Aortic & peripheral vascular diseaseSecondary analysis
Intravascular Ultrasound-Guided vs Angiography-Guided Drug-Coated Balloon Angioplasty in Patients With Complex Femoropopliteal Artery Disease
- Secondary analysis of the IVUS-DCB randomised trial
- prespecified subgroup analysis
Authors' conclusion
In endovascular treatment of FPA using DCB, IVUS guidance was significantly associated with improved 12-month clinical outcomes, particularly in patients with complex FPA lesions.
Study context
- Population
- Patients with femoropopliteal artery disease undergoing DCB angioplasty, by complex (TASC II C/D) or noncomplex (TASC II A/B) lesions158 complex, 79 noncomplex
- Participants
- 237 patients
- Comparison
- Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)-guided vs angiography-guided DCB angioplasty
- Primary endpoint
- Primary patency
- Follow-up
- 12 months
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
Primary patency, by lesion complexity (subgroups)
IVUS vs AngiographyHazard ratio (95% CI)P value
complex FPA: 82.1% vs 60.3%; HR for loss of primary patency
0.34(0.16–0.70)
P = 0.002noncomplex FPA: 87.5% vs 88.2%
1.84(0.39–8.60)
P = 0.44Secondary outcomes
| Outcome | IVUS | Angiography | HR (95% CI) | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Freedom from CD-TLR (complex FPA) | 90.0% | 76.9% | 0.31 (0.13–0.75) | P = 0.01 | |
| 0.10.31310Hazard ratio (log scale) |
Sustained clinical and hemodynamic improvement (complex femoropopliteal artery (FPA))
- Significantly higher with IVUS vs angiography guidance
Secondary endpoints (noncomplex FPA)
- No significant difference between IVUS and angiography guidance
Original publication
Intravascular Ultrasound-Guided vs Angiography-Guided Drug-Coated Balloon Angioplasty in Patients With Complex Femoropopliteal Artery Disease. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. Published 22 January 2025. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2024.10.052
Summarised from the published abstract; every number is checked against it