Document Detail

Subintimal angioplasty for peripheral arterial occlusive disease: a systematic review.
Jump to Full Text
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  18414946     Owner:  NLM     Status:  MEDLINE    
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
The objective of this study was to summarize outcomes of subintimal angioplasty (SA) for peripheral arterial occlusive disease. The Cochrane Library, Medline and Embase databases were searched to perform a systematic review of the literature from 1966 through May 2007 on outcomes of SA for peripheral arterial occlusive disease of the infrainguinal vessels. The keywords "percutaneous intentional extraluminal revascularization," "subintimal angioplasty," "peripheral arterial disease," "femoral artery," "popliteal artery," and "tibial artery" were used. Assessment of study quality was done using a form based on a checklist of the Dutch Cochrane Centre. The recorded outcomes were technical and clinical success, primary (assisted) patency, limb salvage, complications, and survival, in relation to the clinical grade of disease (intermittent claudication or critical limb ischemia [CLI] or mixed) and location of lesion (femoropopliteal, crural, or mixed). Twenty-three cohort studies including a total of 1549 patients (range, 27 to 148) were included in this review. Methodological and reporting quality were moderate, e.g., there was selection bias and reporting was not done according to the reporting standards. These and significant clinical heterogeneity obstructed a meta-analysis. Reports about length of the lesion and TASC classification were too various to summarize or were not mentioned at all. The technical success rates varied between 80% and 90%, with lower rates for crural lesions compared with femoral lesions. Complication rates ranged between 8% and 17% and most complications were minor. After 1 year, clinical success was between 50% and 70%, primary patency was around 50% and limb salvage varied from 80% to 90%. In conclusion, taking into account the methodological shortcomings of the included studies, SA can play an important role in the treatment of peripheral arterial disease, especially in the case of critical limb ischemia. Despite the moderate patency rates after one year, SA may serve as a "temporary bypass" to provide wound healing and limb salvage.
Authors:
Rosemarie Met; Krijn P Van Lienden; Mark J W Koelemay; Shandra Bipat; Dink A Legemate; Jim A Reekers
Related Documents :
14577656 - Antioxidants in peripheral arterial disease.
20819866 - Leveraging informatics for genetic studies: use of the electronic medical record to ena...
6627746 - The quantitation of arterial elasticity from doppler flow measurements.
3243986 - Peripheral arteries of the extremities in acute ischemia.
2383116 - Decreased vascular compliance after reimplantation of the left lower lobe in young pigs.
14627226 - Brave new world: the role for endovascular aneurysm repair in contemporary vascular sur...
Publication Detail:
Type:  Journal Article; Review     Date:  2008-04-15
Journal Detail:
Title:  Cardiovascular and interventional radiology     Volume:  31     ISSN:  1432-086X     ISO Abbreviation:  Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol     Publication Date:    2008 Jul-Aug
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2008-08-08     Completed Date:  2008-11-14     Revised Date:  2013-06-05    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  8003538     Medline TA:  Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol     Country:  United States    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  687-97     Citation Subset:  IM    
Affiliation:
Department of Radiology, Academic Medical Center, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. r.met@amc.nl
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Descriptor/Qualifier:
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Angiography / methods
Angioplasty, Balloon / adverse effects,  methods*
Arterial Occlusive Diseases / radiography,  therapy*
Female
Femoral Artery / pathology,  radiography
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Leg / blood supply*
Limb Salvage / methods
Male
Middle Aged
Peripheral Vascular Diseases / radiography,  therapy*
Popliteal Artery / pathology,  radiography
Risk Assessment
Severity of Illness Index
Tibial Arteries / pathology,  radiography
Treatment Outcome
Tunica Intima
Vascular Patency / physiology
Comments/Corrections

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine

Full Text
Journal Information
Journal ID (nlm-ta): Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol
ISSN: 0174-1551
ISSN: 1432-086X
Publisher: Springer-Verlag, New York
Article Information
Download PDF
? The Author(s) 2008
Received Day: 29 Month: 1 Year: 2008
Revision Received Day: 27 Month: 2 Year: 2008
Accepted Day: 28 Month: 2 Year: 2008
Electronic publication date: Day: 15 Month: 4 Year: 2008
Print publication date: Month: 7 Year: 2008
Volume: 31 Issue: 4
First Page: 687 Last Page: 697
ID: 2515568
PubMed Id: 18414946
Publisher Id: 9331
DOI: 10.1007/s00270-008-9331-7
issue-copyright-statement: ? Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Subintimal Angioplasty for Peripheral Arterial Occlusive Disease: A Systematic Review
Rosemarie Met1 Address: r.met@amc.nl
Krijn P. Van Lienden1 Address: k.p.vanlienden@amc.nl
Mark J. W. Koelemay2 Address: m.j.koelemaij@amc.nl
Shandra Bipat1 Address: s.bipat@amc.nl
Dink A. Legemate2 Address: d.a.legemate@amc.nl
Jim A. Reekers13 Address: j.a.reekers@amc.uva.nl
1Department of Radiology, Academic Medical Center, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands
2Department of Vascular Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands
3Department of Radiology, Academic Medical Center, P.O. Box 22660, 1100 DD Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Introduction

Since it was first described in 1990 [1], subintimal angioplasty (SA) has become an established percutaneous technique to overcome long and chronic arterial occlusions. It is also known as percutaneous intentional extraluminal recanalization (PIER) [2]. Initially it was used only for femoral and popliteal occlusions, but now it is also applied to long crural artery occlusions [3]. This therapy, being minimally invasive, offers many advantages compared with other treatment options. Patients need only local anesthesia to enable access to the common femoral artery, and after the procedure they are quickly ambulatory again. In addition, failed SA does not preclude the opportunity for surgical revascularization [4]. Despite these advantages, there are also specialists who adopt a critical attitude toward SA. They state that it is difficult to learn, that the long-term results are not known, and that there are no randomized studies comparing SA with surgery. To determine the clinical value of this technique, a systematic review of available evidence is needed. The aim of this study was to systematically review the literature on the technical and clinical outcomes of subintimal angioplasty for peripheral arterial occlusive disease.


Methods
Literature Search

A systematic search of literature was performed with assistance of a clinical librarian in the medical databases National Guideline Clearinghouse, Trip database, Bandolier, British Medical Journal Clinical Evidence, Medline (January 1966 through May 2007), Embase (January 1980 through May 2007), and Cochrane Library, comprising the Database of Systematic Reviews (1988 through May 2007). The keywords ?percutaneous intentional extra-luminal revascularization,? ?subintimal angioplasty,? ?peripheral arterial disease,? ?femoral artery,? ?popliteal artery,? and ?tibial artery? were used, along with synonyms of them. There was no language restriction. Titles and abstracts were screened by two reviewers (R.M. and K.P.L.) independently to identify potentially relevant articles, using the inclusion and exclusion criterion. Discrepancies in judgment were resolved after discussion and, when necessary, after mediation of a third reviewer (S.B.). Full text of these articles was retrieved for further analysis.

