Open Surgical Thrombendarterectomy Versus Endovascular Treatment in Occlusive Processes of the Femoral Artery Bifurcation.

backgroundThe standard treatment of occlusive processes of the femoral artery bifurcation is thrombendarterectomy (TEA). Endovascular techniques (ENDO) have recently been put forward as a potential alternative. It is unclear so far which modality yields better outcomes with respect to long-term revascularization and periprocedural complications. Method: Multiple databases were systematically searched for pertinent publications (publication date November 1965 to February 2022). From the included studies, individual patient data (IPD) were requested. Aggregate data (AD) were used when no IPD were available. Primary and secondary patency (PP and SP), perioperative morbidity/mortality, and further endpoints were determined separately for TEA and ENDO and compared with each other. AD for each modality were summarized in meta-analyses. Time-to-event analyses and comparative meta-analyses with PP as primary endpoint were carried out using IPD. Results: 42 studies (3 IPD, 39 AD; 27 TEA, 12 ENDO, 3 comparisons of TEA versus ENDO) were included. In the combined meta-analysis of IPD and AD, PP for TEA was 97% at 6 months and 92% at 12 months, while PP for ENDO was 84% at 6 months and 85% at 12 months. The differences were not statistically significant. The comparative meta-analysis regarding PP did not reveal any significant differences either (TEA versus ENDO: HR 0.30 [0.06; 1.48]). SP at 12 months was 97% (TEA) and 93% (ENDO). The periprocedural morbidity was 16% for TEA and 9% for ENDO. Conclusion: In light of a higher PP, even without formal statistical proof of superiority, TEA can still be considered the standard treatment for occlusive processes of the femoral artery bifurcation.

methodsMultiple databases were systematically searched for pertinent publications (publication date November 1965 to February 2022). From the included studies, individual patient data (IPD) were requested. Aggregate data (AD) were used when no IPD were available. Primary and secondary patency (PP and SP), perioperative morbidity/mortality, and further endpoints were determined separately for TEA and ENDO and compared with each other. AD for each modality were summarized in meta-analyses. Time-to-event analyses and comparative meta-analyses with PP as primary endpoint were carried out using IPD.

results42 studies (3 IPD, 39 AD; 27 TEA, 12 ENDO, 3 comparisons of TEA versus ENDO) were included. In the combined meta-analysis of IPD and AD, PP for TEA was 97% at 6 months and 92% at 12 months, while PP for ENDO was 84% at 6 months and 85% at 12 months. The differences were not statistically significant. The comparative meta-analysis regarding PP did not reveal any significant differences either (TEA versus ENDO: HR 0.30 [0.06; 1.48]). SP at 12 months was 97% (TEA) and 93% (ENDO). The periprocedural morbidity was 16% for TEA and 9% for ENDO.

conclusionIn light of a higher PP, even without formal statistical proof of superiority, TEA can still be considered the standard treatment for occlusive processes of the femoral artery bifurcation.