Part 6/Chapter 37/9-min read

Femoropopliteal Occlusive Disease

Femoropopliteal occlusive disease framed by the patient's limb problem rather than the device cabinet: claudication versus limb threat, medical therapy and structured exercise as first-line, and the durability gap between intervention modalities. The chapter frames endovascular, surgical, and conduit choice for the femoropopliteal segment.

Edited by Tal M. Hörer MD, PhD · David T. McGreevy MD, PhD·Version 1 · Last published ·5 sections · 26 references

Revision history

Listen to this chapter13 min · AI audio edition · two hostsAI narration

Choose a chapter overview or a specialist discussion. Each recording follows this published edition.

General medical education, not patient-specific advice.

Choose an audio edition

Definition and clinical presentation

Femoropopliteal occlusive disease presents either as functionally limiting or chronic limb-threatening ischemia (). Claudication is characterized by exertional limitation, and revascularization is indicated only after an inadequate response to medical therapy and structured exercise . CLTI is a severe disease state characterized by or tissue loss, where intervention is indicated to achieve limb salvage rather than simply reproduce exertional symptom relief.

For a broader account of biology, disability and the evidence behind treatment, see the review by Nordanstig and colleagues. The randomized studies below address particular procedures and outcomes rather than replacing this broader disease context .

Evaluation and risk stratification

Evaluation of femoropopliteal disease requires objective documentation of peripheral artery disease and baseline limb threat staging. A resting of 0.90 or lower is diagnostic of peripheral artery disease; an index above 1.40 indicates noncompressible, medially calcified vessels, and toe pressure or transcutaneous oximetry is substituted . Hemodynamic confirmation of chronic limb-threatening ischemia in a patient with ischemic rest pain typically requires an ankle pressure below 50 mmHg or a toe pressure below 30 mmHg . For CLTI, management requires integrating patient risk, limb severity, and anatomic complexity, formalized as the framework. The system grades limb threat. The system stages the target arterial path for infrainguinal disease and requires angiographic assessment; it is not inferred from clinical symptoms alone.

Preprocedural conduit mapping is mandatory for CLTI planning. The availability of an adequate single-segment great saphenous vein fundamentally alters expected surgical outcomes and revascularization strategy .

Management thresholds and procedural selection

Medical therapy and supervised exercise are first-line management for claudication. Supervised exercise therapy is walking to moderate-to-maximum claudication in sessions of 30 to 45 minutes, at least three times weekly, for a minimum of 12 weeks . Best medical therapy comprises antiplatelet monotherapy, a high-intensity statin, and smoking cessation; cilostazol 100 mg twice daily improves walking distance in claudication but is contraindicated in heart failure of any severity, and after revascularization low-dose rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily plus aspirin reduces adverse limb and cardiovascular events (VOYAGER PAD). Revascularization is reserved for functionally limiting symptoms refractory to conservative care.

When to choose endovascular treatment or bypass. In claudication, first establish persistent functional limitation despite medical treatment and structured exercise. Favor a lower-burden endovascular option when its expected durability is acceptable; consider bypass for complex disease when operative risk, vein quality and anticipated functional benefit justify it. The 2017 25-cm boundary is historical guidance, not an isolated contemporary decision rule. ESVS 2024 recommends individual assessment of long, heavily calcified femoropopliteal occlusions and prefers autologous vein when bypass is performed .

For CLTI, assess the entire target path, operative risk and conduit. BEST-CLI supports bypass in patients suitable for either strategy who have adequate single-segment great saphenous vein, for the composite of major adverse limb events or death—not a separately demonstrated survival benefit . An infrapopliteal target does not automatically override that assessment: the BEST-CLI tibial subgroup and BASIL-2 have different primary endpoints and results . When suitable is absent, alternative autologous vein, endovascular treatment and selected nonautologous bypass require individualized comparison. Prosthetic bypass is not categorically confined to above-knee targets, but outcomes are less favorable for distal reconstruction than with good-quality vein .