Criteria for Inclusion

The same two reviewers (R.M. and K.P.L.) independently checked the retrieved articles on inclusion criteria using a standardized form. Clinical studies were selected when all of the inclusion criteria were met. First, patients had to be treated for a femoral, popliteal, or crural occlusion by SA (studies reporting a maximum of 5% iliac occlusions were also included). Second, at least one of the following outcome parameters of interest?i.e., technical success, primary patency after 1?year, and limb salvage after 1?year?had to be reported. Technical success was defined as good antegrade flow at completion of the procedure. Primary patency after 1?year must be measured by an established imaging technique, i.e., duplex scanning, computed tomography angiography (CTA), magnetic resonance angiography (MRA), or digital subtraction angiography (DSA). Third, the study should include a minimum of 10 patients. Fourth, it should be an original patient series (studies containing duplicate material were excluded and the ones with the best documented material were included for analysis).

Study Quality

Studies fulfilling all inclusion criteria were checked on study quality characteristics by two reviewers (R.M. and K.P.L.) independently. Assessment of study quality was done using a form based on a checklist of the Dutch Cochrane Centre [5]. The main points of appraisal included description of (1) patient selection, (2) patient characteristics, (3) location of lesion, (4) technique, (5) follow-up, (6) assessment of patency, and (7) definition of outcome. Each item was described clearly, described moderate to badly, or not described at all. Articles were considered to be valid and selected for data extraction if items 2, 3, 4, and 7 were described clearly. An article could be included, despite incomplete or very short follow-up, because one important outcome, i.e., technical success, is independent of follow-up.

Data Extraction

The following data were recorded per study: method of data collection (prospective or retrospective), selection of patients for the intervention (indication for SA), and selection of patients for the study (consecutive or selected and, if selected, inclusion and exclusion criteria). Furthermore, patient characteristics (number of patients, sex, age, indication [claudication, rest pain, gangrene], and most important risk factors, i.e., diabetes, smoking, hypertension, renal failure) and characteristics of treated lesions (location, length, outflow) were recorded. Finally, data about the procedure were collected such as technique (materials, stent placement, anticoagulants during procedure), performer (number of different interventional radiologists, experience), use of anticoagulants after the procedure, and follow-up data.

The following outcomes were recorded and analyzed: technical and clinical success, primary (assisted) patency, limb salvage, complications, and survival. Data extraction was done by two reviewers (R.M. and K.P.L.) independently. Discrepancies in evaluation were resolved after discussion and, when necessary, after mediation of a third reviewer (S.B.).

Data Analysis

The studies were subdivided into different groups according to the clinical grade of disease (intermittent claudication [IC] or critical limb ischemia [CLI] or mixed) and location of lesion (femoral-popliteal, crural, or mixed). Studies that included mainly patients with CLI and <15% patients with IC were analyzed in the CLI group, and vice versa. A mixed patient population was defined as a patient group consisting of both >15% claudicants as well as >15% CLI patients. We intended to perform a meta-analysis if data were clinically homogeneous by calculating summary estimates with nonlinear models using either random-effects or fixed-effects approaches.

Many studies reported patency and limb salvage only for cases which were technically successful. For this systematic review we considered technically unsuccessful cases as not patent and calculated patency rates and limb salvage rates for the total group of treated patients, including technically unsuccessful cases.

Reporting was according to the consensus statement of the Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group [6].


Results
Search Strategy and Study Selection

The initial search yielded 151 articles (Fig.?1). After screening of title and abstract, 105 articles were excluded. The most frequent reasons for exclusion were study design (review, case report), technique (other than SA), and location of lesion (iliac artery or extending from the femoral into the iliac artery). For the remaining 46 papers, two full copies [7, 8] could not be obtained, and translation of one Lithuanian article [9] was not possible. After assessment of 43 full text publications, 20 articles were excluded, mainly because of inadequate description of patient or lesion characteristics or use of another (sometimes experimental) endovascular technique.

Finally, 23 articles [2, 10?31] were included in this review. We did not find randomized controlled trials. Most of the studies were retrospective (n?=?11) or prospective (n?=?8) patient series. In four studies, it remained unclear whether data collection was pro- or retrospective [13, 15, 19, 29]. Quality assessment of the studies is shown in Table?1.

Study Characteristics

Characteristics of all included studies are shown in Tables?2, 3, 4. The authors often described that they included consecutive patients undergoing SA, but the selection procedure for the treatment remained unclear. If it was described, there was a large variation in patient selection. Two studies [13, 28] included patients in whom amputation was inevitable without treatment; two other studies [17, 18] selected every patient presenting with critical limb ischemia; five studies [11, 19, 21, 26, 29] included patients who met one of the following conditions: (a) lack of vein suitable for surgical reconstruction, (b) poor medical condition, (c) unfavorable anatomy for bypass grafting, and (d) favorable anatomy for SA. One study [31] selected only patients who refused surgery or in whom surgery was contraindicated. The studies varied in size from 27 to 148 patients. Studies reported age in different ways: some gave median age; others, mean age. The ages were between 59 and 81?years; most studies (16/23) reported ages (some mean and others median) between 70 and 80?years. The percentage of diabetic patients between studies showed a large variation (9%?72%). However, the percentage of patients with diabetes was higher in the group of patients treated for CLI (Table?2) compared with the group of patients treated for mixed indications (intermittent claudication or CLI; Table?3). Also, there was a trend that there were more diabetics in the group of patients with mixed disease and mixed lesions compared with patients with mixed disease and a lesion proximal to the knee. Chronic renal failure is not included in the tables because only 9 of 23 articles mentioned it. Use of anticoagulants during the procedure was described in 14 articles; all patients received heparin, with a variation in dose of 50?70?IU/kg or 2000?5000 IU. Some also received nitroglycerin or tolazoline (intra-arterial vasodilating agents to minimize vasospasms) during the procedure. Nearly all papers had well-described postprocedural anticoagulant therapy. All patients were given acetylsalicylic acid, sometimes combined with clopidogrel. Only very few papers report the use of additional devices (like stents). The use of re-entry devices is described nowhere. The significant clinical heterogeneity obstructed a meaningful meta-analysis.

