4-French–Compatible Endovascular Material Is Safe and Effective in the Treatment of Femoropopliteal Occlusive Disease: Results of the 4-EVER Trial

Abstract

Purpose: To report the 1-year results of a prospective multicenter trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of treating symptomatic femoropopliteal occlusive disease using 4-F–compatible materials and no closure device.

Methods: The non-randomized 4-EVER trial ( 4 -F e ndo v ascular tr e atment app r oach to infrainguinal disease) was conducted at 5 European hospitals ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01413139). The protocol mandated the use of only 4-F sheaths, self-expanding nitinol stents (Astron Pulsar or Pulsar-18 stent), and balloons from a single manufacturer. Between June 2010 and June 2011, 120 symptomatic patients (82 men; mean age 71±9.7 years, range 47–90), primarily claudicants, treated for 120 femoropopliteal lesions (>90% TASC A/B) were enrolled. The mean lesion length was 71.0±45.9 mm. Follow-up evaluations were scheduled on day 1 and at 1, 6, 12, and 24 months. A duplex ultrasound was performed on all follow-up visits to determine vessel patency (primary outcome measure at 1 year), and biplanar radiography was performed at 12 and 24 months to assess stent fracture.

Results: Stents were successfully implanted in all patients: an Astron Pulsar stent in 70 (58.3%) lesions and a Pulsar-18 stent in 46 (38.3%); 4 (3.3%) patients had both stents implanted for flow-limiting dissection after predilation. No closure devices were used; the mean manual compression time was 8.1 minutes (2–15). Four (3.3%) patients developed significant hematoma at the puncture site, but none required surgical repair. The overall 12-month primary patency rate was 81.4%: 85.2% for the Astron Pulsar and 73.4% for the Pulsar-18 (p=0.236). Freedom from target lesion revascularization at 12 months for the entire cohort was 89.3%.

Conclusion: Compared to published historical data for superficial femoral artery type A/B lesion stenting using 6-F devices, the 4-F devices applied in this trial showed similar patency at 12 months, fewer access site complications, and shorter manual compression times, supporting the supposition that 4-F endovascular treatment is safe and effective.

Keywords

peripheral artery disease superficial femoral artery femoropopliteal segment stenosis occlusion endovascular therapy nitinol stent 4-French devices low profile puncture site complications access site complications patency manual compression

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Nowygrod

Egorova

Greco

. Trends, complications, and mortality in peripheral vascular surgery. J Vasc Surg. 2006;43:205–216.

Anderson

Gelijns

Moskowitz

. Understanding trends in inpatient surgical volume: vascular interventions, 1980–2000. J Vasc Surg. 2004;39:1200–1208.

Adam

Beard

Cleveland

. Bypass versus angioplasty in severe ischaemia of the leg (BASIL): multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2005;366:1925–1934.

Schillinger

Sabeti

Dick

. Sustained benefit at 2 years of primary femoropopliteal stenting compared with balloon angioplasty with optional stenting. Circulation. 2007;1158:2745–2749.

Norgren

Hiatt

Dormandy

. Inter-Society Consensus for the Management of Peripheral Arterial Disease (TASC II). J Vasc Surg. 2007;45 Suppl S:S5–67.

Conrad

Cambria

Stone

. Intermediate results of percutaneous endovascular therapy of femoropopliteal occlusive disease: a contemporary series. J Vasc Surg. 2006;44:762–769.

Scott

Biuckians

Light

. Subintimal angioplasty for the treatment of claudication and critical limb ischemia: 3-year results. J Vasc Surg. 2007;46:959–964.

Mousa

Rhee

Trocciola

. Percutaneous endovascular treatment for chronic limb ischemia. Ann Vasc Surg. 2005;19:186–191.

Dick

Wallner

Sabeti

. Balloon angioplasty versus stenting with nitinol stents in intermediate length superficial femoral artery lesions. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;74:1090–1095.

10.

Laird

Katzen

Scheinert

. Nitinol stent implantation versus balloon angioplasty for lesions in the superficial femoral artery and proximal popliteal artery. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2010;3:267–276.

11.

Tavris

Gallauresi

Lin

. Risk of local adverse events following cardiac catheterization by hemostasis device use and gender. J Invasive Cardiol. 2004;16:459–464.

12.

Durst

Lotan

Nassar

. Comparison of 4 and 6 French catheters for coronary angiography: real-world modeling. Isr Med Assoc J. 2007;9:290–293.

13.

Bosiers

Torsello

Gissler

. Nitinol stent implantation in long superficial femoral artery lesions: 12-month results of the DURABILITY I study. J Endovasc Ther. 2009;16:261–269.

14.

Rutherford

Baker

Ernst

. Recommended standards for reports dealing with lower extremity ischemia: revised version. J Vasc Surg. 1997;26:517–538.

15.

Leiner

Kessels

Nelemans

. Peripheral arterial disease: comparison of color duplex US and contrast-enhanced MR angiography for diagnosis. Radiology. 2005;235:699–708.

16.

Rocha-Singh

Jaff

Crabtree

. Performance goals and endpoint assessments for clinical trials of femoropopliteal bare nitinol stents in patients with symptomatic peripheral arterial disease. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2007;69:910–919.

17.

Krankenberg

Schluter

Steinkamp

. Nitinol stent implantation versus percutaneous transluminal angioplasty in superficial femoral artery lesions up to 10 cm in length: the femoral artery stenting trial (FAST). Circulation. 2007;116:285–292.

18.