Femoropopliteal revascularization pathways

  • Claudication refractory to conservative care

    Factors favoring an option
    Suitable anatomy, acceptable expected durability and lower procedural burden
    Selection
    Endovascular treatment is a reasonable option
    Citation

  • Claudication refractory to conservative care

    Factors favoring an option
    Complex disease, acceptable operative risk and usable vein
    Selection
    Consider bypass after comparison with endovascular durability and recovery
    Citation

  • CLTI, adequate single-segment GSV

    Factors favoring an option
    Both strategies feasible; durable wound-directed perfusion required
    Selection
    Bypass often favored, but integrate patient risk and target quality
    Citation

  • CLTI, no adequate GSV or elevated operative risk

    Factors favoring an option
    Feasible endovascular path or usable alternative conduit
    Selection
    Individualized endovascular/alternative-conduit decision
    Citation

  • CLTI requiring tibial intervention

    Factors favoring an option
    Patient risk, vein, runoff and complete target path
    Selection
    Neither bypass-first nor endovascular-first follows from the tibial location alone
    Citation

The stepwise decision logic for severe femoropopliteal occlusive disease is:

  1. Intervention is considered only after confirmed inadequate response to medical therapy and structured exercise for claudication, or following objective documentation of peripheral artery disease with CLTI signs.
  2. Limb threat is graded using , and anatomic complexity is staged using GLASS for CLTI.
  3. Preprocedural vein-conduit imaging determines single-segment great saphenous vein adequacy.
  4. Compare endovascular and bypass feasibility along the entire target path; a short lesion, absent suitable vein or elevated operative risk may favor endovascular treatment, but tibial location alone does not decide the modality.
  5. Consider vein bypass when durable perfusion is needed, a suitable conduit and target are available, and the patient can tolerate the operation; document the expected benefit and alternatives.

An unsalvageable limb or a non-ambulatory patient with limited life expectancy may warrant primary amputation or palliation rather than revascularization (detailed in the amputation chapter) .

CLTI and severe limb ischemia landmark trials

  • Severe infrainguinal limb ischemia (BASIL, n=452)

    Comparison
    Surgery-first versus angioplasty-first
    Key results and effect size
    Similar amputation-free survival at 6 months (HR 1.07; 95% CI 0.72 to 1.6); 55% alive without amputation at end of follow-up; surgery costs one-third higher in year 1.
    Citation

  • CLTI with infrapopliteal target (BASIL-2, n=345)

    Comparison
    Endovascular-first versus vein-bypass-first
    Key results and effect size
    Endovascular-first lowered major amputation or death (adjusted HR 1.35 favoring endovascular; P=0.037); deaths were 53% for bypass-first and 45% for endovascular-first.
    Citation

  • CLTI with adequate single-segment GSV (BEST-CLI Cohort 1, n=1,420)

    Comparison
    Bypass-first versus endovascular-first
    Key results and effect size
    Bypass-first reduced the composite of major adverse limb event or death (42.6% vs 57.4%; HR 0.68; 95% CI 0.59 to 0.79; P < 0.001).
    Citation

  • CLTI lacking adequate single-segment GSV (BEST-CLI Cohort 2, n=393)

    Comparison
    Bypass-first versus endovascular-first
    Key results and effect size
    No significant difference in composite endpoint (42.8% vs 47.7%; HR 0.79; 95% CI 0.58 to 1.06; P=0.12).
    Citation

Post-revascularization surveillance evaluates sustained functional benefit in claudication and limb salvage status in CLTI. Outcome measures, including primary patency, target-lesion revascularization, major adverse limb events, and amputation-free survival, follow standardized endpoint reporting guidelines .

Endovascular device selection

Device selection is tailored to lesion complexity and intended failure mode. Drug-coated balloon angioplasty and paclitaxel-eluting stents demonstrate durable antiproliferative benefit over standard balloon angioplasty in superficial femoral and popliteal disease . For mechanically demanding zones, such as the distal superficial femoral and proximal popliteal segments, interwoven nitinol stents provide high patency with mechanical fracture resistance . Adjunctive devices, including rotational atherectomy and embolic protection systems, are used for complex or heavily calcified infrainguinal lesions, though atherectomy patency declines predictably over long-term follow-up .

Femoropopliteal endovascular device performance

  • Clinical outcomes: SWEDEPAD 1, 2025

    Intervention and target
    Paclitaxel-coated versus uncoated infrainguinal devices in CLTI; 2355 analyzed
    Trial outcome at designated interval
    No reduction in ipsilateral major amputation: HR 1.05 (0.87–1.27), median follow-up 2.67 years
    Citation

  • Clinical outcomes: SWEDEPAD 2, 2025

    Intervention and target
    Coated versus uncoated devices in claudication; 1136 analyzed, predominantly femoropopliteal
    Trial outcome at designated interval
    No one-year VascuQoL-6 benefit; five-year mortality HR 1.47 (1.09–1.98), but complete-follow-up HR 1.18 (0.94–1.48)
    Citation

  • Paclitaxel-coated balloon (IN.PACT SFA, n=331)