Technical Success

Most studies described technical success as good antegrade flow of the occluded segment at completion of the procedure. Some studies added the condition that there was <30% residual stenosis [11, 20, 23, 25, 28, 31]. Technical success percentages (95% confidence interval) are shown in Figs.?2, 3, and 4. In patients with critical limb ischemia, technical success of crural procedures is lower compared with that for femoral lesions. For patients treated for different disease (CLI or intermittent claudication), technical success rate show a large variation. In general, technical success is between 80% and 90%.

Clinical Success

Nine studies reported clinical success, described as resolution or improvement of claudication, relief of pain at rest, healing of ulcers, or healing of minor amputations which were required for gangrene and nonhealing wounds after previous amputation. Clinical success was achieved in 50% to 70% of the patients after 1?year (Tables?5, 6, 7).

Patency

The definition and reporting of patency varied considerably between studies. Some studies reported primary patency; others primary assisted patency. Primary patency was defined differently among studies as (1) absence of occlusion and absence of >50% stenosis in the treated segment; (2) absence of occlusion and absence of >30% stenosis in the treated segment; and (3) patency of the segment without intervention. Definitions 1 and 2 are taken together because of the clinical irrelevance of such a difference. Primary and primary assisted patency were about 50% after 1?year (Tables?5?7).

Limb Salvage

The most common definition of limb salvage was salvation of the leg not further specified. Two studies [18, 26] made the definition more explicit, to state that limb salvage was maintained even when a minor amputation was needed. Most limb salvage rates are about 80% to 90%, one study [26] reporting about patients with CLI and mixed lesions report a limb salvage rate of 66% after 1?year (Tables?5?7).

Survival

Survival was given for different time periods and different patient selections. Studies reporting only on patients with CLI showed lower survival rates compared with studies reporting patients with different stages of disease. Patients with CLI and a crural lesion demonstrate a survival after 1?year of from 65%?78%, in contrast to a survival of between 86% and 100% after 1?year for patients with mixed disease and a femoral lesion.

Complications

Most frequently reported complications include hematoma of the groin, perforation of the artery, and distal embolism. Also, pseudoaneurysms of the femoral artery, retroperitoneal hematomas, and myocardial infarctions were reported. Complication rates for all studies were mostly between 8% and 17%. One study [22], reporting about patients with CLI and a femoral lesion, reports 2% complications; another study [2], reporting about patients with mixed disease and femoral lesions, reports a complication rate of 20%.


Discussion

This systematic review shows that SA can be a useful option in the treatment of patients with severe critical leg ischemia. After 1?year, limb salvage rates are between 80% and 90%, irrespective of whether the occlusion is in the femoral or femoropopliteal artery or in the crural arteries.

Although there were no comparative studies, SA seems to have lower patency rates than surgery. The primary patency of lower limb surgical bypass is high, 83% for an above-knee femoropopliteal bypass with a saphenous vein graft, 78% for a PTFE graft [32] and 82% even for a popliteal-to-distal vein bypass after 1?year [33]. The primary patency rates after 1?year for SA were about 50%. The lower patency rates must be balanced against the advantage that SA is a minimally invasive technique that requires only local anesthesia, which are great advantages with respect to surgical revascularization procedures. Individual patient characteristics, like age and pattern of disease, will determine the choice between a percutaneous and a surgical approach.

The benefit of SA for patients with intermittent claudication is more indistinct. Two studies [12, 20], including only claudicants, reported a clinical success of 58%, a primary patency of 56% after 1?year, and a primary assisted patency of 56% after 3?years. There are several treatment options for patients with intermittent claudication, ranging from conservative to invasive. SA could be useful in claudicants, but since patency rates are low, this option should be offered with reserve.

The technical success rates of SA were about 80%, with higher success rates in the femoral or femoropopliteal arteries compared with the crural arteries. Although most studies do not report the experience of the interventional radiologist, which is an important factor determining outcome of SA, these good technical success rates could indicate that the procedure is not only reserved for experts. Second, the included studies are originating from many different centers, indicating that many interventionalists are currently practicing SA, indicating that this technique is probably not so difficult to learn.

Approximately 15% of the procedures is complicated by a puncture-site hematoma, vessel perforation, or distal embolus. This is comparable to the incidence of complications after PTA (11%) [34]. However, the reported complication rates ranged between 2% and 20%. It is likely that various definitions and different registration systems for complications were used, which makes these numbers hard to interpret. It can be argued that complications are related to the site of the lesion. The risk of a groin hematoma does not depend on the site of the lesion, however, crural vessels are more fragile and might therefore be at greater risk of perforation. We observed that studies reporting solely about femoral or femoropopliteal lesions reported fewer cases of perforation. It should be noted that major complications, like myocardial infarction, renal failure, and in-hospital mortality, are probably underreported. In general, such complications should be registered as well, to fully appreciate the effect of interventions in this fragile group of patients.

This systematic overview of best evidence has several limitations. First, the only available publications for this systematic review were case series (observational studies). An additional limitation is selection bias, which causes overestimation of treatment effects. Many studies did not provide data about the entire cohort of patients, including those who underwent surgery as the initial procedure or conservative treatment in the case of claudication. Moreover, we must assume publication bias to be likely, another cause of overestimation of the results. To determine the exact value of SA, a randomized controlled trial in which SA is compared to surgery would be ideal. From earlier randomized trials in patients with critical limb ischemia (BASIL trial [35]), only a small number seems to be eligible for randomization due to local anatomy. However, experience with SA is still evolving, and at our hospital bypass surgery for critical limb ischemia has been reduced by more than 50% over the past decade, indicating that a significant number of patients can be treated by SA. A major obstacle for randomized trials is the preference of patients as well as of treating physicians for minimally invasive techniques as first-line treatment, knowing that surgery is still in reserve [36].

We noticed a wide variation in reporting of patient characteristics and in definitions of outcome and complications of subintimal angioplasty. First, a whole scale of outcome measurements and definitions of outcomes was used. We have tried to sort out all these different outcomes. Second, different statistical methods were used to determine outcome. Most authors did Kaplan-Meier analysis, whereas others used life-table analysis. Some authors reported patency and limb salvage rates for the total group of treated patients; others, only for the technically successful cases. Also, data on follow-up were reported insufficiently; the number of patients lost-to-follow-up and the reasons for that remained unclear most of the time. These shortcomings in methodology and reporting make it difficult to compare results, and made us decide not to perform any meta-analysis. Therefore, we like to stress the importance of using standards for reporting results of treatment for peripheral arterial disease and, especially, for lower-extremity arterial endovascular procedures, to facilitate future meta-analyses [37, 38].

