;22(1):1-10. doi:10.1177/1526602814564385
14. Dake MD, Ansel GM, Jaff MR, et al. Paclitaxel-eluting stents show superiority to balloon angioplasty and bare metal stents in femoropopliteal disease: twelve-month Zilver PTX randomized study results. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2011;4(5):495-504. doi:10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.111.962324
15. Rastan A, Krankenberg H, Baumgartner I, et al. Stent placement versus balloon angioplasty for the treatment of obstructive lesions of the popliteal artery: a prospective, multicenter, randomized trial. Circulation. 2013;127(25):2535-2541. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.113.001849
16. Rosenfield K, Jaff MR, White CJ, et al. Trial of a paclitaxel-coated balloon for femoropopliteal artery disease. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(2):145-153. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1406235
17. Kinstner CM, Lammer J, Willfort-Ehringer A, et al. Paclitaxel-eluting balloon versus standard balloon angioplasty in in-stent restenosis of the superficial femoral and proximal popliteal artery: 1-year results of the PACUBA trial. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9(13):1386-1392. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2016.04.012
18. Mori S, Hirano K, Yamauchi Y, et al. Penetration rate of the placement of a drug-eluting stent for the treatment of superficial femoral artery lesions in Japan. Heart Vessels. 2017;32(9):1093-1098. doi:10.1007/s00380-017-0982-7
19. Vent PA, Kaladji A, Davaine JM, et al. Bare metal versus paclitaxel-eluting stents for long femoropopliteal lesions: prospective cohorts comparison using a propensity score-matched analysis. Ann Vasc Surg. 2017;43:166-175. doi:10.1016/j.avsg.2016.10.058
20. Powell RJ, Jaff MR, Schroe H, Benko A, Diaz-Cartelle J, Muller-Hulsbeck S. Stent placement in the superficial femoral and proximal popliteal arteries with the Innova self-expanding bare metal stent system. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2017;89(6):1069-1077. doi:10.1002/ccd.26976
21. Elmahdy MF, Buonamici P, Trapani M, et al. Long-term primary patency rate after nitinol self-expandable stents implantation in long, totally occluded femoropopliteal (TASC II C & D) lesions. Heart Lung Circ. 2017;26(6):604-611. doi:10.1016/j.hlc.2016.09.011
22. Stavroulakis K, Torsello G, Manal A, et al. Results of primary stent therapy for femoropopliteal peripheral arterial disease at 7 years. J Vasc Surg. 2016;64(6):1696-1702. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2016.05.073
23. Brouillet J, Deloose K, Goueffic Y, et al. Primary stenting for TASC C and D femoropopliteal lesions: one-year results from a multicentric trial on 203 patients. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino). 2018;59(3):392-404. doi:10.23736/S0021-9509.16.09282-X
24. Myint M, Schouten O, Bourke V, Thomas SD, Lennox AF, Varcoe RL. A real-world experience with the supera interwoven nitinol stent in femoropopliteal arteries: midterm patency results and failure analysis. J Endovasc Ther. 2016;23(3):433-441. doi: 10.1177/1526602816639543
25. Matsumi J, Ochiai T, Tobita K, et al. Long-term outcomes of self-expandable nitinol stent implantation with intraluminal angioplasty to treat chronic total occlusion in the superficial femoral artery (TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus type D lesions). J Invasive Cardiol. 2016;28(2):58-64.
