Invasiveness of previous treatment for peripheral arterial disease and risk of adverse cardiac events after coronary stenting

Tineke H. Pinxterhuis, Clemens von Birgelen, Robert H. Geelkerken, Carine J.M. Doggen, Theo P. Menting, K. Gert van Houwelingen, Gerard C.M. Linssen, Eline H. Ploumen*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

26 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Patients with peripheral arterial disease (PADs), undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), have higher adverse event risks. The effect of invasiveness of PADs treatment on PCI outcome is unknown. This study assessed the impact of the invasiveness of previous PADs treatment (invasive or non-invasive) on event risks after PCI with contemporary drug-eluting stents. This post-hoc analysis pooled 3-year patient-level data of PCI all-comer patients living in the eastern Netherlands, previously treated for PADs. PADs included symptomatic atherosclerotic lesion in the lower or upper extremities; carotid or vertebral arteries; mesenteric arteries or aorta. Invasive PADs treatment comprised endarterectomy, bypass surgery, percutaneous transluminal angioplasty, stenting or amputation; non-invasive treatment consisted of medication and participation in exercise programs. Primary endpoint was (coronary) target vessel failure: composite of cardiac mortality, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, or clinically indicated target vessel revascularization. Of 461 PCI patients with PADs, information on PADs treatment was available in 357 (77.4%) patients; 249 (69.7%) were treated invasively and 108 (30.3%) non-invasively. Baseline and PCI procedural characteristics showed no between-group difference. Invasiveness of PADs treatment was not associated with adverse event risks, including target vessel failure (20.5% vs. 16.0%; HR: 1.30, 95%-CI 0.75–2.26, p = 0.35), major adverse cardiac events (23.3% vs. 20.4%; HR: 1.16, 95%-CI 0.71–1.90, p = 0.55), and all-cause mortality (12.1% vs. 8.3%; HR: 1.48, 95%-CI 0.70–3.13, p = 0.30). In PADs patients participating in PCI trials, we found no significant relation between the invasiveness of previous PADs treatment and 3-year outcome after PCI. Consequently, high-risk PCI patients can be identified by consulting medical records, searching for PADs, irrespective of the invasiveness of PADs treatment. Graphical abstract: (Figure presented.) Comparison of patients with non-invasive and invasive PADs treatment. PADs peripheral arterial disease, PCI percutaneous coronary intervention.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)173-182
Number of pages10
JournalCardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics
Volume39
Issue number2
Early online date14 Feb 2024
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Apr 2024

Keywords

  • Coronary artery disease
  • Drug-eluting stent
  • Percutaneous coronary intervention
  • Peripheral arterial disease
  • UT-Hybrid-D

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Invasiveness of previous treatment for peripheral arterial disease and risk of adverse cardiac events after coronary stenting'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this