In conclusion, this systematic review shows that, especially in the treatment of critical limb ischemia, SA can play an important role. Despite the moderate long-term patency rates of the revascularized segments, SA may serve as a ?temporary bypass? to provide wound healing and limb salvage. Further studies of higher methodological quality should include and analyze entire cohorts of patients admitted for CLI, instead of selected series, to better appreciate the value of SA in relation to bypass surgery.


Open Access

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.


References
1.. Bolia A,Miles KA,Brennan J,et al. Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty of occlusions of the femoral and popliteal arteries by subintimal dissectionCardioVasc Interv Radiol 1990;13(6):357–363. [doi: 10.1007/BF02578675]
1.. Bolia A, Miles KA, Brennan J et?al (1990) Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty of occlusions of the femoral and popliteal arteries by subintimal dissection. CardioVasc Interv Radiol 13(6):357?363
2.. Reekers JA,Kromhout JG,Jacobs MJ. Percutaneous intentional extraluminal recanalisation of the femoropopliteal arteryEur J Vasc Surg 1994;8(6):723–728. [doi: 10.1016/S0950-821X(05)80653-X]
2.. Reekers JA, Kromhout JG, Jacobs MJ (1994) Percutaneous intentional extraluminal recanalisation of the femoropopliteal artery. Eur J Vasc Surg 8(6):723?728 [pmid: 7828750]
3.. Bolia A,Sayers RD,Thompson MM,et al. Subintimal and intraluminal recanalisation of occluded crural arteries by percutaneous balloon angioplastyEur J Vasc Surg 1994;8(2):214–219. [doi: 10.1016/S0950-821X(05)80463-3]
3.. Bolia A, Sayers RD, Thompson MM et?al (1994) Subintimal and intraluminal recanalisation of occluded crural arteries by percutaneous balloon angioplasty. Eur J Vasc Surg 8(2):214?219 [pmid: 8181619]
4.. Sandford RM,Bown MJ,Sayers RD,et al. Is infrainguinal bypass grafting successful following failed angioplasty?Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2007;34(1):29–34. [doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2007.01.020]
4.. Sandford RM, Bown MJ, Sayers RD et?al (2007) Is infrainguinal bypass grafting successful following failed angioplasty? Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 34(1):29?34 [pmid: 17408992]
5.. http://www.cochrane.nl/index.html. Accessed April 14, 2007
6.. Stroup DF,Berlin JA,Morton SC,et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology (MOOSE) group: a proposal for reportingJAMA 2000;283(15):2008–2012. [doi: 10.1001/jama.283.15.2008]
6.. Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC et?al (2000) Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology (MOOSE) group: a proposal for reporting. JAMA 283(15):2008?2012 [pmid: 10789670]
7.. Bolia A,Bell PR. Femoropopliteal and crural artery recanalisation using subintimal angioplastySemin Vasc Surg 1995;8(3):253–264.
7.. Bolia A, Bell PR (1995) Femoropopliteal and crural artery recanalisation using subintimal angioplasty. Semin Vasc Surg 8(3):253?264 [pmid: 8564039]
8.. Kocher M,Cerna M,Utikal P,et al. Subintimal recanalisation in femoropopliteal area?Short-term resultsCeska Radiol 2004;58(3):142–146.
8.. Kocher M, Cerna M, Utikal P et?al (2004) Subintimal recanalisation in femoropopliteal area?Short-term results. Ceska Radiol 58(3):142?146
9.. Aleksynas N,Kaupas RS. The influence of various factors on results of subintimal angioplasty of superficial femoral artery occlusionsMedicina (Kaunas) 2007;43(6):43–50.
9.. Aleksynas N, Kaupas RS (2007) The influence of various factors on results of subintimal angioplasty of superficial femoral artery occlusions. Medicina (Kaunas) 43(6):43?50 [pmid: 17297283]
10.. Cho SK,Do YS,Shin SW,et al. Subintimal angioplasty in the treatment of chronic lower limb ischemiaKorean J Radiol 2006;7(2):131–138.
10.. Cho SK, Do YS, Shin SW et?al (2006) Subintimal angioplasty in the treatment of chronic lower limb ischemia. Korean J Radiol 7(2):131?138 [pmid: 16799274]
11.. Desgranges P,Boufi M,Lapeyre M,et al. Subintimal angioplasty: feasible and durableEur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2004;28(2):138–141.
11.. Desgranges P, Boufi M, Lapeyre M et?al (2004) Subintimal angioplasty: feasible and durable. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 28(2):138?141 [pmid: 15234693]
12.. Florenes T,Bay D,Sandbaek G,et al. Subintimal angioplasty in the treatment of patients with intermittent claudication: long term resultsEur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2004;28(6):645–650. [doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2004.09.023]
12.. Florenes T, Bay D, Sandbaek G et?al (2004) Subintimal angioplasty in the treatment of patients with intermittent claudication: long term results. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 28(6):645?650 [pmid: 15531202]
13.. Hynes N,Akhtar Y,Manning B,et al. Subintimal angioplasty as a primary modality in the management of critical limb ischemia: comparison to bypass grafting for aortoiliac and femoropopliteal occlusive diseaseJ Endovasc Ther 2004;11(4):460–471. [doi: 10.1583/04-1242.1]
13.. Hynes N, Akhtar Y, Manning B et?al (2004) Subintimal angioplasty as a primary modality in the management of critical limb ischemia: comparison to bypass grafting for aortoiliac and femoropopliteal occlusive disease. J Endovasc Ther 11(4):460?471 [pmid: 15298498]
14.. Ingle H,Nasim A,Bolia A,et al. Subintimal angioplasty of isolated infragenicular vessels in lower limb ischemia: long-term resultsJ Endovasc Ther 2002;9(4):411–416. [doi: 10.1583/1545-1550(2002)009<0411:SAOIIV>2.0.CO;2]
14.. Ingle H, Nasim A, Bolia A et?al (2002) Subintimal angioplasty of isolated infragenicular vessels in lower limb ischemia: long-term results. J Endovasc Ther 9(4):411?416 [pmid: 12223000]
15.. Kidd J,Bourke BM,Dunwoodie J,et al. The role of pre and postprocedural color duplex ultrasound for the treatment of lower limb ischemia by subintimal angioplastyJ Vasc Ultrasound 2006;30(1):17–21.
15.. Kidd J, Bourke BM, Dunwoodie J et?al (2006) The role of pre and postprocedural color duplex ultrasound for the treatment of lower limb ischemia by subintimal angioplasty. J Vasc Ultrasound 30(1):17?21
16.. Laxdal E,Jenssen GL,Pedersen G,et al. Subintimal angioplasty as a treatment of femoropopliteal artery occlusionsEur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2003;25(6):578–582. [doi: 10.1053/ejvs.2002.1899]
16.. Laxdal E, Jenssen GL, Pedersen G et?al (2003) Subintimal angioplasty as a treatment of femoropopliteal artery occlusions. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 25(6):578?582 [pmid: 12787703]
17.. Lazaris AM,Tsiamis AC,Fishwick G,et al. Clinical outcome of primary infrainguinal subintimal angioplasty in diabetic patients with critical lower limb ischemiaJ Endovasc Ther 2004;11(4):447–453. [doi: 10.1583/03-1159.1]
17.. Lazaris AM, Tsiamis AC, Fishwick G et?al (2004) Clinical outcome of primary infrainguinal subintimal angioplasty in diabetic patients with critical lower limb ischemia. J Endovasc Ther 11(4):447?453 [pmid: 15298514]
18.. Lazaris AM,Salas C,Tsiamis AC,et al. Factors affecting patency of subintimal infrainguinal angioplasty in patients with critical lower limb ischemiaEur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2006;32(6):668–674. [doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2006.07.016]
18.. Lazaris AM, Salas C, Tsiamis AC et?al (2006) Factors affecting patency of subintimal infrainguinal angioplasty in patients with critical lower limb ischemia. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 32(6):668?674 [pmid: 16968668]
19.. Lipsitz EC,Ohki T,Veith FJ,et al. Does subintimal angioplasty have a role in the treatment of severe lower extremity ischemia?J Vasc Surg 2003;37(3):386–391. [doi: 10.1067/mva.2003.20]
19.. Lipsitz EC, Ohki T, Veith FJ et?al (2003) Does subintimal angioplasty have a role in the treatment of severe lower extremity ischemia? J Vasc Surg 37(3):386?391 [pmid: 12563211]
20.. London NJ,Srinivasan R,Naylor AR,et al. Subintimal angioplasty of femoropopliteal artery occlusions: the long-term resultsEur J Vasc Surg 1994;8(2):148–155. [doi: 10.1016/S0950-821X(05)80450-5]