26. Suzuki K, Takahara M, Shintani Y, et al. Retrospective multicenter comparison of S.M.A.R.T. CONTROL and MISAGO stents in treatment of femoropopliteal lesions. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2016;27(11):1642-1649. doi:10.1016/j.jvir.2016.05.042
27. Nishibe T, Yamamoto K, Seike Y, et al. Endovascular therapy for femoropopliteal artery disease and association of risk factors with primary patency: the implication of critical limb ischemia and TASC II C/D disease. Vasc Endovascular Surg. 2015;49(8):236-241. doi:10.1177/1538574415614406
28. Ohki T, Angle JF, Yokoi H, et al. One-year outcomes of the U.S. and Japanese regulatory trial of the misago stent for treatment of superficial femoral artery disease (OSPREY study). J Vasc Surg. 2016;63(2):370-376.e371. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2015.08.093
29. Fujihara M, Higashimori A, Kato Y, et al. Nitinol stent implantation for femoropopliteal disease in patients on hemodialysis: results of the 3-year retrospective multicenter APOLLON study. Heart Vessels. 2016;31(9):1476-1483. doi:10.1007/s00380-015-0740-7
30. Guo X, Xue G, Huang X, et al. Outcomes of endovascular treatment for patients with TASC II D femoropopliteal occlusive disease: a single center study. BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2015;15:44. doi:10.1186/s12872-015-0025-1
31. Matsumi J, Takada T, Moriyama N, et al. Long-term risks for patency loss in patients with hemodialysis after bare self-expandable nitinol stent implantation to femoropopliteal artery occlusive lesions. Int J Cardiol. 2016;223:268-275. Epub 2016 Aug 13. doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2016.08.235
32. Nasser F, Kambara A, Abath C, et al. Safety and efficacy of the EPIC nitinol vascular stent system for the treatment of lesions located in the superficial femoral artery: prospective and multicentric trial. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino). 2017;58(3):409-415. doi:10.23736/S0021-9509.16.08471-8
33. Soga Y, Iida O, Suzuki K, et al. Initial and 3-year results after subintimal versus intraluminal approach for long femoropopliteal occlusion treated with a self-expandable nitinol stent. J Vasc Surg. 2013;58(6):1547-1555. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2013.05.107
34. Brescia AA, Wickers BM, Correa JC, Smeds MR, Jacobs DL. Stenting of femoropopliteal lesions using interwoven nitinol stents. J Vasc Surg. 2015;61(6):1472-1478. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2015.01.030
35. Dumantepe M, Seren M, Fazliogullari O, Ayoglu U, Teymen B. Treatment of complex atherosclerotic femoropopliteal artery disease with a self-expanding interwoven nitinol stent: midterm results. Vascular. 2021;29(5):711-719. doi:10.1177/1708538114568884
36. Rocha-Singh KJ, Bosiers M, Schultz G, Jaff MR, Mehta M, Matsumura JS. A single stent strategy in patients with lifestyle limiting claudication: 3-year results from the Durability II trial. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;86(1):164-170. doi:10.1002/ccd.25895
37. Gabrielli R, Rosati MS, Chiappa R, et al. First clinical experience with the Innova versus the Protege everflex self-expanding bare metal stents in superficial femoral artery occlusions. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2015;63(2):158-163. doi:10.1055/s-0034-1396898
38. Sarkadi H, Berczi V, Kollar A, et al. Safety, clinical outcome, and fracture rate of femoropopliteal stenting using a 4F compatible delivery system. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2015;49(2):199-204. doi:10.1016/j.ejvs.2014.12.004
