Purpose: To report a single-center study comparing drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty vs directional atherectomy with antirestenotic therapy (DAART) for isolated lesions of the popliteal artery. Methods: Seventy-two patients were treated with either DCB angioplasty alone (n=31) or with DAART (n=41) for isolated popliteal artery stenotic disease between October 2009 and December 2015. The majority of patients presented with lifestyle-limiting claudication (74% vs 86%, respectively). Vessel calcification (29% vs 29%, respectively), mean lesion length (47 vs 42 mm, respectively), and number of runoff vessels were comparable between the groups. The primary outcome measure was primary patency; secondary outcomes were technical success (<30% residual stenosis or bailout stenting), secondary patency, and freedom from clinically driven target lesion revascularization (TLR). Results: The technical success rate following DCB was 84% vs 93% (p=0.24) after DAART. The 12-month primary patency rate was significantly higher in the DAART group (65% vs 82%; hazard ratio 2.64, 95% confidence interval 1.09 to 6.37, p=0.021), while freedom from TLR did not differ between the 2 treatment strategies (82% vs 94%, p=0.072). Secondary patency at 12 months was identical for both groups (96% vs 96%). Although not statistically significant, bailout stenting was more common after DCB angioplasty (16% vs 5% for DAART, p=0.13) and aneurysmal degeneration of the popliteal artery was seen more often after DAART (7% vs 0% for DCB alone, p=0.25). Popliteal artery injury was observed in 2 patients treated using DAART (5% vs 0% for DCB alone, p=0.5), whereas distal embolization rates were comparable between the groups (3% for DCB alone vs 5% for DAART, p=0.99). Conclusion: In this study, the use of DAART was associated with a higher primary patency rate compared with DCB angioplasty for isolated popliteal lesions. Nonetheless, both treatment options were associated with excellent 12-month secondary patency. Aneurysmal degeneration of the popliteal artery and increased bailout stenting could compromise the outcomes of DAART and DCB, respectively.

Purpose: To report an experience using directional atherectomy (DA) with antirestenotic therapy (DAART) in the form of drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty vs DCB angioplasty alone in common femoral artery (CFA) occlusive lesions. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted of 47 consecutive patients (mean age 71 years; 26 men) treated between October 2011 and July 2016 using either DCB angioplasty alone (n=26) or DAART (n=21) for CFA lesions. The majority of patients had lifestyle-limiting claudication (14 DCB and 15 DAART). Mean lesion length (39±14 mm DCB and 34±16 mm DAART) and vessel calcification (17/26 DCB and 11/21 DAART) were comparable between the groups. There were 4 chronic total occlusions, all in the DAART group. The main outcome measure was primary patency. Key secondary outcomes were technical success, secondary patency, and freedom from clinically-driven target lesion revascularization (TLR). Results: Technical success rates were 89% following DCB angioplasty and 95% for DAART (p=0.41). The 88% 12-month primary patency and 89% freedom from TLR for DAART were higher than the 68% and 75% estimates following DCB angioplasty alone, but neither difference was statistically significant. However, the secondary patency estimate at 12 months was significantly higher in the DAART group (100% vs 81% for DCB, p=0.03). Bailout stenting (1 DCB vs 1 DAART), vessel perforation (1 DCB vs 0 DAART), access site complications (4 DCB vs 3 DAART), and distal embolization (0 DCB vs 1 DAART) were comparable, whereas DCB angioplasty had more non-flow-limiting dissections (8 vs 1 for DAART, p=0.02). Conclusion: Preparation of the atherosclerotic CFA with directional atherectomy was not associated with statistically significantly higher primary patency or freedom from TLR compared to DCB angioplasty alone at 12 months. Nonetheless, both modalities had promising outcomes in a primarily surgically treated vascular territory.

Purpose: To evaluate the use of a brachial artery access for endovascular treatment of iliac artery disease. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted of 201 patients (mean age 73 years; 147 men) treated via a brachial artery access for iliac artery stenosis. The majority (n=141, 70%) presented with lifestyle-limiting claudication (Rutherford category 3), whereas the incidence of critical limb ischemia (Rutherford categories 4–6) was 30% (n=70). Diagnostic angiography revealed a TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus II (TASC) C/D lesion in 114 (57%) patients. The primary outcome was technical success achieved exclusively with a brachial artery access. Secondary outcomes were secondary technical success (adjunctive transfemoral access), access site complications, and stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA). Results: In 17 (8%) patients, lesion crossing was unsuccessful, while an adjunctive transfemoral approach was necessary to restore iliac vessel patency in 23 (11%) cases. Thus, the primary and secondary technical success rates were 81% and 92%, respectively. Local hematomas (9, 4%) dominated the access site complications, followed by pseudoaneurysms (8, 4%), late brachial artery bleeding (4, 2%), brachial artery occlusion (2, 1%), and puncture site infection (2, 1%). No transient or permanent median nerve dysfunction was observed. The stroke/TIA rate was 2% (n=4). A single patient died due to acute coronary syndrome (0.5% mortality). TASC II class (p=0.58), sex (p=0.66), and target vessel (p>0.3 for all locations) had no effect on technical success. Female gender unfavorably influenced the incidence of access site complications (hazard ratio 6.7, 95% confidence interval 2.7 to 15, p<0.001), but sheath size did not (p=0.22). Conclusion: Brachial artery access enables endovascular treatment of iliac artery disease in the majority of patients, although an adjunctive transfemoral access may be required. However, the high incidences of access site complications and cerebral events remain a significant limitation of the transbrachial approach.