20.. London NJ, Srinivasan R, Naylor AR et?al (1994) Subintimal angioplasty of femoropopliteal artery occlusions: the long-term results. Eur J Vasc Surg 8(2):148?155 [pmid: 8181606]
21.. McCarthy RJ,Neary W,Roobottom C,et al. Short-term results of femoropopliteal subintimal angioplastyBr J Surg 2000;87(10):1361–1365. [doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2168.2000.01633.x]
21.. McCarthy RJ, Neary W, Roobottom C et?al (2000) Short-term results of femoropopliteal subintimal angioplasty. Br J Surg 87(10):1361?1365 [pmid: 11044162]
22.. Myers SI,Myers DJ,Ahmend A,et al. Preliminary results of subintimal angioplasty for limb salvage in lower extremities with severe chronic ischemia and limb-threatening ischemiaJ Vasc Surg 2006;44(6):1239–1246. [doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2006.08.022]
22.. Myers SI, Myers DJ, Ahmend A et?al (2006) Preliminary results of subintimal angioplasty for limb salvage in lower extremities with severe chronic ischemia and limb-threatening ischemia. J Vasc Surg 44(6):1239?1246 [pmid: 17145425]
23.. Nydahl S,Hartshorne T,Bell PRF,et al. Subintimal angioplasty of infrapopliteal occlusions in critically ischaemic limbsEur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 1997;14(3):212–216. [doi: 10.1016/S1078-5884(97)80194-3]
23.. Nydahl S, Hartshorne T, Bell PRF et?al (1997) Subintimal angioplasty of infrapopliteal occlusions in critically ischaemic limbs. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 14(3):212?216 [pmid: 9345242]
24.. Shaw MB,DeNunzio M,Hinwood D,et al. The results of subintimal angioplasty in a district general hospitalEur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2002;24(6):524–527. [doi: 10.1053/ejvs.2002.1764]
24.. Shaw MB, DeNunzio M, Hinwood D et?al (2002) The results of subintimal angioplasty in a district general hospital. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 24(6):524?527 [pmid: 12443748]
25.. Smith BM,Stechman M,Gibson M,et al. Subintimal angioplasty for superficial femoral artery occlusion: poor patency in critical ischaemiaAnn R Coll Surg Engl 2005;87(5):361–365. [doi: 10.1308/1478708051801]
25.. Smith BM, Stechman M, Gibson M et?al (2005) Subintimal angioplasty for superficial femoral artery occlusion: poor patency in critical ischaemia. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 87(5):361?365 [pmid: 16176697]
26.. Spinosa DJ,Leung DA,Matsumoto AH,et al. Percutaneous intentional extraluminal recanalization in patients with chronic critical limb ischemiaRadiology 2004;232(2):499–507. [doi: 10.1148/radiol.2322030729]
26.. Spinosa DJ, Leung DA, Matsumoto AH et?al (2004) Percutaneous intentional extraluminal recanalization in patients with chronic critical limb ischemia. Radiology 232(2):499?507 [pmid: 15286320]
27.. Tisi PV,Mirnezami A,Baker S,et al. Role of subintimal angioplasty in the treatment of chronic lower limb ischaemiaEur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2002;24(5):417–422. [doi: 10.1053/ejvs.2002.1754]
27.. Tisi PV, Mirnezami A, Baker S et?al (2002) Role of subintimal angioplasty in the treatment of chronic lower limb ischaemia. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 24(5):417?422 [pmid: 12435341]
28.. Treiman GS,Treiman R,Whiting J. Results of percutaneous subintimal angioplasty using routine stentingJ Vasc Surg 2006;43(3):513–519. [doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2005.11.015]
28.. Treiman GS, Treiman R, Whiting J (2006) Results of percutaneous subintimal angioplasty using routine stenting. J Vasc Surg 43(3):513?519 [pmid: 16520165]
29.. Vraux H,Hammer F,Verhelst R,et al. Subintimal angioplasty of tibial vessel occlusions in the treatment of critical limb ischaemia: mid-term resultsEur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2000;20(5):441–446. [doi: 10.1053/ejvs.2000.1200]
29.. Vraux H, Hammer F, Verhelst R et?al (2000) Subintimal angioplasty of tibial vessel occlusions in the treatment of critical limb ischaemia: mid-term results. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 20(5):441?446 [pmid: 11112462]
30.. Vraux H,Bertoncello N. Subintimal angioplasty of tibial vessel occlusions in critical limb ischaemia: A good opportunity?Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2006;32(6):663–667. [doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2006.06.006]
30.. Vraux H, Bertoncello N (2006) Subintimal angioplasty of tibial vessel occlusions in critical limb ischaemia: A good opportunity? Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 32(6):663?667 [pmid: 16935010]
31.. Yilmaz S,Sindel T,Yegin A,et al. Subintimal angioplasty of long superficial femoral artery occlusionsJ Vasc Interv Radiol 2003;14(8):997–1010.
31.. Yilmaz S, Sindel T, Yegin A et?al (2003) Subintimal angioplasty of long superficial femoral artery occlusions. J Vasc Interv Radiol 14(8):997?1010 [pmid: 12902557]
32.. Klinkert P,Post PN,Breslau PJ,et al. Saphenous vein versus PTFE for above-knee femoropopliteal bypass. A review of literatureEur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2004;27(4):357–362. [doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2003.12.027]
32.. Klinkert P, Post PN, Breslau PJ et?al (2004) Saphenous vein versus PTFE for above-knee femoropopliteal bypass. A review of literature. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 27(4):357?362 [pmid: 15015183]
33.. Albers M,Romiti M,Brochado-Neto FC,et al. Meta-analysis of popliteal-to-distal vein bypass grafts for critical ischemiaJ Vasc Surg 2006;43(3):498–503. [doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2005.11.025]
33.. Albers M, Romiti M, Brochado-Neto FC et?al (2006) Meta-analysis of popliteal-to-distal vein bypass grafts for critical ischemia. J Vasc Surg 43(3):498?503 [pmid: 16520163]
34.. Pentecost MJ, Criqui MH, Dorros G et?al Special Writing Group of the Councils on Cardiovascular Radiology, Arteriosclerosis, Cardio-Thoracic and Vascular Surgery, Clinical Cardiology, and Epidemiology and Prevention, American Heart Association (2003) Guidelines for peripheral percutaneous transluminal angioplasty of the abdominal aorta and lower extremity vessels. A statement for health professionals from a Special Writing Group of the Councils on Cardiovascular Radiology, Arteriosclerosis, Cardio-Thoracic and Vascular Surgery, Clinical Cardiology, and Epidemiology and Prevention, the American Heart Association. J Vasc Interv Radiol 14(9; Pt 2):S495?S515
35.. Adam DJ,Beard JD,Cleveland T,et al. Bypass versus angioplasty in severe ischaemia of the leg (BASIL): multicentre, randomised controlled trialLancet 2005;366(9501):1925–1934. [doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67704-5]
35.. Adam DJ, Beard JD, Cleveland T et?al (2005) Bypass versus angioplasty in severe ischaemia of the leg (BASIL): multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 366(9501):1925?1934 [pmid: 16325694]
36.. Zaag ES,Legemate DA,Prins MH,et al. Angioplasty or bypass for superficial femoral artery disease? A randomised controlled trialEur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2004;28(2):132–137.
36.. Van der Zaag ES, Legemate DA, Prins MH et?al (2004) Angioplasty or bypass for superficial femoral artery disease? A randomised controlled trial. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 28(2):132?137 [pmid: 15234692]
37.. Rutherford RB,Baker JD,Ernst C,et al. Recommended standards for reports dealing with lower extremity ischemia: revised versionJ Vasc Surg 1997;26(3):517–538. [doi: 10.1016/S0741-5214(97)70045-4]
37.. Rutherford RB, Baker JD, Ernst C et?al (1997) Recommended standards for reports dealing with lower extremity ischemia: revised version. J Vasc Surg 26(3):517?538 [pmid: 9308598]
38.. Ahn SS,Rutherford RB,Becker GJ,et al. Reporting standards for lower extremity arterial endovascular standardsJ Vasc Surg 1993;17(6):1103–1107. [doi: 10.1067/mva.1993.45889]
38.. Ahn SS, Rutherford RB, Becker GJ et?al (1993) Reporting standards for lower extremity arterial endovascular standards. J Vasc Surg 17(6):1103?1107 [pmid: 8505790]

