Midterm Outcomes of Percutaneous Deep Venous Arterialization With a Dedicated System for Patients With No-Option Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia: The ALPS Multicenter Study
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online August, 2020
Midterm Outcomes of Percutaneous Deep Venous Arterialization With a Dedicated System for Patients With No-Option Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia: The ALPS Multicenter Study
Purpose: To evaluate the midterm results of patients suffering from no-option chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) treated with a dedicated system for percutaneous deep venous arterialization (pDVA). Materials and Methods: Thirty-two consecutive CLTI patients (mean age 67±14 years; 20 men) treated with pDVA using the Limflow device at 4 centers between 11 July 2014 and 11 June 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. Of all patients, 21 (66%) had diabetes, 8 (25%) were on immunosuppression, 4 (16%) had dialysis-dependent renal failure, 9 (28%) had Rutherford category 6 ischemia, and 25 (78%) were deemed at high risk of amputation. The primary outcome was amputation-free survival (AFS) at 6 months. Secondary outcomes were wound healing, limb salvage, and survival at 6, 12, and 24 months. Results: Technical success was achieved in 31 patients (96.9%). The median follow-up was 34 months (range 16–63). At 6, 12, and 24 months, estimates were 83.9%, 71.0%, and 67.2% for AFS, 86.8%, 79.8% and 79.8% for limb salvage, and 36.6%, 68.2%, and 72.7% for complete wound healing, respectively. Median time to complete wound healing was 4.9 months (range 0.5–15). The DVA circuit occluded during follow-up in 21 patients; the median time to occlusion was 2.6 months. Reintervention for occlusion was performed in 17 patients: 16 because of unhealed wounds and 1 for a newly developed ulcer. Conclusion: This study represents the largest population of patients with no-option CLTI treated with pDVA using the LimFlow device with midterm results. In this complex group of patients, pDVA using the LimFlow device has been shown to be feasible, with a high technical success rate and AFS at 6 up to 24 months coupled with wound healing. In selected patients with no-option CLTI, pDVA could be a recommended treatment to prevent amputation and heal wounds.
FowkesFGRAboyansVFowkesFJI, et al. Peripheral artery disease: epidemiology and global perspectives. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2017;14:156–170.
2.
BoccalonHBragaABreddinK, et al. Two randomised and placebo-controlled studies of an oral prostacyclin analogue (Iloprost) in severe leg ischaemia. The Oral Iloprost in severe Leg Ischaemia Study Group. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2000;20:358–362.
3.
HinchliffeRJBrownriggJRWAndrosG, et al. Effectiveness of revascularization of the ulcerated foot in patients with diabetes and peripheral artery disease: a systematic review. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2016;32(suppl 1):136–144.
4.
FerraresiRMauriGLosurdoF, et al. BAD transmission and SAD distribution: a new scenario for critical limb ischemia. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino). 2018;59:655–664.
5.
SchreveMAUnluCKumS, et al. Surgical and endovascular venous arterialization: ready to take the “desert” by storm?J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino). 2017;58:402–408.
6.
Abu DabrhAMSteffenMWUndavalliC, et al. The natural history of untreated severe or critical limb ischemia. J Vasc Surg. 2015;62:1642–1651.e3.
7.
BenoitEO’DonnellTFJKitsiosGD, et al. Improved amputation-free survival in unreconstructable critical limb ischemia and its implications for clinical trial design and quality measurement. J Vasc Surg. 2012;55:781–789.
8.
FerraresiRCasiniALosurdoF, et al. Hybrid foot vein arterialization in no-option patients with critical limb ischemia: a preliminary report. J Endovasc Ther. 2019;26:7–17.
9.
LichtenbergMSchreveMAFerraresiR, et al. Surgical and endovascular venous arterialization for treatment of critical limb ischaemia. Vasa. 2018;47:17–22.
10.
SchreveMAVosCGVahlAC, et al. Venous arterialisation for salvage of critically ischaemic limbs: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2017;53:387–402.
11.
KumSHuizingESchreveMA, et al. Percutaneous deep venous arterialization in patients with critical limb ischemia: a technical note. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino). 2018;59:665–669.
12.
