Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 28, 2025

Predicting Amputation using Local Circulating Mononuclear Progenitor Cells in Angioplasty-treated Patients with Critical Limb Ischemia
Published on: September 22, 2020
Outcomes of Peripheral Vascular Interventions via Retrograde Pedal Access for Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia in a
Mark Perry1, Peter W Callas2, Matthew J Alef1
1University of Vermont Medical Center, Burlington, VT, USA.
Insights
Retrograde pedal access for chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) shows similar technical success and early complications compared to femoral access. However, pedal access had higher major adverse limb events (MALE) but comparable amputation-free survival (AFS) at one year.
Area of Science:
- Vascular Surgery
- Interventional Cardiology
- Peripheral Vascular Interventions
Background:
- Chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) poses significant risks of limb loss and mortality.
- Peripheral vascular interventions (PVI) are crucial for limb salvage in CLTI patients.
- Retrograde pedal access is an alternative approach for PVI when traditional access is challenging.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the utilization and one-year outcomes of retrograde pedal access in PVI for CLTI.
- To compare retrograde pedal access with traditional contralateral retrograde femoral access.
Main Methods:
- Analysis of 159 patients undergoing PVI via retrograde pedal access from the VQI registry (Oct 2016-Sep 2017).
- Propensity-matched comparison with 156 patients undergoing PVI with contralateral retrograde femoral access.
- Comparison of technical success, access site complications, major adverse limb events (MALE), and amputation-free survival (AFS) at 1 year.
Main Results:
- Technical success rates were similar between retrograde pedal access (87%) and femoral access (93%) (p=0.07).
- Early access site complications were rare and comparable between groups.
- One-year MALE rates were higher with pedal access (38%) versus femoral access (24%) (p=0.01), while AFS was similar (83% vs 86%, p=0.37).
Conclusions:
- Retrograde pedal access demonstrates comparable technical success and early safety to femoral access for CLTI patients.
- While MALE rates are higher with pedal access, amputation-free survival remains similar.
- This suggests a potential tradeoff between limb salvage and the need for repeat interventions with pedal access.
Abstract:
Purpose: To describe the use and 1-year outcomes of retrograde pedal access during peripheral vascular interventions (PVI) for chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI). Materials and Methods: From October 2016 to September 2017, 159 patients (mean age 71±10 years; 112 men) undergoing PVI via retrograde pedal access were enrolled in the multicenter Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) registry. The pedal access approach included retrograde femoral (40%), antegrade femoral (26%), retrograde to antegrade femoral (22%), and pedal only (11%). A comparator group of 1972 patients (mean age 69±12 years; 1129 men) having a contralateral retrograde femoral access was established for propensity matching, which resulted in 156 patients per group. Procedure characteristics, technical success, and access site complications were compared. Major adverse limb events (MALE) and amputation-free survival (AFS) at 1 year were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazard models to calculate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: Technical failure was similar for retrograde femoral and pedal access (7% vs 13%, p=0.07). Complications were rare and included access site hematoma (2 vs 5, p=0.32) and target artery thrombosis (0 vs 2) for the femoral vs pedal access groups, respectively. The rates of MALE at 1 year were significantly lower after retrograde femoral access (24%) compared with pedal access (38%; log-rank p=0.01; HR 1.95, 95% CI 1.15 to 3.30). AFS estimates at 1 year were similar: 86% for retrograde femoral and 83% for pedal access (log-rank p=0.37; HR 1.32, 95% CI 0.73 to 2.39), as were major amputation estimates: 10% for retrograde femoral access and 13% for pedal access group (log-rank p=0.21; HR 1.58, 95% CI 0.77 to 3.26). Conclusion: In this analysis of multicenter registry data, retrograde pedal access in patients with CLTI had similar technical success and early complications in comparison with traditional contralateral retrograde femoral access. The rates of MALE were higher after pedal access but AFS was similar, indicating a tradeoff between limb salvage and repeat interventions.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Peripheral Artery Disease III: Interprofessional Care
Peripheral Arterial Disease II: Clinical Manifestations and Diagnostic Evaluation
Peripheral Artery Disease V: Postoperative Nursing Management
Peripheral Artery Disease IV: Nursing Management
Peripheral Artery Disease I: Introduction
Varicose Veins II: Diagnostic Studies and Interprofessional Care