Figures

[Figure ID: Fig1]
Fig.?1 

Flowchart showing selection of papers for analysis



[Figure ID: Fig2]
Fig.?2 

Technical success accompanied by 95% confidence interval of all studies reporting patients with critical limb ischemia, subdivided according to location of lesion (crural vessels, femoral or femoropopliteal vessels, and mixed lesions, which are all infrainguinal)



[Figure ID: Fig3]
Fig.?3 

Meta-analysis of technical success accompanied by 95% confidence interval of all studies reporting patients with critical limb ischemia and claudication (mixed), subdivided according to location of lesion (femoral or femoropopliteal vessels and mixed lesions, which are all infrainguinal)



[Figure ID: Fig4]
Fig.?4 

Percentage technical success accompanied by 95% confidence interval of two studies reporting patients with intermittent claudication. London et?al. [20] report about patients with lesions in the femoral or femoropopliteal vessels; Florenes et?al. [12], about patients with mixed lesions (all infrainguinal)



Tables
[TableWrap ID: Tab1] Table?1 

Quality assessment of all included studies


Study Year of publication Clear definition of study population? Clear description of patient characteristics? Clear description of lesions? Clear description of technique? Follow-up complete? Objective assessment of patency? Clear definition of outcomes? Suma
London [20] 1994 + + + + ? +/? + 11
Reekers [2] 1994 + + + + +/? +/? +/? 11
Nydahl [23] 1997 + + + + + + + 14
McCarthy [21] 2000 + + + ? +/? + + 11
Vraux & Hammer [29] 2000 + + + + +/? + + 13
Ingle [14] 2002 + + + + + ? +/? 11
Shaw [24] 2002 + + + ? + + + 12
Tisi [27] 2002 + + + +/? + ? + 11
Laxdal [16] 2003 + + + + ? + + 12
Lipsitz [19] 2003 + + + + ? + +/? 11
Yilmaz [31] 2003 + + + + ? + + 12
Desgranges [11] 2004 + + + + ? + +/? 11
Florenes [12] 2004 + + +/? + + + ? 11
Hynes [13] 2004 + +/? + ? + + + 11
Lazaris & Tsiamis [17] 2004 + + + ? ? ? + 8
Spinosa [26] 2004 + + + + +/? +/? + 12
Smith [25] 2005 + + + + + +/? + 13
Cho [10] 2006 + + + + ? + + 12
Kidd [15] 2006 + + + + + + + 13
Lazaris & Salas [18] 2006 + + + ? ? + ? 8
Myers [22] 2006 + + +/? + + + + 13
Treiman [28] 2006 + + + + + + + 14
Vraux & Bertoncello [30] 2006 + + + + +/? + + 13