    Intervention and target
    DCB versus standard PTA in symptomatic SFA/popliteal disease
    Trial outcome at designated interval
    Superior 12-month primary patency (82.2% vs 52.4%; P < 0.001) and lower clinically driven target-lesion revascularization (2.4% vs 20.6%; P < 0.001).
    Citation

  • Paclitaxel-coated balloon (LEVANT 2, n=476)

    Intervention and target
    DCB versus standard PTA in symptomatic SFA/popliteal disease
    Trial outcome at designated interval
    Higher 12-month primary patency (65.2% vs 52.6%; P=0.02) with no significant difference in target-lesion revascularization.
    Citation

  • Paclitaxel-eluting stent (Zilver PTX)

    Intervention and target
    versus standard endovascular therapy in symptomatic femoropopliteal disease
    Trial outcome at designated interval
    Superior 5-year clinical benefit (79.8% vs 59.3%; P < 0.01), patency (66.4% vs 43.4%; P < 0.01), and freedom from target-lesion revascularization (83.1% vs 67.6%; P < 0.01); 40% relative risk reduction for restenosis.
    Citation

  • Interwoven nitinol stent (SUPERB, n=264)

    Intervention and target
    Stenting for symptomatic and proximal popliteal disease
    Trial outcome at designated interval
    78.9% per-protocol and 86.3% Kaplan-Meier 12-month primary patency; zero core-lab-confirmed fractures among 243 evaluated stents; >= 1 Rutherford class improvement in 88.7% of patients.
    Citation

  • Rotational atherectomy (Jetstream, n=150)

    Intervention and target
    Atherectomy plus adjunctive therapy for complex infrainguinal PAD
    Trial outcome at designated interval
    Primary patency of 84.1%, 68.1%, and 58.5% at 1, 3, and 5 years, with lesion complexity predicting long-term failure.
    Citation

Areas of controversy

The 2018 meta-analysis raised a late mortality concern after paclitaxel-coated femoropopliteal devices; this remains important historical context . The NEJM SWEDEPAD report was an interim safety analysis published in 2020. The separate final CLTI and claudication reports appeared in The Lancet in 2025 . Their patient-centered outcomes should be considered alongside, not replaced by, device-specific patency results.

For intermittent claudication, the 2026 ESVS focused update emphasizes exercise and medical therapy and limits consideration of paclitaxel technologies to selected restenosis after discussion of uncertain long-term safety and modest symptomatic benefit . This is claudication-specific clinical guidance, not a statement that every paclitaxel device is prohibited or that the same recommendation applies to CLTI.

The definitive ranking of devices by territory remains unsettled. Single-center and real-world cohorts indicate varying restenosis rates and scoring-balloon performance across iliac, superficial femoral, and popliteal segments, but definitive standard-of-care superiority requires further randomized evaluation .

Further reading

  • Safety of paclitaxel-coated devices in patients with peripheral artery disease: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. (2026). Femoropopliteal drug-device safety context; pooled mortality findings do not erase 2026 guideline restrictions.

References

  1. 1.
    2024 ACC/AHA/AACVPR/APMA/ABC/SCAI/SVM/SVN/SVS/SIR/VESS Guideline for the Management of Lower Extremity Peripheral Artery Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2024.
    PubMed-indexed articleClinical practice guideline2024

    2024 ACC/AHA/AACVPR/APMA/ABC/SCAI/SVM/SVN/SVS/SIR/VESS Guideline for the Management of Lower Extremity Peripheral Artery Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2024. doi:10.1161/cir.0000000000001251.

    PubMedDOISource
  2. 2.
    Global Vascular Guidelines on the Management of Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2019.
    DOI publisher routeClinical practice guideline2019

    Global Vascular Guidelines on the Management of Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2019. doi:10.1016/j.ejvs.2019.05.006.

    DOISource
  3. 3.
    Surgery or Endovascular Therapy for Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia. N Engl J Med. 2022.
    PubMed-indexed articleRandomized controlled trial2022

    Surgery or Endovascular Therapy for Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia. N Engl J Med. 2022. doi:10.1056/nejmoa2207899.

    PubMedDOI
  4. 4.
    2017 ESC Guidelines on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Peripheral Arterial Diseases, in collaboration with the European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS): Document covering atherosclerotic disease of extracranial carotid and vertebral, mesenteric, renal, upper and lower extremity arteriesEndorsed b. Eur Heart J. 2018.
    DOI publisher routeClinical practice guideline2017

    2017 ESC Guidelines on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Peripheral Arterial Diseases, in collaboration with the European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS): Document covering atherosclerotic disease of extracranial carotid and vertebral, mesenteric, renal, upper and lower extremity arteriesEndorsed b. Eur Heart J. 2018. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehx095.

