Comparative Assessment of Procedure Cost and Outcomes Between Guidewire and Crossing Device Strategies to Cross Peripheral Artery Chronic Total Occlusions.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess actual procedural costs and outcomes comparing wire-catheter and dedicated chronic total occlusion (CTO) device strategies to cross peripheral artery CTOs.
Background: Peripheral artery CTO interventions are frequently performed, but there are limited data on actual procedural costs and outcomes comparing wire-catheter and dedicated CTO devices.
Methods: The XLPAD (Excellence in Peripheral Artery Disease Intervention) registry (NCT01904851) was accessed to retrospectively compare cost and 30-day and 12-month outcomes of wire-catheter and crossing device strategies for treatment of infrainguinal peripheral artery CTO.
Results: Of all 3,234 treated lesions, 42% (n = 1,362) were CTOs in 1,006 unique patients. Wire-catheter approaches were used in 82% of CTOs, whereas dedicated CTO devices were used in 18% (p < 0.0001). CTO crossing device use was associated with significantly higher technical success (74% vs. 65%; p < 0.0001) and mean procedure cost ($7,800.09 vs. $4,973.24; p < 0.0001). Because 12-month repeat revascularization (11.3% vs. 17.2%; p = 0.02) and amputation rates (2.8% vs. 8.5%; p = 0.002) in the CTO crossing device arm were lower compared with the wire-catheter group, the net cost for an initial CTO crossing device strategy was $423.80 per procedure.
Conclusions: An initial wire-catheter approach to cross a peripheral artery CTO is most frequently adopted. The use of dedicated CTO crossing devices provides significantly higher technical success and lower reintervention and amputation rates, at a net cost of $423.80 per procedure at 12 months.
(Copyright © 2016 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)