(+) yes; (?) no; (+/?) moderate; (?) unclear

aSum of all seven quality indicators: yes?=?2 point, moderate?=?1 point, no or ??=?0 points


[TableWrap ID: Tab2] Table?2 

Characteristics of included studies reporting about patients with critical limb ischemia, subdivided according to location of lesion (crural, femoral or femoropopliteal vessels or mixed, which are all infrainguinal)


Study No. of patients, limbs Fontaine grade Patient age, yr (range) Patient Characteristics Location of lesions Follow-up, mo (range)
Lesion (mostly) in crural vessels
????Ingle [14] 67, 70 II 6 (9%) Mean: 76 (41?96) DM: 31 (46%) CA: 70 (6?44)
III 21 (31%) HT: 36 (54%)
IV 40 (60%) Smoking: 39 (58%)
????Nydahl [23] 27, 28 III 4 (14%) Median: 81 (48?88) DM: 9 (33%) CA: 28 No one lost to FU (18?48)
IV 24 (86%) HT: 9 (33%)
Smoking: 4 (15%)
????Vraux & Hammer [29] 36, 40 III 9 (23%) Median: 70 (36?90) DM: 26 (72%) PA-CA: 8 (20%) Median: 10 (1?24)
IV 31 (77%) HT: 14 (39%) CA: 32 (80%)
Smoking: unknown
????Vraux & Bertoncello [30] 46, 50 III 4 (8%) Median: 75 (35?92) DM: 28 (61%) PA-CA: 28 (56%) Median: 15 (2?53)
IV 46 (92%) HT: 33 (72%) CA: 22 (44%)
Smoking: unknown
Lesion (mostly) in femoral or femoropopliteal artery
????Hynes [13] 74, 74 III 24 (32%) Mean: 71 DM: 17 (23%) FA: 74 Mean: 15
IV 50 (68%) HT: unknown SD: 0.6
Smoking: 42 (57%)
????Myers [22] 78, 82 II 10 (12%) Mean: 59 (42?88) DM: 49 (63%) FA: 82 Mean: 10
III 51 (62%) HT: 59 (76%) SD: 0.8
IV 21 (26%) Smoking: 74 (95%)
????Treiman [28] 29, 29 III 16 (55%) Mean: 71 (48?86) DM: 16 (55%) FA: 8 (28%) Mean: 38 (28?54)
IV 13 (45%) HT: 22 (76%) FA-PA: 20 (69%)
Smoking: 17 (59%) CA: 1 (3%)
Mixed lesions (all infrainguinal)
????Lazaris & Tsiamis [17] 99, 112 III 32 (29%) Median: 79 (42?92) DM: 40 (36%) FA-PA: 62 (55%) Mean: 20 (3?2)
IV 80 (71%) HT: 54 (48%) PA-CA: 33 (29%)
Smoking: 68 (61%) FA-CA: 17 (15%)
????Lazaris & Salas [18] 46, 51 III 14 (27%) Median: 80 (43?95) DM: 18 (39%) FA-PA: 27 (53%) 12
IV 37 (73%) HT: 25 (54%) CA: 24 (47%)
Smoking: 22 (48%)
????Spinosa [26] 40, 44 III 4 (9%) Median: 69 (29?90) DM: 24 (60%) FA-PA: 7 (16%) Median: 8 (1?24)
IV 40 (91%) HT: unknown CA: 15 (34%)
Smoking: unknown FA-CA: 22 (50%)

Note: DM, diabetes mellitus; HT, hypertension; FA, femoral artery; PA, popliteal artery; CA, crural arteries; FU, follow-up


[TableWrap ID: Tab3] Table?3 

Characteristics of included studies reporting about patients with critical limb ischemia or intermittent claudication (mixed), subdivided according to location of lesion (femoral or femoropopliteal artery or mixed lesions, which are all infrainguinal)


Study No. of patients, limbs Fontaine grade Patient age, yr (range) Patient characteristics Location of lesions Follow-up, mo (range)
Lesion (mostly) in femoral or femoro-popliteal artery
????Kidd [15] 43, 43 II 30 (71%) Mean: 76 (50?95) DM: 5 (12%) FA-PA: 43 After 1?yr, 18/42 at risk
III 10 (24%) HT: 20 (46%)
IV 2 (5%) Smoking: 23 (54%)
????Laxdal [16] 109, 124 II 81 (65%) Mean: 72 (35?92) DM: 19/107 (18%) FA-PA: 124 Mean: 7
III/IV 43 (35%) HT: 47/108 (43%) Median: 3
Smoking: 55/100 (55%)
????McCarthy [21] 66, 69 II 26 (38%) Median: 74 (47?92) DM: 20 (29%) FA-PA: 69 Median: 8 (1?29)
III/IV 43 (62%) HT: 18 (26%)
Smoking: 18 (26%)
????Reekers [2] 40, 40 II 11 (28%) Mean: 69 (42?87) DM: 5 (13%) FA-PA: 40 After 1?yr
III 24 (60%) HT: 16 (40%) 17/34 at risk
IV 5 (13%) Smoking: 27 (68%)
????Shaw [24] 46, 50 II 23 (46%) Median: 72 (45?93) DM: 14 (30%) FA-PA: 48 (96%) Median: 8 (6?11)
III/IV 27 (54%) HT: 26 (57%) CA 2 (4%)
Smoking: 34 (74%)
????Smith [25] 43, 48 II 31 (65%) Median: 73 (49?92) DM: 10 (21%) FA 48 Median: 20
III/IV 17 (35%) HT: 22 (46%)
Smoking: 30 (63%)
????Yilmaz [31] 61, 67 II 41 (67%) Median: 61 DM: 18 (30%) FA 67 Mean: 12.5
III 18 (30%) (37?75) HT: 30 (49%) SD: 9
IV 2 (3%) Mean: 61 Smoking: 42 (69%) (1?30)
Mixed lesions (all infrainguinal)
????Cho [10] 36, 40 II 18 (45%) Mean: 71 DM: 23 (64%) IA: 2 (5%) Median: 8
III 2 (5%) (57?83) HT: 30 (83%) FA-PA: 15 (38%) Mean: 10
IV 20 (50%) Smoking: 20 (56%) CA: 15 (38%) (1?23)
FA-CA 8 (20%)
????Desgranges [11] 96, 100 II 46 (48%) Mean: 72 DM: 63 (66%) FA-PA: 82 (82%) Mean: 15
III/IV 50 (52%) (44?90) HT: 69 (72%) CA: 18 (18%) 14 pts lost to FU
Smoking: 62 (64%)
????Lipsitz [19] 39, 39 II 9 (23%) Median: 74 DM: 22 (56%) IA: 2 (5%) After 1?yr, 46%
III 5 (13%) (46?89) HT: 20 (51%) FA-PA: 31 (79%) Lost to FU
IV 25 (64%) Smoking: 14 (36%) CA: 6 (15%)
????Tisi [27] 148, 158 II 29 (18%) Median: 78 DM: 43 (29%) FA-PA: 122 (77%) After 1?yr, 26/152 at risk
III/IV 129 (82%) (70?82) HT: 79 (53%) CA: 36 (23%)
Smoking: 106 (72%)