    DOI
  5. 5.
    BASIL-2 (Bradbury et al, Lancet 2023).
    DOI publisher routeRandomized controlled trial2023

    BASIL-2 (Bradbury et al, Lancet 2023). doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(23)00462-2.

    PubMedDOISource
  6. 6.
    BASIL trial (Bradbury et al, Lancet 2005).
    PubMed-indexed articleRandomized controlled trial2005

    BASIL trial (Bradbury et al, Lancet 2005). doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67704-5.

    PubMedDOISource
  7. 7.
    SVS Reporting Endo PAD 2016.
    PubMed-indexed article2016

    SVS Reporting Endo PAD 2016. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2016.03.432. PMID:27345507.

    PubMedDOI
  8. 8.
    IN.PACT SFA (Tepe et al, Circulation 2015).
    AHARandomized controlled trial2015

    IN.PACT SFA (Tepe et al, Circulation 2015). doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.114.011004.

    PubMedDOISource
  9. 9.
    Trial of a Paclitaxel-Coated Balloon for Femoropopliteal Artery Disease. (2015) DOI: 10.1056/nejmoa1406235
    PubMed-indexed articleRandomized controlled trial2015
    PubMedDOI
  10. 10.
    Zilver PTX 5-year (Dake et al, Circulation 2016).
    AHARandomized controlled trial2016

    Zilver PTX 5-year (Dake et al, Circulation 2016). doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.115.016900.

    PubMedDOISource
  11. 11.
    SUPERB trial (Garcia et al, Circ Cardiovasc Interv 2015).
    AHARegistry / cohort2015

    SUPERB trial (Garcia et al, Circ Cardiovasc Interv 2015). doi:10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.113.000937.

    PubMedDOISource
  12. 12.
    Three-year outcomes of a prospective, multicenter study of rotational atherectomy with antirestenotic therapy for infrainguinal arterial disease. Ann Surg Treat Res. 2026.
    DOI publisher routeRegistry / cohort2026

    Three-year outcomes of a prospective, multicenter study of rotational atherectomy with antirestenotic therapy for infrainguinal arterial disease. Ann Surg Treat Res. 2026. doi:10.4174/astr.2026.110.3.180.

    DOISource
  13. 13.
    A novel technique for preventing distal embolism during endovascular therapy for femoropopliteal lesions: The flow-controlled anti-embolic technique. J Vasc Surg Cases Innov Tech. 2026.
    PubMed-indexed article2026

    A novel technique for preventing distal embolism during endovascular therapy for femoropopliteal lesions: The flow-controlled anti-embolic technique. J Vasc Surg Cases Innov Tech. 2026. doi:10.1016/j.jvscit.2026.102229.

    PubMedDOISource
  14. 14.
    Risk of Death Following Application of Paclitaxel-Coated Balloons and Stents in the Femoropopliteal Artery of the Leg: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. J Am Heart Assoc. 2018.
    PubMed-indexed articleMeta-analysis / systematic review2018

    Risk of Death Following Application of Paclitaxel-Coated Balloons and Stents in the Femoropopliteal Artery of the Leg: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. J Am Heart Assoc. 2018. doi:10.1161/jaha.118.011245.

    PubMedDOISource
  15. 15.
    Safety of paclitaxel-coated devices in patients with peripheral artery disease: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. EClinicalMedicine. 2026.
    PubMed-indexed articleMeta-analysis / systematic review2026

    Safety of paclitaxel-coated devices in patients with peripheral artery disease: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. EClinicalMedicine. 2026. doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2026.103881.

    PubMedDOISource
  16. 16.
    Territory- and Lesion-Specific Endovascular Strategies in Lower Limb Peripheral Artery Disease: A Cohort Study. J Cardiovasc Dev Dis. 2026.
    PubMed-indexed articleRegistry / cohort2026

    Territory- and Lesion-Specific Endovascular Strategies in Lower Limb Peripheral Artery Disease: A Cohort Study. J Cardiovasc Dev Dis. 2026. doi:10.3390/jcdd13010029.

    PubMedDOISource
  17. 17.
    A Case of Scoring Site Shift of a Novel Scoring Balloon in a Femoropopliteal Arterial Lesion. Cureus. 2026.
    PubMed-indexed articleCase report2026

    A Case of Scoring Site Shift of a Novel Scoring Balloon in a Femoropopliteal Arterial Lesion. Cureus. 2026. doi:10.7759/cureus.103875.

