PURPOSE: Symptomatic atherosclerotic disease of the popliteal artery presents challenges for endovascular therapy. We evaluated the technical success, complications, and midterm outcomes of atherectomy and angioplasty involving the popliteal segment. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of outcomes of popliteal artery intervention using atherectomy or angioplasty performed between 2003 and 2008. RESULTS: A total of 56 patients (36% women, age 72.8 +/- 12.2 years, 77% critical limb ischemia) underwent popliteal atherectomy (n = 18) or angioplasty (n = 38). These patients had similar clinical characteristics, TransAtlantic Intersociety Consensus (TASC)/ TASC II classification, mean lesion length, and runoff scores. We observed a trend toward higher rates of technical success defined as <30% residual stenosis after atherectomy compared to angioplasty (94% vs 71%, P = .08). While angioplasty was associated with a higher frequency of arterial dissection (23% vs 0%, P = .003), atherectomy was associated with a higher rate of thromboembolic events (22% vs 0%, P = 0.01). Adjunctive stenting was used more frequently following angioplasty compared to atherectomy (45% vs 6%, P = .005). Thrombolysis was used to treat embolization in 4 patients in the atherectomy group. The improvement in the ankle-brachial index (ABI) was similar between the 2 treatment groups. Primary patency of the popliteal artery at 3, 6, and 12 months was 94%, 88%, and 75% in the atherectomy group and 89%, 82%, and 73% in the angioplasty group (P = not significant [NS]). There were no significant differences in limb salvage and freedom from reintervention at 1 year between the atherectomy and angioplasty groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our experience with popliteal artery endovascular therapy indicates a distinct pattern of procedural complications with atherectomy compared to angioplasty but similar midterm patency, limb salvage, and freedom from intervention.
PURPOSE: Symptomatic atherosclerotic disease of the popliteal artery presents challenges for endovascular therapy. We evaluated the technical success, complications, and midterm outcomes of atherectomy and angioplasty involving the popliteal segment. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of outcomes of popliteal artery intervention using atherectomy or angioplasty performed between 2003 and 2008. RESULTS: A total of 56 patients (36% women, age 72.8 +/- 12.2 years, 77% critical limb ischemia) underwent popliteal atherectomy (n = 18) or angioplasty (n = 38). These patients had similar clinical characteristics, TransAtlantic Intersociety Consensus (TASC)/ TASC II classification, mean lesion length, and runoff scores. We observed a trend toward higher rates of technical success defined as <30% residual stenosis after atherectomy compared to angioplasty (94% vs 71%, P = .08). While angioplasty was associated with a higher frequency of arterial dissection (23% vs 0%, P = .003), atherectomy was associated with a higher rate of thromboembolic events (22% vs 0%, P = 0.01). Adjunctive stenting was used more frequently following angioplasty compared to atherectomy (45% vs 6%, P = .005). Thrombolysis was used to treat embolization in 4 patients in the atherectomy group. The improvement in the ankle-brachial index (ABI) was similar between the 2 treatment groups. Primary patency of the popliteal artery at 3, 6, and 12 months was 94%, 88%, and 75% in the atherectomy group and 89%, 82%, and 73% in the angioplasty group (P = not significant [NS]). There were no significant differences in limb salvage and freedom from reintervention at 1 year between the atherectomy and angioplasty groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our experience with popliteal artery endovascular therapy indicates a distinct pattern of procedural complications with atherectomy compared to angioplasty but similar midterm patency, limb salvage, and freedom from intervention.
Authors: W Brent Keeling; Murray L Shames; Patrick A Stone; Paul A Armstrong; Brad L Johnson; Martin R Back; Dennis F Bandyk Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2007-01 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Martin Schillinger; Schila Sabeti; Christian Loewe; Petra Dick; Jasmin Amighi; Wolfgang Mlekusch; Oliver Schlager; Manfred Cejna; Johannes Lammer; Erich Minar Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2006-05-04 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: David E Kandzari; R Stefan Kiesz; David Allie; Craig Walker; Peter Fail; Venkatesh G Ramaiah; Joseph Cardenas; Jose Vale; Atul Chopra; Roger S Gammon Journal: J Endovasc Ther Date: 2006-02 Impact factor: 3.487
Authors: Patrice L Anderson; Annetine Gelijns; Alan Moskowitz; Ray Arons; Lopa Gupta; Alan Weinberg; Peter L Faries; Roman Nowygrod; K Craig Kent Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2004-06 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: James F McKinsey; Lee Goldstein; Habib U Khan; Ashley Graham; Combiz Rezeyat; Nicholas J Morrissey; Elliott Sambol; K Craig Kent Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2008-10 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Aljoscha Rastan; James F McKinsey; Lawrence A Garcia; Krishna J Rocha-Singh; Michael R Jaff; Stuart Harlin; Suraj Kamat; Sean Janzer; Thomas Zeller Journal: J Endovasc Ther Date: 2017-11-09 Impact factor: 3.487