Stefanos Giannopoulos1, Luis M Palena2, Ehrin J Armstrong3. 1. Division of Cardiology, Rocky Mountain Regional VA Medical Centre, University of Colorado, Denver, CO, USA. 2. Endovascular Surgery Unit, Endovascular Interventions & Research, Foot & Ankle Clinic, Maria Cecilia Hospital, Cotignola, Italy. 3. Division of Cardiology, Rocky Mountain Regional VA Medical Centre, University of Colorado, Denver, CO, USA. Electronic address: Ehrin.armstrong@gmail.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Antegrade crossing techniques via transfemoral access are often challenging and may be associated with technical and clinical failure when treating patients with critical limb ischaemia (CLI). The objective of this study was to summarise all available literature regarding retrograde endovascular treatment of patients with CLI and to investigate the technical success and complication rate of retrograde access. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Central until May 2020. A meta-analysis of 31 observational studies (29 retrospective and two prospective; 26 and five studies with low and moderate risk of bias, respectively) was conducted with random effects modelling. The incidence of adverse events peri-procedurally and during follow up were calculated. RESULTS: The 31 studies enrolled 1 910 patients who were treated endovascularly for femoropopliteal and/or infrapopliteal lesions causing CLI. Most of the patients had diabetes while more than half of the overall population had coronary artery disease and dyslipidaemia. All lesions were located in the infra-inguinal segment and most were chronic total occlusions (96%; 95% CI 85%-100%). Seven studies reported moderate or severe calcification in approximately half of the cases (45%; 95% CI 30%-60%). The overall technical success of the retrograde approach was 96% (18 studies; 95% CI 92%-100%). Perforation, flow limiting dissection, distal embolisation, and local haematoma at the retrograde access site were infrequent and observed in 2.1%, 0.6%, 0.1%, and 1.3% of the patients, respectively. The six month primary patency rate was 78% (five studies; 95% CI 46%-99%), the six month limb salvage rate was 77% (four studies; 95% CI 70%-84%). CONCLUSION: The results indicated that the retrograde or bidirectional antegrade/retrograde approach is safe and effective and facilitates angioplasty when antegrade treatment fails. However, prospective studies with standardised wound care and surveillance protocols are needed to investigate retrograde techniques in patients with CLI who failed antegrade revascularisation, to improve long term limb salvage and survival.
OBJECTIVE: Antegrade crossing techniques via transfemoral access are often challenging and may be associated with technical and clinical failure when treating patients with critical limb ischaemia (CLI). The objective of this study was to summarise all available literature regarding retrograde endovascular treatment of patients with CLI and to investigate the technical success and complication rate of retrograde access. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Central until May 2020. A meta-analysis of 31 observational studies (29 retrospective and two prospective; 26 and five studies with low and moderate risk of bias, respectively) was conducted with random effects modelling. The incidence of adverse events peri-procedurally and during follow up were calculated. RESULTS: The 31 studies enrolled 1 910 patients who were treated endovascularly for femoropopliteal and/or infrapopliteal lesions causing CLI. Most of the patients had diabetes while more than half of the overall population had coronary artery disease and dyslipidaemia. All lesions were located in the infra-inguinal segment and most were chronic total occlusions (96%; 95% CI 85%-100%). Seven studies reported moderate or severe calcification in approximately half of the cases (45%; 95% CI 30%-60%). The overall technical success of the retrograde approach was 96% (18 studies; 95% CI 92%-100%). Perforation, flow limiting dissection, distal embolisation, and local haematoma at the retrograde access site were infrequent and observed in 2.1%, 0.6%, 0.1%, and 1.3% of the patients, respectively. The six month primary patency rate was 78% (five studies; 95% CI 46%-99%), the six month limb salvage rate was 77% (four studies; 95% CI 70%-84%). CONCLUSION: The results indicated that the retrograde or bidirectional antegrade/retrograde approach is safe and effective and facilitates angioplasty when antegrade treatment fails. However, prospective studies with standardised wound care and surveillance protocols are needed to investigate retrograde techniques in patients with CLI who failed antegrade revascularisation, to improve long term limb salvage and survival.