Sagar S Gandhi1, Joseph A Ewing2, Emily Cooper2, Jose Mauro Chaves3, Bruce H Gray4. 1. Department of Surgery, Division of Vascular Surgery and Vascular Medicine, Greenville Health System, Greenville, SC; University of South Carolina School of Medicine Greenville, Greenville, SC. Electronic address: SGandhi@ghs.org. 2. Department of Surgery, Division of Vascular Surgery and Vascular Medicine, Greenville Health System, Greenville, SC. 3. University of South Carolina School of Medicine Greenville, Greenville, SC. 4. Department of Surgery, Division of Vascular Surgery and Vascular Medicine, Greenville Health System, Greenville, SC; University of South Carolina School of Medicine Greenville, Greenville, SC.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) and/or pharmacomechanical thrombectomy (PMT) can dissolve/remove thrombus; PMT alone, however, may require the adjunctive use of CDT. The aim of this study was to compare the use of CDT with and without PMT for the treatment of acute lower extremity ischemia (ALI). METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all patients with ALI who underwent CDT with or without PMT between January 2008 and April 2014 (n = 99). Patients with incomplete medical charts were excluded (n = 16). Remaining patients were divided into 2 cohorts: group 1 included patients who underwent PMT + CDT (n = 54); group 2 included those who underwent CDT alone (n = 29). Lesions were further characterized by anatomic location: iliac disease (n = 14), femoropopliteal disease (n = 53), tibial disease (n = 2), and multilevel disease (n = 14). Data collection included patient and limb characteristics, duration of treatment, complications, clinical outcomes, adjunctive interventions, and follow-up. RESULTS: No significant differences were seen between treatment groups in terms of patient characteristics, occlusion length and location, Rutherford class, median duration of ischemia time (P = 0.22), or mean lysis time (P = 0.58). Treatment groups were also similar with regard to outcomes, including periprocedure complications, patency, reintervention, limb salvage, and amputation-free survival. CONCLUSIONS: There was no different between PMT + CDT and CDT alone in terms of periprocedural complications or outcomes. In the quest to resolve ALI, initial thrombus extraction with PMT may not reduce the need, duration, or efficacy of CDT.
BACKGROUND: Catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) and/or pharmacomechanical thrombectomy (PMT) can dissolve/remove thrombus; PMT alone, however, may require the adjunctive use of CDT. The aim of this study was to compare the use of CDT with and without PMT for the treatment of acute lower extremity ischemia (ALI). METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all patients with ALI who underwent CDT with or without PMT between January 2008 and April 2014 (n = 99). Patients with incomplete medical charts were excluded (n = 16). Remaining patients were divided into 2 cohorts: group 1 included patients who underwent PMT + CDT (n = 54); group 2 included those who underwent CDT alone (n = 29). Lesions were further characterized by anatomic location: iliac disease (n = 14), femoropopliteal disease (n = 53), tibial disease (n = 2), and multilevel disease (n = 14). Data collection included patient and limb characteristics, duration of treatment, complications, clinical outcomes, adjunctive interventions, and follow-up. RESULTS: No significant differences were seen between treatment groups in terms of patient characteristics, occlusion length and location, Rutherford class, median duration of ischemia time (P = 0.22), or mean lysis time (P = 0.58). Treatment groups were also similar with regard to outcomes, including periprocedure complications, patency, reintervention, limb salvage, and amputation-free survival. CONCLUSIONS: There was no different between PMT + CDT and CDT alone in terms of periprocedural complications or outcomes. In the quest to resolve ALI, initial thrombus extraction with PMT may not reduce the need, duration, or efficacy of CDT.