    PubMedDOISource
  18. 18.
    Klinkert P, Post PN, Breslau PJ, van Bockel JH. Saphenous vein versus PTFE for above-knee femoropopliteal bypass. A review of the literature. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2004;27(4):357-362.
    PubMed-indexed article2004

    Klinkert P, Post PN, Breslau PJ, van Bockel JH. Saphenous vein versus PTFE for above-knee femoropopliteal bypass. A review of the literature. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2004;27(4):357-362. doi:10.1016/j.ejvs.2003.12.027.

    PubMedDOI
  19. 19.
    Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) - A challenging manifestation of atherosclerosis 2023-06; online 2023-04-07.
    PubMed-indexed article2023

    Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) - A challenging manifestation of atherosclerosis 2023-06; online 2023-04-07. doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2023.107489.

    PubMedDOI
  20. 20.
    Editor's Choice - European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) 2024 Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Management of Asymptomatic Lower Limb Peripheral Arterial Disease and Intermittent Claudication 2024; online 2023-11-10.
    PubMed-indexed article2024

    Editor's Choice - European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) 2024 Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Management of Asymptomatic Lower Limb Peripheral Arterial Disease and Intermittent Claudication 2024; online 2023-11-10. doi:10.1016/j.ejvs.2023.08.067.

    PubMedDOISource
  21. 21.
    Surgery or endovascular therapy for patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia requiring infrapopliteal interventions 2024-06-21 online; 2024-11 issue.
    PubMed Central2024

    Surgery or endovascular therapy for patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia requiring infrapopliteal interventions 2024-06-21 online; 2024-11 issue. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2024.05.049.

    PubMedDOISource
  22. 22.
    Prosthetic conduits have worse outcomes compared with great saphenous vein conduits in femoropopliteal and infrapopliteal bypass in patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia 2025-02; online 2024-09-23.
    PubMed-indexed article2025

    Prosthetic conduits have worse outcomes compared with great saphenous vein conduits in femoropopliteal and infrapopliteal bypass in patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia 2025-02; online 2024-09-23. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2024.09.016.

    PubMedDOI
  23. 23.
    Paclitaxel-coated versus uncoated devices for infrainguinal endovascular revascularisation in chronic limb-threatening ischaemia (SWEDEPAD 1): a multicentre, participant-masked, registry-based, randomised controlled trial 2025-08-31 online; 2025-09-13 issue.
    PubMed-indexed article2025

    Paclitaxel-coated versus uncoated devices for infrainguinal endovascular revascularisation in chronic limb-threatening ischaemia (SWEDEPAD 1): a multicentre, participant-masked, registry-based, randomised controlled trial 2025-08-31 online; 2025-09-13 issue. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(25)01585-5.

    PubMedDOI
  24. 24.
    Paclitaxel-coated versus uncoated devices for infrainguinal endovascular revascularisation in intermittent claudication (SWEDEPAD 2): a multicentre, participant-masked, registry-based, randomised controlled trial 2025-08-31 online; 2025-09-13 issue.
    PubMed-indexed article2025

    Paclitaxel-coated versus uncoated devices for infrainguinal endovascular revascularisation in intermittent claudication (SWEDEPAD 2): a multicentre, participant-masked, registry-based, randomised controlled trial 2025-08-31 online; 2025-09-13 issue. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(25)01584-3.

    PubMedDOI
  25. 25.
    Mortality with Paclitaxel-Coated Devices in Peripheral Artery Disease 2020-12.
    PubMed-indexed article2020

    Mortality with Paclitaxel-Coated Devices in Peripheral Artery Disease 2020-12. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2005206.

    PubMedDOI
  26. 26.
    Editor's Choice - Focused Update on Paclitaxel Coated Technologies, from the 2024 European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) Guidelines on the Management of Asymptomatic Peripheral Arterial Disease and Intermittent Claudication 2026-05-18 online; 2026-06 issue.
    PubMed-indexed article2024

    Editor's Choice - Focused Update on Paclitaxel Coated Technologies, from the 2024 European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) Guidelines on the Management of Asymptomatic Peripheral Arterial Disease and Intermittent Claudication 2026-05-18 online; 2026-06 issue. doi:10.1016/j.ejvs.2026.04.037.

    PubMedDOI

Educational use only

AI assists this editorial workflow. Published updates are human-reviewed before publication.

Not intended to diagnose, monitor, predict, prognose, treat, or alleviate disease.

Verify clinically relevant information against primary sources and current guidelines.

AI DisclosurePrivacyTermsCautions
Updates and feedback

You are reading the published chapter.

What has changed

Loading the change history…

Report a problem