See clearly. Treat optimally.
Proven solutions for optimal patient outcomes.
The intersection of imaging and therapy
Our clinically proven peripheral vascular portfolio provides advanced imaging and specialized treatment options so you can effectively and efficiently maximize patient outcomes.
Demonstrated IVUS real-world results to improve patient outcomes2,3
83%
primary patency4
A recently published RCT comparing IVUS guided vs Angiography guided angioplasty for the outcomes of DCB in the treatment of Femoropopliteal artery disease demonstrated statistically significant better primary patency when IVUS was used (83.8% v 70.1%, p=0.01)
92.4%
freedom from CD-TLR4
A recently published RCT comparing IVUS guided vs Angiography guided angioplasty for the outcomes of DCB in the treatment of Femoropopliteal artery disease demonstrated statistically significant better freedom from CD-TLR when IVUS was used (92.4 v 83.0%, p=0.03)
89.1%
sustained clinical improvement4
A recently published RCT comparing IVUS guided vs Angiography guided angioplasty for the outcomes of DCB in the treatment of Femoropopliteal artery disease demonstrated statistically significant better sustained clinical improvement when IVUS was used (89.1 v 76.3%, p=0.02)
IVUS changed 57% of venous treatment plans5
In VIDIO, in 35 patients IVUS changed plan from no treatment to stent placement; in 13 patients it changed number of stents planned; in 6 patients it changed plan from no treatment to other intervention; in 3 patients it changed plan from treatment to no treatment.5
Phoenix Mechanical Atherectomy System. The safe, simple and effective choice.
Phoenix treats a broad range of tissue types, from soft plaque to calcified arteries, and can be used for lesions above and below the knee.6,7 Phoenix presents proven clinical evidence in over 1,000 patients resulting in <1% symptomatic distal embolization with no filter used. 8-14
AngioSculpt Scoring Balloon Catheter. Scoring means results.
Rectangular scoring edges lock the device in place and are designed to drive outward expansion with up to ~15–25 times the force of a conventional balloon15. AngioSculpt has low dissection rates and minimal perforations16,17
Quick-Cross Support Catheter. The support you need to handle complex lesions
Hydrophilic coating and low profile tapered tip for crossing challenging lesions
Tack Endovascular System. Optimizing PTA with precision dissection repair.
Tack provides a focal treatment which limits healthy tissue coverage and preserves future treatment options 18-22. It presents low metal burden and low chronic outward force and allows treatment above and below-the-knee.23,24
“Anytime I go inside a blood vessel, I use intravascular ultrasound …the quality of my intervention goes up significantly.”
Bryan T. Fisher Sr., MD
Vascular Surgeon
HCA Healthcare
Nashville, Tennessee
Footnotes
[1] Mechanism and Implementation of Catheter-Based Ultraviolet Photoablation, Christopher Reiser, Ph.D [16] Kiesz RS, Scheinert D, Peeters PJ, et al. Results from the international registry of the AngioSculpt Scoring Balloon Catheter for the treatment of infrapopliteal disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;51:10 (suppl B);75.
[2] Divakaran S, Meissner MH, Kohi MP, et al. Utilization of and Outcomes Associated with Intravascular Ultrasound during Deep Venous Stent Placement among Medicare Beneficiaries. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2022;33(12):1476-1484.e2. doi:10.1016/j.jvir.2022.08.018
[3] Divakaran S, Parikh SA, Hawkins BM, et al. Temporal Trends, Practice Variation, and Associated Outcomes With IVUS Use During Peripheral Arterial Intervention. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2022;15(20):2080-2090. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2022.07.050
[4] Allan R, Puckridge P, Spark J, et al. The Impact of Intravascular Ultrasound on Femoropopliteal Artery Endovascular Interventions. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2022 Mar, 15 (5) 536–546. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2022.01.001
[5] Gagne PG, TaharaRW, FastabendCP,etal. Venography versus intravascular ultrasound for diagnosing and treating iliofemoral vein obstruction. J VascSurg:Venousand LymDis 2017;5:678-87.
[6] Monitor flow of excised material into the disposal reservoir during operation of the Catheter. If flow of excised material ceases during the procedure, this is a sign that the Catheter drive system (cutter, torque shaft, or Handle motor drive) may not be operating properly.
[7] The Phoenix atherectomy 1.5 mm tracking catheter is indicated for vessels of 2.0 mm in diameter or above, the 1.8 mm tracking catheter is indicated for vessels 2.5 mm in diameter or above. The Phoenix 2.2 mm tracking and deflected as well as the 2.4 mm deflecting catheters are indicated for vessels of 3.0 mm in diameter or above. While the 1.5mm and 1.8 tracking as well as the 2.2 mm tracking and deflecting catheters are indicated for femoral, popliteal, or distal arteries located below the knee, the Phoenix 2.4 mm deflecting catheter is indicated for femoral and popliteal only. Refer to product IFU for detailed instructions.
