Optimal activated clotting time during peripheral artery endovascular procedures: cutting the gordian knot

All endovascular procedures need an effective anticoagulation regimen that avoids thrombo-embolic complications due to the insertion and manipulation of various intravascular devices. Systemic heparinization reduces the risk of thrombosis but there is no conclusive evidence regarding the correct use of anticoagulant medications and accordant monitoring, especially in endovascular peripheral arterial procedures. An-ticoagulation must be maintained during the whole vascular procedure, especially during partial or complete blood flow interruption. Reaching and maintaining the correct coagulative status is mandatory to avoid or reduce thromboembolic complications that could limit the procedure's effectiveness or be harmful to the patient. Patients' baseline variables and procedure-related elements can influence the way anticoagulation should be administered and how coagulative status has to be monitored. This review aimed to clarify the critical points of anticoagulation and monitoring management for non-cardiac arterial procedures in order to understand the best way to manage vascular procedures anticoagulation

Patient radiation exposure for endovascular deep venous interventions

OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to assess the cumulative radiation exposure from preoperative, periprocedural, and follow-up imaging to patients who underwent common endovascular deep venous interventions for acute and chronic central venous outflow obstructive diseases; namely, deep vein thrombosis (DVT) thrombolysis, unilateral chronic iliofemoral venous stenting, and inferior vena cava (IVC) reconstruction in a single center. METHODS: Patients who had DVT thrombolysis of upper extremity (UE) DVT and lower extremity (LE) DVT, unilateral chronic iliofemoral venous stenting, and endovascular IVC reconstruction between May 1, 2012, and July 31, 2017, in a single unit were retrospectively reviewed. Demographic data, anatomic DVT, imaging, technical details of the index procedure, follow-up, and radiation exposure measured in dose-length product, dose-area product (DAP), and fluoroscopy time (FT) from related computed tomography scans and interventions were analyzed. Mann-Whitney U tests were performed to assess for significance of differences between subgroups. A P value of less than .05 was considered significant. RESULTS: In total, 20 UE DVT thrombolysis, 91 LE DVT thrombolysis, 56 unilateral chronic iliofemoral venous stenting, and 39 endovascular IVC reconstruction patients were included in the study, with the following median ages: 39 years (range, 20-67 years), 44 years (range, 15-78 years), 45 years (range, 20-80 years), and 35 years (range, 18 -73 years), respectively. The median cumulative DAP for the index DVT thrombolysis was 9.2 Gycm2 (range, 0.2-176.0 Gycm2) for LE DVT and 2.0 Gycm2 (range, 0.1-11.7 Gycm2) for UE DVT (P < .0001). The median cumulative FT for the index thrombolysis was 981 seconds (range, 20-4890 seconds) and 837 seconds (range, 19-2895 seconds) for LE DVT and UE DVT, respectively (P = .18). For unilateral chronic iliofemoral venous stenting, the median cumulative DAP and FT were 32.4 Gycm2 (range, 0.1-289.6 Gycm2) and 660 seconds (range, 246-4200 seconds), respectively. Meanwhile, the median cumulative DAP and FT for the endovascular IVC reconstruction were 60.8 Gycm2 (range, 2.5-269.1 Gycm2) and 2846 seconds (range, 836-11682 seconds), respectively. The median DAP for secondary procedures during follow-up was 6.6 Gycm2 (range, 0.8 186.5 Gycm2), 1.9 Gycm2 (range, 0.2-111.7 Gycm2), and 24.3 Gycm2 (range, 0.2-157.5 Gycm2) for LE DVT thrombolysis, unilateral chronic iliofemoral venous stenting, and endovascular IVC reconstruction, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Patient radiation exposure for endovascular deep venous interventions for central venous outflow obstruction measured in DAP and FT seemed to be less than and at most similar to anatomically comparable arterial interventions in the literature. However, these patients were usually much younger than those with arterial diseases and may need secondary interventions involving further radiation exposure in their lifetime

Target Balloon-Assisted Antegrade and Retrograde Use of Re-Entry Catheters in Complex Chronic Total Occlusions

Purpose, Retrograde recanalizations have gained increasing recognition in complex arterial occlusive disease. Re-entry devices are a well described adjunct for antegrade recanalizations. We present our experience with target balloon-assisted antegrade and retrograde recanalizations using re-entry devices in challenging chronic total occlusions. Materials and Methods: We report data from a retrospective multicenter registry. Eligibility criteria included either antegrade or retrograde use of the OutbackTM or GoBackTM re-entry catheter in combination with a balloon as a target to accomplish wire passage, when conventional antegrade and retrograde recanalization attempts had been unsuccessful. Procedural outcomes included technical success (defined as wire passage though the occlusion and delivery of adjunctive therapy with <30% residual stenosis at final angiogram), safety (periprocedural complications, e.g., bleeding, vessel injury, or occlusion of the artery at the re-entry site, and distal embolizations), and clinical outcome (amputation-free survival and freedom from target lesion revascularization after 12-months follow-up). Results: Thirty-six consecutive patients underwent target balloon-assisted recanalization attempts. Fourteen (39 %) patients had a history of open vascular surgery in the index limb. Fifteen patients were claudications (Rutherford Class 2 or 3, 21 presented with chronic limb threatening limb ischemia (Rutherford Class 4 to 6). The locations of the occlusive lesions were as follows: iliac arteries in 3 cases, femoropopliteal artery in 39 cases, and in below-the-knee arteries in 12 cases. In 15 cases, recanalization was attempted in multilevel occlusions. Retrograde access was attempted in 1 case in the common femoral artery, in the femoropopliteal segment in 10 cases, in below-the-knee arteries in 23 cases, and finally in 2 patients via the brachial artery. In 10 cases, the re-entry devices were inserted via the retrograde access site. Technical success was achieved in 34 (94 %) patients. There were 3 periprocedural complications, none directly related to the target balloon-assisted re-entry maneuver. Amputation-free survival was 87.8 % and freedom from clinically driven target lesion revascularization was 86.6 % after 12-months follow-up. Conclusion: Target balloon-assisted use of re-entry devices in chronic total occlusions provides an effective and safe endovascular adjunct, when conventional antegrade and retrograde recanalization attempts have failed

Target Balloon-Assisted Antegrade and Retrograde Use of Re-Entry Catheters in Complex Chronic Total Occlusions

Purpose, Retrograde recanalizations have gained increasing recognition in complex arterial occlusive disease. Re-entry devices are a well described adjunct for antegrade recanalizations. We present our experience with target balloon-assisted antegrade and retrograde recanalizations using re-entry devices in challenging chronic total occlusions. Materials and Methods: We report data from a retrospective multicenter registry. Eligibility criteria included either antegrade or retrograde use of the OutbackTM or GoBackTM re-entry catheter in combination with a balloon as a target to accomplish wire passage, when conventional antegrade and retrograde recanalization attempts had been unsuccessful. Procedural outcomes included technical success (defined as wire passage though the occlusion and delivery of adjunctive therapy with &lt;30% residual stenosis at final angiogram), safety (periprocedural complications, e.g., bleeding, vessel injury, or occlusion of the artery at the re-entry site, and distal embolizations), and clinical outcome (amputation-free survival and freedom from target lesion revascularization after 12-months follow-up). Results: Thirty-six consecutive patients underwent target balloon-assisted recanalization attempts. Fourteen (39 %) patients had a history of open vascular surgery in the index limb. Fifteen patients were claudications (Rutherford Class 2 or 3, 21 presented with chronic limb threatening limb ischemia (Rutherford Class 4 to 6). The locations of the occlusive lesions were as follows: iliac arteries in 3 cases, femoropopliteal artery in 39 cases, and in below-the-knee arteries in 12 cases. In 15 cases, recanalization was attempted in multilevel occlusions. Retrograde access was attempted in 1 case in the common femoral artery, in the femoropopliteal segment in 10 cases, in below-the-knee arteries in 23 cases, and finally in 2 patients via the brachial artery. In 10 cases, the re-entry devices were inserted via the retrograde access site. Technical success was achieved in 34 (94 %) patients. There were 3 periprocedural complications, none directly related to the target balloon-assisted re-entry maneuver. Amputation-free survival was 87.8 % and freedom from clinically driven target lesion revascularization was 86.6 % after 12-months follow-up. Conclusion: Target balloon-assisted use of re-entry devices in chronic total occlusions provides an effective and safe endovascular adjunct, when conventional antegrade and retrograde recanalization attempts have failed