Treatment Strategies for Subclavian Artery Occlusion: A Comparative Analysis of Endovascular Repair,Subclavian-Carotid Bypass,and Transposition

Abstract

Background:

We aimed to compare the technical success rates and long-term patency of endovascular repair, subclavian-carotid bypass (SCB), and subclavian-carotid transposition (SCT) for subclavian artery occlusion.

Methods:

A retrospective analysis was conducted on 181 patients at Fuwai Hospital (2015–2024). Primary endpoint was the primary patency rate. Secondary endpoints included technical success, secondary patency and freedom from target lesion revascularization (TLR) rates. Kaplan–Meier analyses were applied.

Results:

One hundred and eighty-one patients [median age: 60 years, interquartile range (IQR) 54.00–65.00; 76.2% male) underwent 192 procedures, with 111 endovascular repairs, 38 SCBs, and 43 SCTs. Indications included vertebrobasilar insufficiency (39.2%), arm ischemia (28.7%), both (29.3%), cardiac causes (2.2%), and combined arm and cardiac indications (0.6%). The endovascular group had a lower technical success rate than SCB and SCT (86.5% vs 97.4% vs 100.0%). SCT had the longest lesion-to-vertebral artery (VA) length among the 3 groups. Ostial occlusion was more frequent and lesion length was longer in failed cases compared to successful cases (33.3% vs 6.3%, 14.50 vs 22.00 mm). After a median follow-up of 44 months (IQR 22.00–70.00), SCT had the highest primary patency rate (100% at 1, 3, and 5 years) compared to endovascular repair (93.4%, 88.2%, 77.6%) and SCB (94.1%, 86.8%, 72.3%; p=0.12). Endovascular group had primary patency, secondary patency, and freedom from TLR rates comparable to open surgery (SCB and SCT). SCB had lower primary patency than SCT.

Conclusions:

Endovascular repair offers good long-term patency but requires careful patient selection due to higher technical failure rates. SCT is recommended for patients at high risk of endovascular failure, while SCB remains suitable for multi-segment, distal occlusions or lesions with a short lesion-to-VA length.

Clinical Impact

To our knowledge, this is the largest study comparing outcomes of endovascular repair, subclavian-carotid bypass (SCB), and transposition (SCT) for SA occlusion. We found that endovascular repair provides midterm patency comparable to open surgery and may serve as the preferred option in carefully selected patients—contrary to prior reports, possibly due to optimized antiplatelet therapy. Technical failure was more frequent in cases with ostial involvement or longer lesion length. Although SCB showed inferior patency to SCT, it remains preferable for complex, distal lesions, or those with short lesion-to-vertebral artery (VA) length. Our anatomical analysis may offer guidance for individualized treatment selection.