The Current Use of Drug-Eluting Balloons and Stents in Peripheral Arterial Disease: An Online Survey by the Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe (CIRSE)

• Published in: Cardiovascular and interventional radiology Vol. 46; no. 12; pp. 1743 - 1747
• Main Authors: Morgan, Robert A., Müller-Hülsbeck, Stefan, Fanelli, Fabrizio, Haage, Patrick, Hamady, Mohamad, Loffroy, Romaric, O’Sullivan, Gerard, Wolf, Florian, Slijepčević, Birgit
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: New York Springer US 01.12.2023; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Angioplasty, Balloon - methods; Arterial Interventions; Availability; Balloon treatment; Cardiology; Cardiovascular system; Coated Materials, Biocompatible; Devices; Drug delivery; Drug-Eluting Stents; Europe; Femoral Artery; Hospitals; Humans; Imaging; Implants; Medical equipment; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Meta-analysis; Mortality; Mortality risk; Nuclear Medicine; Paclitaxel; Paclitaxel - therapeutic use; Peripheral Arterial Disease - diagnostic imaging; Peripheral Arterial Disease - therapy; Popliteal Artery; Radiology; Response rates; Short Communication; Stents; Surveys; Treatment Outcome; Ultrasound; Europe; Current practice; Paclitaxel-coated balloons; Member survey; Paclitaxel-eluting stents; Drug-eluting devices
• ISSN: 0174-1551; 1432-086X
• DOI: 10.1007/s00270-023-03562-3

Purpose To assess the current use of drug-eluting devices for peripheral arterial disease (PAD) among interventional radiologists following the controversy caused by the 2018 meta-analysis suggesting an increased mortality risk for paclitaxel-eluting devices. Methods An anonymous survey was sent to 7035 CIRSE members via email; only complete responses were included and statistically analysed. Results Three hundred and seven members (4.4%) completed the survey. Among these, 95.8% indicated that they personally perform peripheral vascular procedures. Thirty-eight percentage of respondents did not see any change of practice since 2018, while 47% reported that the use of drug-eluting devices decreased; for 13%, the use stopped altogether, while it increased in 3% of responses. 45.6% of respondents also felt the impact of the controversy in terms of pricing, availability or directives from hospital administration. A large majority of respondents (83.7%) who perform peripheral vascular procedures consider the use of these devices as safe, 12.9% were undecided and 3.4% did not consider them as safe. Among the respondents who do not perform endovascular procedures, 77% considered these devices as safe and 23% were undecided. Conclusion Although the 2018 meta-analysis had a disruptive impact on the use of drug-eluting devices in PAD, with the increasing body of evidence available, a majority of respondents continue to believe in the safety of these devices for use in femoropopliteal disease. Graphical Abstract