Note: DM, diabetes mellitus; HT, hypertension; IA, iliac artery; FA, femoral artery; PA, popliteal artery; CA, crural arteries; FU, follow-up


[TableWrap ID: Tab4] Table?4 

Characteristics of included studies reporting about patients with intermittent claudication, subdivided according to location of lesion (femoral or femoropopliteal artery or mixed lesions, which are all infrainguinal)


Study No. of patients, limbs Fontaine grade Patients age, yr (range) Patient characteristics Location of lesions Follow-up, mo (range)
Lesion (mostly) in femoral or femoral-popliteal artery
????London [20] 176, 200 II 178 (89%) Median: 68 (22?92) DM: 33 (19%) FA-PA: 200 (3?60)
III/IV 22 (11%) HT: 62 (35%)
Smoking: 61 (35%)
Mixed lesions (all infrainguinal)
????Florenes [12] 104, 116 II 116 (100%) Mean: 67 (31?91) DM: 9 (9%) Inf-ing: 116 Median: 41 (0?79)
HT: 31 (30%)
Smoking: 57 (55%)

Note: DM, diabetes mellitus; HT, hypertension; FA, femoral artery; PA, popliteal artery; FU, follow-up; Inf-ing, infrainguinal


[TableWrap ID: Tab5] Table?5 

Outcomes of studies reporting about patients with critical limb ischemia, subdivided according to location of lesion (crural, femoral or femoropopliteal vessels or mixed, which are all infrainguinal)


Study Statistical method Clinical success (mo) Complications Primary patency (mo) Primary assisted patency (mo) Limb salvage (mo) Survival (mo)
Lesion (mostly) in crural vessels
????Ingle [14] KMA ? 9/70 (13%) ? ? 94% (12) ?
????Nydahl [23] KMA 56% (12) 3/28 (11%) 53% (12)a ? 85% (12) ?
????Vraux & Hammer [29] KMA 68% (12) 5/40 (13%) 56% (12)b ? 81% (12) 78% (12)
????Vraux & Bertoncello [30] KMA 63% (12) 7/50 (14%) 46% (12)b ? 87% (12) 65% (12)
Lesion (mostly) in femoral or femoropopliteal artery
????Hynes [13] LTA ? 6/74 (8%) ? ? ? ?
????Myers [22] KMA ? 2/82 (2%) 74% (3)a 87% (3) ? ?
????Treiman [28] KMA ? 4/29 (14%) 64% (24)b ? 80% (24) 50% (24)
Mixed lesions (all infrainguinal)
????Lazaris & Tsiamis [17] KMA 69% (24) 14/112 (13%) ? ? 88% (12) ?
????Lazaris & Salas [18] KMA ? ? 50% (12)b ? 92% (12) 87% (12)
????Spinosa [26] KMA ? 4/40 (10%) ? ? 66% (12) 71% (12)

Note: KMA, Kaplan-Meier analysis; LTA, life-table analysis

aDefinition of patency is absence of occlusion and absence of >50% or >30% stenosis in treated segment

bDefinition of patency is patency of segment without intervention


[TableWrap ID: Tab6] Table?6 

Outcomes of studies reporting about patients with critical limb ischemia or intermittent claudication (mixed), subdivided according to location of lesion (femoral or femoropopliteal artery or mixed lesions, which are all infrainguinal)


Study Statistical method Clinical success (mo) Complications Primary patency (mo) Primary assisted patency (mo) Limb salvage (mo) Survival (mo)
Lesion (mostly) in femoral or femoro-popliteal artery
????Kidd [15] LTA ? ? 52% (12)a ? 100% (12) 98% (12)
????Laxdal [16] KMA ? 9/124 (7%) ? 37% (12) 90% (7) ?
????McCarthy [21] KMA 60% (8) 11/69 (16%) 51% (6)a ? 88% (8) 86% (6)
????Reekers [2] LTA 50% (12) 8/40 (20%) 59% (12)a ? ? ?
????Shaw [24] KMA 59% (6) 5/50 (10%) 57% (6)a ? ? 89% (6)
????Smith [25] KMA ? 7/47 (15%) 53% (12)a ? ? ?
????Yilmaz [31] KMA ? 10/67 (15%) 22% (12)a 57% (12) ? 100% (12)
Mixed lesions (all infrainguinal)
????Cho [10] KMA ? 4/40 (10%) 44% (12)b ? ? ?
????Desgranges [11] LTA ? 17/100 (17%) 61% (24)a 69% (24) 78% (24) 85% (24)
????Lipsitz [19] LTA 68% (12) 3/39 (8%) 64% (12)b ? 92% (12) ?
????Tisi [27] LTA ? 26/158 (16%) 45% (1)a ? ? ?

Note: KMA, Kaplan-Meier analysis; LTA, life-table analysis

aDefinition of patency is patency of segment without intervention

bDefinition of patency is absence of occlusion and absence of >50% or >30% stenosis in treated segment


[TableWrap ID: Tab7] Table?7 

Outcomes of studies reporting about patients with intermittent claudication, subdivided according to location of lesion (femoral or femoropopliteal artery or mixed lesions, which are all infrainguinal)


Study Statistical method Clinical success (mo) Complications Primary patency (mo) Primary assisted patency (mo) Limb salvage (mo) Survival (mo)
Lesion (mostly) in femoral or femoro-popliteal artery
????London [20] KMA 58% (12) 15/200 (8%) 56% (12)a ? ? ?
Mixed lesions (all infrainguinal)
????Florenes [12] KMA ? 20/116 (17%) ? 56% (36) ? ?

Note: KMA, Kaplan-Meier analysis

aDefinition of patency is absence of occlusion and absence of >50% or >30% stenosis in treated segment



Article Categories:
  • Review

Keywords: Keywords Subintimal angioplasty, Peripheral arterial disease, Revascularization, Percutaneous intentional extraluminal recanalization, Systematic review.

Previous Document:  Femoral artery stenosis following percutaneous closure using a starclose closure device.
Next Document:  Olfactory responses of the predatory mites (N eoseiulus cucumeris) and insects (Orius strigicollis )...