BASIL-3: Balloon vs Stenting in Severe Ischaemia of the Leg

  • Research type

    Research Study

  • Full title

    Multi-centre randomised controlled trial of clinical and cost-effectiveness of drug coated balloons, drug eluting stents and plain balloon angioplasty with bail-out bare metal stent revascularisation strategies for severe limb ischaemia due to atherosclerotic femoro-popliteal, with or without infra-popliteal involvement, peripheral arterial disease

  • IRAS ID

    183761

  • Contact name

    Andrew Bradbury

  • Contact email

    andrew.bradbury@btinternet.com

  • Sponsor organisation

    University of Birmingham

  • Duration of Study in the UK

    5 years, 9 months, 1 days

  • Research summary

    Summary of Research

    One in every 1000-2000 people in the UK will be diagnosed with advanced cases of Severe Limb Ischemia (SLI) yearly. As a result of a combination of smoking, diabetes mellitus, high blood pressure, high cholesterol levels, kidney failure and the ageing process, some people develop atherosclerosis (aka ‘hardening’ of the arteries) in their legs. In SLI even minor injuries to the foot can fail to heal, resulting in the development of ulceration, even gangrene.
    Unless the blood supply to the leg and foot is improved, many people affected by SLI will lose their limb and/or die within 12 months. As well as causing great suffering, SLI places a large economic burden upon health (NHS) and social care services.
    Most SLI patients with disease in the femoro-popliteal arteries are treated by endovascular means, which involves opening up the diseased arteries with balloons and sometimes the use of metal tubes called stents. In recent years, a number of “advanced” endovascular technologies - drug eluting stent (DES) and drug coated balloons (DCB) - have become available but the evidence base for using these new technologies is weak and they are much more expensive than the traditional methods.

    The purpose of BASIL-3 is to determine which treatment is best at preventing amputation and death, getting the ulcers and gangrene to heal, and relieving pain in people with SLI. The costs of the 3 revascularisation strategies will be studied to see which offers the best value for money for the NHS.

    Summary of Results
    Chronic limb threatening ischaemia is the severest form of atherosclerotic peripheral arterial disease. This disease represents a growing global healthcare burden. Unless the blood supply to the leg is improved by a process called revascularisation, patients are at a high risk of amputation or death. There are different revascularisation methods, but no evidence on which is most effective. BASIL-3 is the only publicly funded randomised controlled trial to compare the clinical effectiveness of three revascularisation strategies. The methods compared were:
    • Plain balloon angioplasty with or without bare metal stenting (PBA +/- BMS)
    • Drug coated balloon angioplasty with or without bare metal stenting (DCBA +/- BMS)
    • Drug eluting stent
    Major amputation or death occurred in 66% of participants in the PBA +/- BMS group; in 60% of the DCBA+/-BMS group; and 58% in the DES group. No differences in serious adverse events were reported between the groups.
    The BASIL-3 trial concluded that neither DCBA+/-BMS nor DES had a significant clinical benefit over PBA+/-BMS in the femoro-popliteal segment in patients undergoing endovascular femoro-popliteal, with or without infra-popliteal, revascularisation.

    Published results: Bradbury, Andrew W et al (2025) BMJ 2025; 388:e080881
    https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdx.doi.org%2F10.1136%2Fbmj-2024%25E2%2580%2591080881&data=05%7C02%7Capprovals%40hra.nhs.uk%7Cac46b683d61947dd4da708dd58d07aa4%7C8e1f0acad87d4f20939e36243d574267%7C0%7C0%7C638764374620246593%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=XzocH1SODCxKNsCBUYB1Jbx54Q1z%2FqL4iwv39NCNWyQ%3D&reserved=0

  • REC name

    North of Scotland Research Ethics Committee 1

  • REC reference

    15/NS/0070

  • Date of REC Opinion

    26 Aug 2015

  • REC opinion

    Further Information Favourable Opinion