Affiliation:
1. European Vascular Centre Aachen-Maastricht, Department of Vascular Surgery, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, 52074 Aachen, Germany
2. Institute of Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, Medical Faculty, RWTH Aachen University, Pauwelsstraße 30, 52074 Aachen, Germany
Abstract
Background: Percutaneous deep vein arterialization (pDVA) is considered a treatment modality in patients with no-option critical limb ischemia. However, there is still a paucity of evidence regarding its safety and efficacy. Data sources: MEDLINE (via PubMed), Embase and Web of Science databases as well as the CENTRAL registry up to the end of June 2023. Methods: This review adhered to the PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO registration no. CRD42023445171). The risk of bias was assessed using the methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS). Primary endpoints included technical success, overall survival and limb salvage during the follow-up. Amputation-free survival at 30 days, 6 months and 1 year as well as complete wound healing, major adverse limb events and reintervention were investigated as secondary outcomes. Results: Five observational studies, comprising 208 patients (142 Rutherford class 5/77 Rutherford class 6), were included. MINORS revealed a low risk of bias. The meta-analysis reached a pooled technical success rate of 96.2% (95% CI: 91.5–98.4), an overall survival of 82.8% (95% CI: 70.5–95.2) and a limb salvage rate of 77.2% (95% CI: 65.2–89.1) during the follow-up. The amputation-free survival at 30 days, 6 months and 1 year was 87.8%, 68.7% and 65.6%, respectively. Furthermore, pDVA resulted in a complete wound healing rate of 53.4% (95% CI: 30.3–76.5). The pooled reintervention rate was as high as 46.7% (37.1–56.3%). Conclusions: PDVA seems a feasible bail-out strategy for patients with no option for routine treatment of CLTI. However, due to the small number of studies, the strength of the evidence is low.