Back to Search Start Over

Impact of intravascular ultrasound-guided endovascular therapy on periprocedural outcomes in patients with lower-extremity artery disease.

Authors :
Nakao S
Takahara M
Iida O
Kohsaka S
Amano T
Ishii H
Shinke T
Nakama T
Fujihara M
Mano T
Kozuma K
Source :
Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions [Catheter Cardiovasc Interv] 2024 Aug; Vol. 104 (2), pp. 277-284. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Jun 26.
Publication Year :
2024

Abstract

Background: Although technological improvements in intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) may reduce technical failures in endovascular therapy (EVT), perioperative complications (POCs) associated with IVUS use may increase.<br />Aims: This study investigated the impact of IVUS on periprocedural outcomes in symptomatic lower-extremity artery disease (LEAD) patients undergoing EVT.<br />Methods: This study evaluated 28,088 symptomatic LEAD patients who underwent EVT between January 2021 and December 2021 using a prospective nationwide registry in Japan. Outcome measures included periprocedural outcomes, including technical failure and POCs. To compare outcomes with and without IVUS use, propensity score matching analysis was performed for overall and for each arterial region (aortoiliac [AI], femoropopliteal [FP], and infrapopliteal [IP] arteries) using a binary logistic regression model.<br />Results: IVUS was used in 75%, 72%, and 37% of AI, FP, and IP lesions, respectively. After propensity matching extraction, the IVUS group had a tendency of lower technical failure rate than the non-IVUS group, although not statistically different (3.9% vs. 5.4%, p = 0.054), without an increase in the POC rate (1.8% vs. 1.6%, p = 0.54). Regarding the per-regional analysis, the technical failure rate of FP-EVT was significantly lower in the IVUS group (3.1% vs. 4.2%, p = 0.006), whereas those of AI-EVT (2.2% vs. 3.1%, p = 0.12) and IP-EVT (6.8% vs. 6.1%, p = 0.37) were not significantly different between the two groups. Furthermore, IVUS did not increase the POC rate for any region (AI-EVT: 1.3% vs. 1.3%, p = 1.00; FP-EVT: 1.8% vs. 1.7%, p = 0.75; and IP-EVT: 2.0% vs. 1.7%, p = 0.56).<br />Conclusion: The current study revealed that IVUS did not increase the POCs and technical failure for overall lesions but reduced the incidence of FP-EVT technical failure.<br /> (© 2024 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
1522-726X
Volume :
104
Issue :
2
Database :
MEDLINE
Journal :
Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
38923660
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.31134