Five-Year Outcomes of the SuperB Trial:A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Heparin-Bonded Endograft to Surgical Femoropopliteal Bypass

Objective: This study aims to compare the 5-year outcomes of endoluminal bypass (EB) using heparin-bonded self-expanding covered stents versus bypass surgery for extensive femoropopliteal disease, including technical and clinical outcomes and health status. Background: The surgical femoropopliteal bypass was the gold standard to treat peripheral arterial disease (PAD) for decades; however, endovascular treatment modalities are now recommended for most femoropopliteal lesions. One-year data of a randomized controlled trial comparing EB with surgical bypass (SB) have shown a faster recovery, less morbidity, and comparable patency rates between the two techniques. To date, long-term randomized controlled data regarding both techniques are lacking. Methods: Five-year results of a multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing EB with SB in patients with femoropopliteal artery disease were evaluated based on intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses. Results: At 5-year follow-up, primary, primary-assisted, and secondary patency rates were 36.2%, 52.4%, and 68.1% for EB and 49.4%, 72.2%, and 77.8% for SB, respectively (p=0.608). Freedom from target lesion revascularization (fTLR) was 34.1% for EB and 57.6% for SB (p=0.365). In both groups, the ankle-brachial index, Rutherford classification, and walking distance significantly improved compared with baseline without differences between groups at follow-up. Freedom from major amputation rate was 92.6% in the EB group and 96.2% in the SB group (p=0.361). The 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey showed no significant differences between groups. Conclusion: Treatment of extensive femoropopliteal disease with self-expanding covered stents provides comparable clinical-related and health-related questionnaire outcomes when compared with SB through 5 years of follow-up. However, the EB is related to a higher number of reinterventions. Clinical Impact: This present study is the first to report five-year outcomes comparing an endoluminal (EB) using heparin-bonded self-expanding covered stents with surgical bypass (SB) for long and complex femoropopliteal disease. Although the advantages of treatment with EB are mostly seen in the early period after treatment, the outcomes support the use of EB for this indication and seems to be a valid and safe alternative for bypass surgery. Future trials comparing various endovascular strategies may provide further guidance for the development of an evidence-based treatment algorithm.</p

1-Year Results of a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Heparin-Bonded Endoluminal to Femoropopliteal Bypass

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to compare heparin-bonded endografts with femoropopliteal bypass, including quality of life, using general health and disease-specific questionnaires as well as patency rates. BACKGROUND: Endovascular treatment continues to advance and is gaining acceptance as primary treatment for long occlusive or stenotic lesions in the superficial femoral artery. Heparin-bonded expanded polytetrafluoroethylene endografts have been related to outcomes comparable to bypass surgery, but this has not been tested in a randomized fashion. METHODS: A multicenter randomized-controlled trial was performed comparing femoropopliteal bypass with heparin-bonded expanded polytetrafluoroethylene endografts. Data were analyzed on an intention-to-treat and per-protocol manner. RESULTS: A total of 129 patients were randomized and 125 patients were treated, 63 in the endoluminal and 62 in the surgical group (42 venous, 20 prosthetic). Enrollment was terminated before reaching the predefined target number for patency. Baseline characteristics and anatomical data were similar. Patients were treated for critical limb ischemia in 38.1% and 32.2% in the endoluminal and surgical arms, respectively. Mean lesion length was 23 cm in both groups and lesions were largely TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus II D. Hospitalization time and 30-day morbidity were significantly lower in the endoluminal group, without differences in serious adverse events (n = 5 each; surgical: 4 venous and 1 polytetrafluoroethylene bypass). There were no significant differences in Rutherford category between groups at any time point. At 30 days the endoluminal group showed a greater improvement in quality-of-life scores. At 1 year, these differences had largely disappeared and no differences in primary (endoluminal: 64.8%; surgical: 63.6%), assisted primary (endoluminal: 78.1%; surgical: 79.8%), secondary patency (endoluminal: 85.9%; surgical: 83.3%), and target vessel revascularization (endoluminal: 72.1%; surgical: 71.0%) were observed. Limb salvage rate was 100% in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Heparin-bonded endoluminal bypass for long segment lesions shows promising results (less morbidity, faster recovery, and improvement in quality of life with indistinguishable patency rates at 1 year) compared with surgical bypass. Long-term results have to be awaited