uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
PTFE bypass or thrupass for superficial femoral artery occlusion?: A randomised controlled trial
Show others and affiliations
2009 (English)In: European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, ISSN 1078-5884, E-ISSN 1532-2165, Vol. 37, no 5, 578-584 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Early results of a thrupass endograft in the treatment of femoral lesions are promising. Less morbidity and better cost-effectiveness are suggested to be achieved in the treatment of chronic lower limb ischaemia with endovascular treatment compared to surgical treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This randomised multicentre trial aimed to enroll a group of 60+60 patients for the treatment of 5-25-cm occlusions of superficial femoral artery (SFA) to be followed up for 3 years. Patients were treated either with endoluminal PTFE thrupass (WL Gore & Ass) or with surgical polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) bypass to proximal popliteal artery. Primary patency at 3 years was scheduled to be the primary end-point and secondary patency, functional success, costs and quality of life the secondary end-points. RESULTS: A sample of 100 consecutive SFA occlusions in one of the centres revealed that only 4% of the lesions were amenable for the study. The trial was prematurely terminated due to the results of an interim analysis at the time when 44 patients were recruited: the 1-year primary patency (excluding technical failures) was 48% for thrupass and 95% for bypass (p=0.02). The patency difference in favour of surgical bypass over endovascular thrupass was also sustained after completion of 1-year follow-up, the primary patencies being 46% and 84% at 1 year with grossly equilinear life-table curves thereafter (p=0.18), respectively. The corresponding secondary patencies were 63% and 100% (p=0.05) when excluding technical failures and 58% and 100% (p=0.02) according to intention-to-treat analysis. Secondary outcomes were thus not analysed. CONCLUSION: Treatment of SFA occlusions (TASC IIB and C or Imelda Ia and II) should be done by PTFE bypass rather than by PTFE thrupass, as thrupass is connected with worse early outcome. These results represent only a small category of femoral disease.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2009. Vol. 37, no 5, 578-584 p.
National Category
Medical and Health Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-110116DOI: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2009.01.003PubMedID: 19231250OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-110116DiVA: diva2:275250
Available from: 2009-11-04 Created: 2009-11-04 Last updated: 2017-12-12Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed
By organisation
Vascular Surgery
In the same journal
European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery
Medical and Health Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 435 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf