Br J Surg. 2025 Nov 6;112(11):znaf251. doi: 10.1093/bjs/znaf251.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: In recent years there have been a plethora of new endovascular devices have entered the market, including paclitaxel (PTX) drug-coated balloons (DCB) and drug-eluting stents (DES) for treating patients with chronic limb-threatening ischaemia (CLTI). There have been concerns that the use of PTX is associated with increased all-cause mortality rate in this patient population.
METHODS: In the BASIL-3 trial (ISRCTN14469736) UK patients with CLTI were randomized (1:1:1) to receive femoro-popliteal (FP) plain balloon angioplasty (PBA; with or without bailout bare metal stenting (BMS), DCB angioplasty (DCBA) (with or without BMS), or primary DES. Here, data from the DCBA and DES arms have been pooled into a single ‘drug technologies’ (DT) group and compared with PBA ± BMS. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes included amputation-free survival (AFS), major amputations, major adverse limb events, major adverse cardiovascular events, reinterventions, and 30-day mortality and morbidity rates.
RESULTS: Four hundred and eighty-one participants were randomized (PBA: n = 160; DT: n = 321). At a median follow-up in survivors of 5.6 years, OS was similar between the pooled DT and PBA groups (adjusted hazard ratio (HR): 0.83; 95% c.i.: 0.64 to 1.07). There was no evidence of a statistically significant difference in AFS between the groups (adjusted HR: 0.84; 95% c.i.: 0.66 to 1.06), or other secondary outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: This further pooled analysis of the BASIL-3 RCT does not support the notion that the use of drug-eluting technologies, when compared to plain balloon angioplasty, increases all-cause mortality rate, or has other clinically important adverse effects, when used in patients with CLTI.
PMID:41276786 | DOI:10.1093/bjs/znaf251
