METHODS: A subgroup analysis was performed on the 24-month data comparing the Asian cohort (AC) to non-Asian cohort (NAC).
RESULTS: AC included 49 patients with 77 lesions. AC was significantly younger (65.6 vs 70.3 years, p < 0.05), had more diabetes (87.8% vs 45.3%, p < 0.05), and was more likely to present with CLTI (73.5% vs 35.3%, p < 0.001) compared to NAC. They had significantly longer mean target lesions (115 vs 86.9 mm, p = 0.006), and received significantly higher paclitaxel doses (10.7 vs 7.2 mg, p = 0.0005). Device, technical and procedural successes were 125/125(100%), 95/97(97.5%) and 45/49(91.8%), respectively. There was no significant difference in target lesion revascularization rates between groups (10.5% vs 12%, p = 0.91). However, the AC had more major adverse events (30.2% vs 16.1%, p = 0.001), amputations (26.3% vs 6.2%, p < 0.05) and mortality (37.9% vs 10.6%, p < 0.05) at 24 months.
CONCLUSION: Passeo-18 Lux™ use was efficacious in Asians, but was associated with higher adverse events, amputations and mortality rates, likely attributable to poorer patient comorbidities and more extensive PAD.