39. Gray WA, Feiring A, Cioppi M, et al. S.M.A.R.T. self-expanding nitinol stent for the treatment of atherosclerotic lesions in the superficial femoral artery (STROLL): 1-year outcomes. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2015;26(1):21-28. doi:10.1016/j.jvir.2014.09.018
40. Stone PA, Campbell JE, Fischer R, et al. Early results with Lifestent implantation in RESILIENT and non-RESILIENT inclusion criteria patients. Vascular. 2015;23(3):225-233. doi:10.1177/1708538114545109
41. Iida O, Takahara M, Soga Y, et al. Shared and differential factors influencing restenosis following endovascular therapy between TASC (Trans-Atlantic Inter-Society Consensus) II class A to C and D lesions in the femoropopliteal artery. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2014;7(7):792-798. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2014.01.168
42. Iida O, Takahara M, Soga Y, et al. Efficacy of intravascular ultrasound in femoropopliteal stenting for peripheral artery disease with TASC II class A to C lesions. J Endovasc Ther. 2014;21(4):485-492. doi:10.1583/14-4721R.1
43. Gillgren P, Pettersson H, Fernström J, et al. Outcome after nitinol stenting in the superficial femoral and popliteal artery in an elderly population. Ann Vasc Surg. 2011;25(6):758-765. doi:10.1016/j.avsg.2010.12.010
44. Lichtenberg M, Kolks O, Hailer B, et al. PEACE I all-comers registry: patency evaluation after implantation of the 4-French Pulsar-18 self-expanding nitinol stent in femoropopliteal lesions. J Endovasc Ther. 2014;21(3):373-380. doi:10.1583/13-4637R.1
45. George JC, Rosen ES, Nachtigall J, VanHise A, Kovach R. SUPERA interwoven nitinol stent outcomes in above-knee interventions (SAKE) study. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2014;25(6):954-961. doi:10.1016/j.jvir.2014.03.004
46. Laird JR, Jain A, Zeller T, et al. Nitinol stent implantation in the superficial femoral artery and proximal popliteal artery: twelve-month results from the complete SE multicenter trial. J Endovasc Ther. 2014;21(2):202-212. doi:10.1583/13-4548R.1
47. Chan YC, Cheng SW, Ting AC, Cheung GC. Primary stenting of femoropopliteal atherosclerotic lesions using new helical interwoven nitinol stents. J Vasc Surg. 2014;59(2):384-391. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2013.08.037
48. Wu TY, Chou HH, Chang SH, et al. Comparison of immediate and 2-year outcomes between excimer laser-assisted angioplasty with spot stent and primary stenting in intermediate to long femoropopliteal disease. Sci World J. 2013;2013:247102. doi:10.1155/2013/247102
49. Lichtenberg M, Hailer B, Kaeunicke M, Stahlhoff WF, Boese D, Breuckmann F. Evaluation of the 4-French Pulsar-18 self-expanding nitinol stent in long femoropopliteal lesions. Clin Med Insights Cardiol. 2014;8(Suppl 2):37-42. doi:10.4137/CMC.S15224
50. Bosiers M, Deloose K, Callaert J, et al. 4-French-compatible endovascular material is safe and effective in the treatment of femoropopliteal occlusive disease: results of the 4-EVER trial. J Endovasc Ther. 2013;20(6):746-756. doi:10.1583/13-4437MR.1
51. Werner M, Piorkowski M, Thieme M, et al. SUMMIT registry: one-year outcomes after implantation of the EPIC self-expanding nitinol stent in the femoropopliteal segment. J Endovasc Ther. 2013;20(6):759-766. doi:10.1583/13-4430R.1
52. Matsumura JS, Yamanouchi D, Goldstein JA, et al. The United States study for evaluating endovascular treatments of lesions in the superficial femoral artery and proximal popliteal by using the Protégé EverFlex nitinol stent system II (DURABILITY II). J Vasc Surg. 2013;58(1):73-83.e71. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2012.12.066
53. Yin MY, Jiang ME, Huang XT, et al. Endovascular interventions for transatlantic intersociety consensus II C and D femoropopliteal lesions. Chin Med J (Engl). 2013;126(3):415-420.
