Purpose: To examine whether the combination of orbital atherectomy (OA) and drug-coated balloons (DCB) can lead to superior procedural and 2-year outcomes compared with DCB only in heavily calcified femoropopliteal (FP) lesions. Materials and Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted to identify patients treated with DCB only or OA+DCB for de novo FP lesions at a single center over a 4-year period (2014–2017). In the observation period, 113 patients met the inclusion criteria: 63 treated with DCB only (mean age 69.0±8.6 years; 62 men) vs 50 treated with OA+DCB (mean age 70.3±7.1 years; 48 men). The OA+DCB group had higher calcification rates (78% with severe calcification vs 37% in the DCB only group). Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to adjust for baseline differences between the 2 groups. Cox regression analysis was used to compare the follow-up outcomes between lesions treated with OA+DCB vs DCB only. Results: No difference in procedural complications or success was found. After PSM adjustment, the OA+DCB group was associated with lower bailout stenting rates (39.4% vs 66.7% in the DCB only group; p=0.026). The 2 groups had similar long-term outcomes, although the OA+DCB arm had a trend toward reduced TLR rates that did not reach statistical significance. The Kaplan-Meier estimates for 2-year freedom from TLR were 76.1% for the OA+DCB group vs 55.5% for the DCB only group (p=0.109). Conclusion: OA+DCB is a safe and effective combination for the treatment of calcified FP lesions. The combined therapy decreased the bailout stenting rates in the adjusted analysis. Larger cohorts and randomized trials are needed to examine OA efficacy in FP lesions.

Background: High-risk patients with advanced peripheral artery disease (PAD), including critical limb ischemia (CLI), are often excluded from peripheral endovascular device intervention clinical trials, leading to difficulty in translating trial results into real-world practice. There is a need for prospectively assessed studies to evaluate peripheral endovascular device intervention outcomes in CLI patients. Methods: LIBERTY 360 is a prospective, observational, multi-center study designed to evaluate the procedural and long-term clinical outcomes of peripheral endovascular device intervention in real-world patients with symptomatic lower-extremity PAD. One thousand two hundred and four patients were enrolled and stratified based on Rutherford Classification (RC): RC2-3 (N=501), RC4-5 (N=603), and RC6 (N=100). For this sub-analysis, RC5 and RC6 patients (RC5-6; N=404) were pooled and 1-year outcomes were assessed. Results: Procedural complications rarely (1.7%) resulted in post-procedural hospitalization and 89.1% of RC5-6 patients were discharged to home. Considering the advanced disease state in RC5-6 patients, there was a high freedom from 1-year major adverse event rate of 65.5% (defined as target vessel revascularization, death to 30 days, and major target limb amputation). At 1 year, freedom from major amputation was 89.6%. Wounds identified at baseline on the target limb had completely healed in 172/243 (70.8%) of the RC5-6 subjects by 1 year. Additionally, the overall quality of life, as measured by VascuQoL, improved from baseline to 1 year. Conclusion: LIBERTY investigated real-world PAD patients with independent oversight of outcomes. This analysis of LIBERTY RC5-6 patients demonstrates that peripheral endovascular device intervention can be successful in CLI patients, with low rates of major amputation and improvement in wound healing and quality of life through 1-year follow-up. LIBERTY 360, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01855412, ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01855412.

Critical hand ischemia can be treated with endovascular techniques. Obtaining good outflow to the fingers is critical for wound healing and preventing amputation. Orbital atherectomy is a useful tool in preparing vessels for balloon angioplasty; particularly in cases where calcification is present.

No abstract

Background: Significant geographical variations exist in amputation rates and utilization of diagnostic and therapeutic vascular procedures before lower extremity amputations in the United States. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the rates of diagnostic and therapeutic vascular procedures in the year prior to amputation in a contemporary population and correlate with pathological findings of the amputation specimens. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted of non-traumatic amputations from 2011 to 2017 at a rural community hospital. We reviewed the proportion of patients undergoing diagnostic (ankle brachial index with duplex ultrasound, computerized tomography angiogram and invasive angiogram) and therapeutic (endovascular and surgical revascularization) vascular procedures in the year prior to amputation. Prevalence of tissue viability and osteomyelitis were evaluated in all amputated specimens and atherosclerotic vascular disease (ASVD) was evaluated in major amputations. We also analyzed primary amputation rates among different subgroups. Results: 698 patients were included with 248 (36%) major amputations and 450 (64%) minor amputations. Any diagnostic procedure was performed in 59% of the major amputations and 49% of the minor amputations (P = 0.01). Any therapeutic revascularization procedure was performed in 34% of the major amputations and 28% of the minor amputations (P = 0.08). The pathology of major amputation specimens revealed severe ASVD in 57% and mild-moderate ASVD in 27% of specimens. Tissue viability was significantly higher in major amputations (90% vs 30%, P = 0.04) and osteomyelitis was significantly higher in minor amputations (50% vs 14%, P = 0.03). Primary amputations were performed in 66% of major amputations, 72% of minor amputations, 81% with mild to moderate ASVD and 54% with severe ASVD. Conclusion: Diagnostic and therapeutic vascular procedures appear under-utilized for patients undergoing lower extremity amputations at a rural community hospital. ASVD rates and tissue viability imply that revascularization could be of significant benefit to avoid major amputation.