Schillinger

Sabeti

Loewe

. Balloon angioplasty versus implantation of nitinol stents in the superficial femoral artery. N Engl J Med. 2006;354:1879–1888.

19.

Dake

Ansel

Jaff

. Paclitaxeleluting stents show superiority to balloon angioplasty and bare metal stents in femoropopliteal disease. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2011;4:495–504.

20.

Matsumara

Yamanouchi

Goldstein

. The United States study for evaluating endovascular treatments of lesions in the superficial femoral artery and proximal popliteal by using the Protégé EverFlex nitinol stent system II (DURABILITY II). J Vasc Surg. 2013;5214:115–118.

21.

Scheinert

Werner

Scheinert

. Treatment of complex atherosclerotic popliteal artery disease with a new self-expanding interwoven nitinol stent: 12-month results of the Leipzig SUPERA popliteal artery stent registry. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;6:65–71.

22.

Schulte

Kralj

Gissler

. MISAGO 2: one-year outcomes after implantation of the Misago self-expanding nitinol stent in the superficial femoral and popliteal arteries of 744 patients. J Endovasc Ther. 2012;19:774–784.

23.

Rzany

Schaldach

. Smart material silicon carbide: reduced activation of cells and proteins on a-SiC:H-coated stainless steel. Prog Biom Res. 2001;6:182–194.

24.

Schwartz

Burstein

Economides

. Review of vascular closure devices. J Invasive Cardiol. 2010;22:599–607.

25.

Semler

. Transfemoral catheterization: mechanical versus manual control of bleeding. Radiology. 1985;154:234–235.

26.

Beyer-Enke

Söldner

Zeitler

. Immediate sealing of arterial puncture site following femoropopliteal angioplasty: a prospective randomized trial. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 1996;19:406–410.

27.

Dehghani

Mohammad

Marcuzzi

. Efficacy and long-term safety of StarClose for hemostasis of arterial puncture sites distal to common femoral artery bifurcation after percutaneous coronary interventions. J Invasive Cardiol. 2010;22:505–510.

28.

Carere

Webb

Ahmed

. Initial experience using Prostar: a new device for percutaneous suture-mediated closure of arterial puncture sites. Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn. 1996;37:367–372.

29.

Hon

Ganeshan

Thomas

. An overview of vascular closure devices: what every radiologist should know. Eur J Radiol. 2010;73:181–190.

30.

Applegate

Sacrinty

Kutcher

. Trends in vascular complications after diagnostic cardiac catheterization and percutaneous coronary intervention via the femoral artery, 1998–2007. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2008;1:317–326.

31.

Ahmed

Piper

Malenka

. Significantly improved vascular complications among women undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a report from the Northern New England Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Registry. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;2:423–429.

32.

Koreny

Riedmüller

Nikfardjam

. Arterial puncture closing devices compared with standard manual compression after cardiac catheterization: systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA. 2004;291:350–357.

33.

Van den Berg

. A close look at closure devices. J Cardiovasc Surg. 2006;47:285–295.

34.

Bogart

. Time to hemostasis: a comparison of manual versus mechanical compression of the femoral artery. Am J Crit Care. 1995;4:149–156.

35.

Simon

Bumgarner

Clark

. Manual versus mechanical compression for femoral artery hemostasis after cardiac catheterization. Am J Crit Care. 1998;7:308–313.

36.

Baim

Knopf

Hinohara

. Suture-mediated closure of the femoral access site after cardiac catheterization: results of the suture to ambulate and discharge (STAND I and STAND II) trials. Am J Cardiol. 2000;85:864–869.

37.

Gutzeit

Van Schie

Schoch

. Feasibility and safety of vascular closure devices in an antegrade approach to either the common femoral artery or the superficial femoral artery. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2012;35:1036–1040.

38.

Sanborn

Gibbs

Brinker

. A multicenter randomized trial comparing a percutaneous collagen hemostasis device with conventional manual compression after diagnostic angiography and angioplasty. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1993;22:1273–1279.

39.

Brueck

Bandorski

Rauber

. Percutaneous transluminal dilatation of inadvertent partial or complete occlusion of the femoral artery caused by Angio-Seal deployment for puncture site closure after cardiac catheterization. J Invasive Cardiol. 2010;22:353–357.

40.

Applegate

. Unintended consequences of femoral artery closure devices. J Invasive Cardiol. 2010;22:358–359.

41.

Biancari

D'Andrea

Di Marco

. Meta-analysis of randomized trials on the efficacy of vascular closure devices after diagnostic angiography and angioplasty. Am Heart J. 2010;159:518–531.

42.

Dangas

Mehran

Kokolis

. Vascular complications after percutaneous coronary interventions following hemostasis with manual compression versus arteriotomy closure devices. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001;38:638–641.

43.

Applegate

Sacrinty

Kutcher

. Propensity score analysis of vascular complications after diagnostic cardiac catheterization and percutaneous coronary intervention 1998–2003. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2006;67:556–562.

44.

Exaire

Dauerman

Topol

. Triple antiplatelet therapy does not increase femoral access bleeding with vascular closure devices. Am Heart J. 2004;147:31–34.

45.

Tron

Koning

Eltchaninoff

. A randomized comparison of a percutaneous suture device versus manual compression for femoral artery hemostasis after PTCA. J Interv Cardiol. 2003;16:217–221.

46.

Cura

Kapadia

L'Allier

. Safety of femoral closure devices after percutaneous coronary interventions in the era of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa platelet blockade. Am J Cardiol. 2000;86:780–782.