[8] Davis T, Ramaiah V, Niazi K, Martin Gissler H, Crabtree T. Safety and effectiveness of the Phoenix atherectomy system in lower extremity arteries: Early and midterm outcomes from the prospective multicenter EASE study. Vascular. 2017 Dec;25(6):563-575
[9] Gandini R, A Single-Center Experience With Phoenix Atherectomy System in Patients With Moderate to ©2021 Heavily Calcified Femoropopliteal Lesions, Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine 21 (2020), 676–681
[10] Giusca S, Safety, effectiveness and mid-term follow-up in 136 consecutive patients with moderate to severely calcified lesions undergoing phoenix atherectomy, Heart and Vessels, Oct 2020
[11] Janas A, Comparison of long-term outcomes after directional versus rotational atherectomy in peripheral artery disease, Adv Interv Cardiol 2020; 16, 1 (59): 76–81
[12] Giusca S, Hagstotz S, Lichtenberg M, Heinrich U, Eisenbach C, Andrassy M, Korosoglou G. Phoenix atherectomy for patients with peripheral artery disease. EuroIntervention. 2022 Aug 5;18(5):e432-e442. doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-21-01070. PMID: 35389346.
[13] Shishehbor et al. Acute Real-World Outcomes From the Phoenix Post-Approval Registry. J Invasive Cardiol. 2022 Jan;34(1):E1-E7. Epub 2021 Dec 19/
[14] Kumarasamy A, Gombert A, Krabbe J, Ruprecht O, Jacobs MJ, Krabbe H. Assessment of Feasibility and Patency of below the Knee Atherectomy Using the 1.5 mm Phoenix Catheter-A Retrospective Study. Medicina (Kaunas). 2022 Nov 3;58(11):1594. doi: 10.3390/medicina58111594. PMID: 36363551; PMCID: PMC9699591.
[15] AngioSculpt Test Plan ST-1197 (2008), on file at Philips.
[17] Scheinert D, Peeters P, Bosiers M, et al. Results of the multicenter first-in-man study of a novel scoring balloon catheter for the treatment of infra-popliteal peripheral arterial disease. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2007;70:1034-1039.
[18] Geraghty PJ, Adams GL, Schmidt A, Lichtenberg M, Wissgott C, Armstrong EJ, Hertting K, on behalf of the TOBA II BTK Investigators. "Twelve-month results of Tack-optimized balloon angioplasty using the Tack Endovascular System in below-the-knee arteries (TOBA II BTK)." Journal of Endovascular Therapy 27.4 (2020): 626-636.
[19] Gray WA, Cardenas JA, Brodmann M et al. Treating post-angioplasty dissection in the femoropopliteal arteries using the Tack Endovascular System: 12-month results from the TOBA II study. JACC Cardiovascular Interventions 12.2 (2019): 75-84.
[20] Brodmann M, Wissgott C, Brechtel K, et al. Optimized drug-coated balloon angioplasty of the superficial femoral and proximal popliteal arteries using the Tack Endovascular System: TOBA III 12-month results. J Vasc Surg. 2020; S0741-5214(20)30330-X.
[21] Adams GL, Lichtenberg M, Wissgott C, et al. Twenty-Four Month Results of Tack-Optimized Balloon Angioplasty Using the Tack Endovascular System in Below-the-Knee Arteries. Journal of Endovascular Therapy. 2023;30(3):393-400. 22. Adams GL. TOBA II BTK 36m Results. New Cardiovascular Horizons (NCVH). New Orleans, LA (2022)
[23] Bosiers M, Scheinert D, Hendriks JMH et al. Results from the Tack Optimized Balloon Angioplasty (TOBA) study demonstrate the benefits of minimal metal implants for dissection repair after angioplasty. J Vasc Surg 2016;64:109-16. 24. Schneider PA, Giasolli R, Ebner A et al. Early experimental and clinical experience with a focal implant for lower extremity post-angioplasty dissection. J Amer Col Cardiol Intv 2015 Feb;8(2):347-354.
Disclaimers
Always read the label and follow the directions for use. Philips medical devices should only be used by physicians and teams trained in interventional techniques, including training in the use of this device.
Products subject to country availability. Please contact your local sales representative. ©2024 Koniklijke Philips N.V. All rights reserved. Trademarks are the property of Koninklijke Philips N.V. or their respective owners. Philips reserves the right to change product specifications without prior notification.
