Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2020
Efficacy and safety of intravascular lithotripsy for the treatment of peripheral arterial disease: An individual patient-level pooled data analysis.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Madhavan Mahesh V, Shahim Bahira, Mena-Hurtado Carlos, Garcia Lawrence, Crowley Aaron, Parikh Sahil A
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) is one of the most common manifestations of atherosclerotic disease worldwide. Peripheral arterial calcification reduces acute success and long-term patency of endovascular therapy for PAD. Several calcium modification devices are available for use in peripheral interventions. Outcomes after peripheral intravascular lithotripsy (IVL), a novel approach using pulsatile sonic waves to treat luminal and medial calcium in patients with PAD, have not been extensively characterized. Therefore, we sought to perform an individual patient-level data (IPD) pooled analysis of available studies to evaluate the efficacy and safety of IVL in the treatment of PAD.
METHODS AND RESULTS: We pooled IPD, including baseline and procedural variables, from five prospective studies which assessed IVL in the treatment of patients with extensive peripheral artery calcification. Final postprocedural percent diameter stenosis (%DS) and procedural angiographic complications were assessed by independent core laboratory. Efficacy endpoints were analyzed using linear mixed effects models and safety endpoints were tabulated overall and by vascular bed. Among 336 patients who underwent endovascular revascularization with use of IVL, there was a significant reduction between pre-procedural and final %DS of 55.1% (95% confidence interval 53.3-57.0%, p < .0001). Core-laboratory assessed lesion-level complications, including flow-limiting dissections (Types D-F), vessel perforation, distal embolization, thrombus, abrupt closure, and no reflow, occurred in 4/328 (1.22%) of treated lesions.
CONCLUSIONS: The present IPD of five prospective studies, marking the largest analysis to date evaluating the use of IVL in significantly calcified PAD lesions, demonstrates this treatment strategy to be both effective and safe.
METHODS AND RESULTS: We pooled IPD, including baseline and procedural variables, from five prospective studies which assessed IVL in the treatment of patients with extensive peripheral artery calcification. Final postprocedural percent diameter stenosis (%DS) and procedural angiographic complications were assessed by independent core laboratory. Efficacy endpoints were analyzed using linear mixed effects models and safety endpoints were tabulated overall and by vascular bed. Among 336 patients who underwent endovascular revascularization with use of IVL, there was a significant reduction between pre-procedural and final %DS of 55.1% (95% confidence interval 53.3-57.0%, p < .0001). Core-laboratory assessed lesion-level complications, including flow-limiting dissections (Types D-F), vessel perforation, distal embolization, thrombus, abrupt closure, and no reflow, occurred in 4/328 (1.22%) of treated lesions.
CONCLUSIONS: The present IPD of five prospective studies, marking the largest analysis to date evaluating the use of IVL in significantly calcified PAD lesions, demonstrates this treatment strategy to be both effective and safe.