54. Sakamoto Y, Hirano K, Iida O, et al. Five-year outcomes of self-expanding nitinol stent implantation for chronic total occlusion of the superficial femoral and proximal popliteal artery. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;82(3):E251-256. doi:10.1002/ccd.24935
55. Soga Y, Tomoi Y, Sato K, Iida O, Yokoi H. Clinical outcome after endovascular treatment for isolated common femoral and popliteal artery disease. Cardiovasc Interv Ther. 2013;28(3):250-257. doi:10.1007/s12928-013-0164-1
56. Scheinert D, Werner M, Scheinert S, et al. Treatment of complex atherosclerotic popliteal artery disease with a new self-expanding interwoven nitinol stent: 12-month results of the Leipzig SUPERA popliteal artery stent registry. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;6(1):65-71. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2012.09.011
57. Schulte KL, Kralj I, Gissler HM, et al. MISAGO 2: one-year outcomes after implantation of the Misago self-expanding nitinol stent in the superficial femoral and popliteal arteries of 744 patients. J Endovasc Ther. 2012;19(6):774-784. doi:10.1583/JEVT-12-3861MR.1
58. Diehl SJ, Gerblich F, Jochum S, et al. Twelve-month results of the EverFlex stent in the superficial femoral artery. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2012;23(10):1317-1322. doi:10.1016/j.jvir.2012.05.045
59. Bosiers M, Deloose K, Callaert J, et al. Results of the Protégé EverFlex 200-mm-long nitinol stent (ev3) in TASC C and D femoropopliteal lesions. J Vasc Surg. 2011;54(4):1042-1050. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2011.03.272
60. Gabrielli R, Rosati MS, Vitale S, et al. Randomized controlled trial of remote endarterectomy versus endovascular intervention for TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus II D femoropopliteal lesions. J Vasc Surg. 2012;56(6):1598-1605. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2012.06.081
61. Stavroulakis K, Donas KP, Torsello G, Osada N, Schönefeld E. Gender-related long-term outcome of primary femoropopliteal stent placement for peripheral artery disease. J Endovasc Ther. 2015;22(1):31-37. doi:10.1177/1526602814564382
62. Hong SJ, Ko YG, Shin DH, et al. Outcomes of spot stenting versus long stenting after intentional subintimal approach for long chronic total occlusions of the femoropopliteal artery. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;8(3):472-480. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2014.10.016
63. Werner M, Paetzold A, Banning-Eichenseer U, et al. Treatment of complex atherosclerotic femoropopliteal artery disease with a self-expanding interwoven nitinol stent: midterm results from the Leipzig SUPERA 500 registry. EuroIntervention. 2014;10(7):861-868. doi: 10.4244/EIJV10I7A147
64. Iida O, Soga Y, Hirano K, et al. Long-term outcomes and risk stratification of patency following nitinol stenting in the femoropopliteal segment: retrospective multicenter analysis. J Endovasc Ther. 2011;18(6):753-761. doi:10.1583/11-3581.1
65. Scheinert D, Grummt L, Piorkowski M, et al. A novel self-expanding interwoven nitinol stent for complex femoropopliteal lesions: 24-month results of the SUPERA SFA registry. J Endovasc Ther. 2011;18(6):745-752. doi:10.1583/11-3500.1
66. Iida O, Soga Y, Hirano K, et al. Retrospective multicentre analysis of S.M.A.R.T. vs. Luminexx nitinol stent implantation for superficial femoral artery lesions (REAL SL) registry. 5 years’ experience. Circ J. 2011;75(2):421-427. doi:10.1253/circj.cj-10-0741
67. Lin Y, Tang X, Fu W, Kovach R, George JC, Guo D. Stent fractures after superficial femoral artery stenting: risk factors and impact on patency. J Endovasc Ther. 2015;22(3):319-326. doi:10.1177/1526602815580783
68. Rastan A, Krankenberg H, Baumgartner I, et al. Stent placement versus balloon angioplasty for the treatment of obstructive lesions of the popliteal artery: a prospective, multicenter, randomized trial. Circulation. 2013;127(25):2535-2541. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.113.001849
69. Lammer J, Zeller T, Hausegger KA, et al. Heparin-bonded covered stents versus bare-metal stents for complex femoropopliteal artery lesions: the randomized VIASTAR trial (Viabahn endoprosthesis with PROPATEN bioactive surface [VIA] versus bare nitinol stent in the treatment of long lesions in superficial femoral artery occlusive disease). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;62(15):1320-1327. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2013.05.079