Del GiudiceCVan Den HeuvelDWilleJ, et al. Percutaneous deep venous arterialization for severe critical limb ischemia in patients with no option of revascularization: early experience from two European centers. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2018;41:1474–1480.
13.
MustaphaJASaabFAClairD, et al. Interim results of the PROMISE I trial to investigate the LimFlow system of percutaneous deep vein arterialization for the treatment of critical limb ischemia. J Invasive Cardiol. 2019;31:57–63.
14.
MillsJLSConteMSArmstrongDG, et al. The Society for Vascular Surgery Lower Extremity Threatened Limb Classification System: risk stratification based on wound, ischemia, and foot infection (WIfI). J Vasc Surg. 2014;59:220–222.
15.
KumSTanYKSchreveMA, et al. Midterm outcomes from a pilot study of percutaneous deep vein arterialization for the treatment of no-option critical limb ischemia. J Endovasc Ther. 2017;24:619–626.
16.
ConteMSGeraghtyPJBradburyAW, et al. Suggested objective performance goals and clinical trial design for evaluating catheter-based treatment of critical limb ischemia. J Vasc Surg. 2009;50:1462–1463.
17.
NakamaTWatanabeNKimuraT, et al. Clinical implications of additional pedal artery angioplasty in critical limb ischemia patients with infrapopliteal and pedal artery disease. J Endovasc Ther. 2016;23:83–91.
18.
AlexandrescuVNgongangCVincentG, et al. Deep calf veins arterialization for inferior limb preservation in diabetic patients with extended ischaemic wounds, unfit for direct arterial reconstruction: preliminary results according to an angiosome model of perfusion. Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2011;12:10–19.
19.
IidaONakamuraMYamauchiY, et al. Endovascular treatment for infrainguinal vessels in patients with critical limb ischemia: OLIVE registry, a prospective, multicenter study in Japan with 12-month follow-up. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;6:68–76.
20.
IidaONakamuraMYamauchiY, et al. 3-Year outcomes of the OLIVE registry, a prospective multicenter study of patients with critical limb ischemia: a prospective, multi-center, three-year follow-up study on endovascular treatment for infra-inguinal vessel in patients with critical limb ischemia. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;8:1493–1502.
21.
IidaOTakaharaMSogaY, et al. Three-year outcomes of surgical versus endovascular revascularization for critical limb ischemia: The SPINACH study (Surgical Reconstruction Versus Peripheral Intervention in Patients With Critical Limb Ischemia). Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2017;10:e005531. doi:10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.117.005531
22.
StavroulakisKBorowskiMTorselloG, et al. One-year results of first-line treatment strategies in patients with critical limb ischemia (CRITISCH Registry). J Endovasc Ther. 2018;25:320–329.
23.
MigliaraBCappellariTF.A novel technique to create an arteriovenous fistula during total percutaneous deep foot venous arterialisation using an IVUS guided catheter [letter]. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2018;55:735.
24.
YsaALobatoMMikelarenaE, et al. Homemade device to facilitate percutaneous venous arterialization in patients with no-option critical limb ischemia. J Endovasc Ther. 2019;26:213–218.
25.
GandiniRMerollaSScaggianteJ, et al. Endovascular distal plantar vein arterialization in dialysis patients with no-option critical limb ischemia and posterior tibial artery occlusion: a technique for limb salvage in a challenging patient subset. J Endovasc Ther. 2018;25:127–132.
26.
ConteMSBradburyAWKolhP, et al. Global vascular guidelines on the management of chronic limb-threatening ischemia. J Vasc Surg. 2019;69(6S):3S–125S.e40.
27.
BrassEPAnthonyRDormandyJ, et al. Parenteral therapy with lipo-ecraprost, a lipid-based formulation of a PGE1 analog, does not alter six-month outcomes in patients with critical leg ischemia. J Vasc Surg. 2006;43:752–759.
28.
WangZHasanRFirwanaB, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of tests to predict wound healing in diabetic foot. J Vasc Surg. 2016;63(2 suppl):29S–36S.e1-2.
29.
FernandezNMcEnaneyRMaroneLK, et al. Predictors of failure and success of tibial interventions for critical limb ischemia. J Vasc Surg. 2010;52:834–842.
