Surgical Bypass vs. Zilver PTX stent for long SFA lesions : Interim results of the ZilverPass Trial

Transcription

1 Surgical Bypass vs. Zilver PTX stent for long SFA lesions : Interim results of the ZilverPass Trial Dr. Koen Deloose Head of Vascular Surgery AZ Sint-Blasius Dendermonde Belgium

2 Disclosure slide Speaker name: Koen Deloose, MD I have the following potential conflicts of interest to report: Consulting: Medtronic, Spectranetics, Biotronik, Abbott, Bard ivascular, Bentley, Cook, GE Healthcare Employment in industry Stockholder of a healthcare company Owner of a healthcare company Other(s) I do not have any potential conflict of interest

3 Patencies Zilver PTX LONG LESIONS Mean lesion length (mm) N = patients n = lesions 1yr PPR (%) PSVR ( V r) = PSV (jet) / PSV (prox segment) PSVR value (duplex US) Zilver PTX premarket SAS complex lesions Zilver PTX premarket SAS complex lesions Subcohort TASC C & D PSVR : 300/80 = 3,75 Zilver PTX Japanese PMS all comers 100,0 + 80,2 N = 787 n = ,0 + 44,0 PSV prox segment Zilver PTX LL registry 189,3 + 91,1 140,7 + 90,7 N = 907 n = ,2 <2,5 N = 134 n = ,6 <2,5 PSV jet N = 45 n = 45 Dake MD et al. J Endovasc Ther 2011;18: Bosiers M et al. J CardiVasc Surg 2013;54: ,4 <2,4 Yokoi H et al. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv 2016;9(3): ,1 <2,0 Presented byt LINC 2014, Leipzig, Germany

4 Patencies Zilver PTX LONG LESIONS PSVR ( V r) = PSV (jet) / PSV (prox segment) Mean lesion length (mm) N = patients n = lesions 1yr PPR (%) PSVR value (duplex US) Zilver PTX premarket SAS complex lesions Zilver PTX premarket SAS complex lesions Subcohort TASC C & D Zilver PTX Japanese PMS all comers 100,0 + 80,2 N = 787 n = ,0 + 44,0 Zilver PTX LL registry 189,3 + 91,1 140,7 + 90,7 N = 907 n = ,2 <2,5 N = 134 n = ,6 <2,5 N = 45 n = 45 Dake MD et al. J Endovasc Ther 2011;18: Bosiers M et al. J CardiVasc Surg 2013;54: ,4 <2,4 Yokoi H et al. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv 2016;9(3): ,1 <2,0 Presented byt LINC 2014, Leipzig, Germany

5 Patencies prosthetic bypass ATK First Author/yr Study type Population 1 yr Primary Patency McQuade et al/2009 J Vasc Surg 2009;49: Kedora J et al/ 2007 J Vasc Surg 2009;49: Jensen L et al/2007 Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2007 ;34:44-49 Pereira C et al/2006 J Vasc Surg 2006;44:510-7 Prospective, randomized (stentgraft vs prosthetic ATK bypass) Prospective, randomized (stentgraft vs prosthetic ATK bypass) Prospective, randomized (Dacron vs PTFE ATK bypass) Meta-analysis (subgroup ATKprosthetic) Rutherford R et al. JVS 1997 (Sept);26(3): patients/100 limbs (1:1 RCT) 86 patients/100 limbs (1:1 RCT) 413 patients (216 Dacron vs 210 PTFE) Stentgraft : 72% Bypass : 77% Stentgraft : 73,5% Bypass 74,2% Dacron : 78% PTFE : 72% 3357 patients Claudicants : 85,3% CLI : 76,3%

6 Difference in Primary Patency definition Surgical Assessing flow through the bypass: open or closed? Endovascular Absence of binary restenosis (PSV 2.0 ; 2,4 ; 2,5) Analysis of PSVR in 100 surgical, primary patent bypasses Total (N=100) Binary restenosis (N= 11)(PSVR >2,4) F-P F-P2 0 0 F-P F-tibial

7 Let us randomize with the same assessment methods! ZILVERPASS STUDY : The Zilver PTX (Cook ) versus bypass surgery for the treatment of femoropopliteal TASC C&D lesions

8 Let us randomize with the same assessment methods! prospective, multicenter, randomized 1:1 randomization 220 patients Tasc C & D lesions Zilver PTX Absence of binary restenosis/ occlusion within treated lesion (CFDU PSVR < 2,4) Without TLR within 12 months Belgium, Germany, Italy, Brazil PRIMARY ENDPOINT Surgical bypass Absence of binary restenosis/ proximal/distal anastomoses/over the entire length of bypass graft (CFDU PSVR < 2,4) Without clinically driven reintervention to restore flow in bypass

9 Let us randomize with the same assessment methods! TIME LINE screen proc disch 1 M 6 M 12 M 24 M Patient informed consent In- / exclusion criteria check Medical / clinical history Medication Physical examination Rutherford ABI Regular Angiography Regular Duplex Ultrasound Core Lab Duplex Ultrasound Adverse Events 191 patients enrolled!

10 Let us randomize with the same assessment methods! Patient demographics Preliminary 115 patients Gender Rutherford Baseline Total ZILVER PTX BYPASS Signific Female 35 (30.4%) 17 (30.36%) 18 (30.51%) Male 80 (69.5%) 39 (69.64%) 41 (69.49%) 2 11 (9.57%) 8 (14.29%) 3 (5.08%) 3 65 (56.52%) 33 (58.93%) 32 (54.24%) 4 16 (13.91%) 4 (7.14%) 12 (20.34%) 5 23 (20.00%) 11 (19.64%) 12 (20.34%) Missing Age (years) P =

11 Let us randomize with the same assessment methods! Lesion characteristics Preliminary 115 patients Stenosis % ; ± SD Lesion Length Mm ; ± SD ABI Baseline ± SD Total ZILVER PTX BYPASS Signific ± 3.89 (N=115) ± (N=115) ± 0.15 (N=115) ± 4.16 (N=56) ± (N=56) ± 0.14 (N=52) ± 3.65 (N=59) ± (N=59) ± 0.17 (N=53) P = P = P = Procedural characteristics Total ZILVER PTX BYPASS Signific Duration Procedure Minutes ; ± SD ± (N=112) ± (N=54) ± (N= 58) P <

12 Let us randomize with the same assessment methods! Preliminary 115 patients 77,4 % 67.8% 73.6 % 67.8% ZILVER PTX BYPASS Baseline 30 days 6MFU 12MFU D365 12MFU D-395 Tar % Tar % P =

13 Let us randomize with the same assessment methods! Preliminary 115 patients 84.6 % 74.4 % 84.6 % 74.4 % ZILVER PTX BYPASS Baseline 30 days 6MFU 12MFU D365 12MFU D-395 Tar % Tar % P =

14 Conclusions Zilver PTX is obtaining outstanding primary patencies, also in long & more complex SFA lesions Patency analysis in these study cohorts are based on (relatively) objective CFDU PSVR assessments Maybe Prosthetic Bypass results are not that great in terms of patency, as we, vascular surgeons, always considered, especially when you use an endovascular CFDU PSVR based patency assessment Randomized controled trials, like the ZILVERPASS, with the same assessments and methodologies in both arms need to clarify the situation. Preliminary results in 115 patients show at least a non-inferiority of Zilver PTX versus prosthetic bypass surgery ATK

15 Surgical Bypass vs. Zilver PTX stent for long SFA lesions : Interim results of the ZilverPass Trial Dr. Koen Deloose Head of Vascular Surgery AZ Sint-Blasius Dendermonde Belgium