70. Garcia L, Jaff MR, Metzger C, et al. Wire-interwoven nitinol stent outcome in the superficial femoral and proximal popliteal arteries: twelve-month results of the SUPERB trial. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;8(5). doi:10.1161/HCV.0000000000000014
71. San Norberto EM, Fuente R, Flota CM, Taylor JH, Vaquero C. Impact of implantation defects on intermediate outcome of Supera stent for popliteal artery stenosis. Ann Vasc Surg. 2017;41:186-195. doi:10.1016/j.avsg.2016.09.021
72. Soga Y, Iida O, Hirano K, et al. Utility of new classification based on clinical and lesional factors after self-expandable nitinol stenting in the superficial femoral artery. J Vasc Surg. 2011;54(4):1058-1066. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2011.03.286
73. Tran K, Ullery BW, Kret MR, Lee JT. Real-world performance of paclitaxel drug-eluting bare metal stenting (Zilver PTX) for the treatment of femoropopliteal occlusive disease. Ann Vasc Surg. 2017;38:90-98. doi:10.1016/j.avsg.2016.08.006
74. Müller-Hülsbeck S, Keirse K, Zeller T, Schroë H, Diaz-Cartelle J. Twelve-month results from the MAJESTIC trial of the Eluvia paclitaxel-eluting stent for treatment of obstructive femoropopliteal disease. J Endovasc Ther. 2016;23(5):701-707. doi:10.1177/1526602816650206
75. Yokoi H, Ohki T, Kichikawa K, et al. Zilver PTX post-market surveillance study of paclitaxel-eluting stents for treating femoropopliteal artery disease in Japan: 12-month results. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9(3):271-277. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2015.09.035
76. Kang WY, Campia U, Didier RJ, et al. A single center experience of Zilver PTX for femoro-popliteal lesions. Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2016;17(6):399-403. doi:10.1016/j.carrev.2016.02.004
77. Oberto S, Cetta F, Trabattoni P, et al. Comparison of SFA lesion treatment with Zilver PTX in diabetics vs. non-diabetics: 2-year clinical and functional results. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino). 2017;58(4):565-573. doi:10.23736/S0021-9509.16.08563-3
78. Fujihara M, Utsunomiya M, Higashimori A, Yokoi Y, Nakamura M. Outcomes of Zilver PTX stent implantation for the treatment of complex femoropopliteal artery disease. Heart Vessels. 2016;31(2):152-157. doi:10.1007/s00380-014-0596-2
79. Zeller T, Rastan A, Macharzina R, et al. Drug-coated balloons vs. drug-eluting stents for treatment of long femoropopliteal lesions. J Endovasc Ther. 2014;21(3):359-368. doi:10.1583/13-4630MR.1
80. Dake MD, Scheinert D, Tepe G, et al. Nitinol stents with polymer-free paclitaxel coating for lesions in the superficial femoral and popliteal arteries above the knee: twelve-month safety and effectiveness results from the Zilver PTX single-arm clinical study. J Endovasc Ther. 2011;18(5):613-623. doi:10.1583/11-3560.1
81. Lammer J, Bosiers M, Zeller T, et al. First clinical trial of nitinol self-expanding everolimus-eluting stent implantation for peripheral arterial occlusive disease. J Vasc Surg. 2011;54(2):394-401. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2011.01.047
82. Bague N, Julia P, Sauguet A, et al. Femoropopliteal in-stent restenosis repair: midterm outcomes after paclitaxel eluting balloon use (PLAISIR trial). Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2017;53(1):106-113. doi:10.1016/j.ejvs.2016.10.002
83. Foley TR, Cotter RP, Kokkinidis DG, Nguyen DD, Waldo SW, Armstrong EJ. Mid-term outcomes of orbital atherectomy combined with drug-coated balloon angioplasty for treatment of femoropopliteal disease. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2017;89(6):1078-1085. doi:10.1002/ccd.26984
84. Stavroulakis K, Schwindt A, Torsello G, et al. Directional atherectomy with antirestenotic therapy vs drug-coated balloon angioplasty alone for isolated popliteal artery lesions. J Endovasc Ther. 2017;24(2):181-188. doi:10.1177/1526602816683933
85. Micari A, Cioppa A, Vadalà G, et al. Clinical evaluation of a paclitaxel-eluting balloon for treatment of femoropopliteal arterial disease: 12-month results from a multicenter Italian registry. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2012;5(3):331-338. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2011.11.010
86. Schmidt A, Piorkowski M, Görner H, et al. Drug-coated balloons for complex femoropopliteal lesions: 2-year results of a real-world registry. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9(7):715-724. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2015.12.267
87. Jang SJ, Hsieh CA, Huang HL, et al. Feasibility and clinical outcomes of peripheral drug-coated balloon in high-risk patients with femoropopliteal disease. PLoS One. 2015;10(11):e0143658. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0143658
88. Stabile E, Virga V, Salemme L, et al. Drug-eluting balloon for treatment of superficial femoral artery in-stent restenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60(18):1739-1742. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2012.07.033
89. Herten M, Torsello GB, Schönefeld E, Imm B, Osada N, Stahlhoff S. Drug-eluting balloons for femoropopliteal lesions show better performance in de novo stenosis or occlusion than in restenosis. J Vasc Surg. 2015;61(2):394-399. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2014.08.005
90. Ohki T, Kichikawa K, Yokoi H, et al. Outcomes of the Japanese multicenter Viabahn trial of endovascular stent grafting for superficial femoral artery lesions. J Vasc Surg. 2017;66(1):130-142 e131. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2021.05.056
91. Sibé M, Kaladji A, Boirat C, et al. French multicenter experience with the GORE TIGRIS vascular stent in superficial femoral and popliteal arteries. J Vasc Surg. 2017;65(5):1329-1335. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2016.11.056
92. Mohr PJ, Oyama JK, Luu JT, Stinis CT. Clinical outcomes of endovascular treatment of TASC-II C and D femoropopliteal lesions with the Viabahn endoprosthesis. Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2015;16(8):465-468. doi:10.1016/j.carrev.2015.09.001
93. Parthipun A, Diamantopoulos A, Kitrou P, et al. Use of a new hybrid heparin-bonded nitinol ring stent in the popliteal artery: procedural and mid-term clinical and anatomical outcomes. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2015;38(4):846-854. doi:10.1007/s00270-015-1113-4
94. Kruse RR, Poelmann FB, Doomernik D, et al. Five-year outcome of self-expanding covered stents for superficial femoral artery occlusive disease and an analysis of factors predicting failure. J Endovasc Ther. 2015;22(6):855-861. doi:10.1177/1526602815610583
95. Piorkowski M, Freitas B, Steiner S, et al. Twelve-month experience with the GORE® TIGRIS® vascular stent in the superficial femoral and popliteal arteries. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino). 2015;56(1):89-95. Epub 2014 Nov 20.
96. Saxon RR, Chervu A, Jones PA, et al. Heparin-bonded, expanded polytetrafluoroethylene-lined stent graft in the treatment of femoropopliteal artery disease: 1-year results of the VIPER (Viabahn endoprosthesis with heparin bioactive surface in the treatment of superficial femoral artery obstructive disease) trial. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2013;24(2):165-173; quiz 174. doi:10.1016/j.jvir.2012.10.004
97. Ullery BW, Tran K, Itoga N, Casey K, Dalman RL, Lee JT. Safety and efficacy of antiplatelet/anticoagulation regimens after Viabahn stent graft treatment for femoropopliteal occlusive disease. J Vasc Surg. 2015;61(6):1479-1488. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2014.12.062
98. Lensvelt MM, Fritschy WM, van Oostayen JA, Holewijn S, Zeebregts CJ, Reijnen MM. Results of heparin-bonded ePTFE-covered stents for chronic occlusive superficial femoral artery disease. J Vasc Surg. 2012;56(1):118-125. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2011.12.066
99. Minko P, Katoh M, Jaeger S, Buecker A. Atherectomy of heavily calcified femoropopliteal stenotic lesions. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2011;22(7):995-1000. doi:10.1016/j.jvir.2011.03.017
Related Reading
- Endovascular eSheath Predilation to Facilitate Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Delivery
- 3D Printing of Renal Arteries for Endovascular Interventions: Feasibility, Utility, and Correlation With Renal Arteriograms
- Association of Iso-Osmolar vs. Low-Osmolar Contrast with Major Adverse Renal or Cardiovascular Events in High Risk Patients Undergoing Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair
- Endovascular Stent-Graft Repair of a Large Renal Artery Pseudoaneurysm With Impending Rupture, Arising From a Solitary Kidney
