OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of atherectomy for limb salvage compared with open bypass in patients with critical limb ischemia. METHODS: Ninety-nine consecutive bypass and atherectomy procedures performed for critical limb ischemia between January 2003 and October 2006 were reviewed. RESULTS: A total of 99 cases involving TASC C (n = 43, 44%) and D (n = 56, 56%) lesions were treated with surgical bypass in 59 patients and atherectomy in 33 patients. Bypass and atherectomy achieved similar 1-year primary patency (64% vs 63%; P = .2). However, the 1-year limb salvage rate was greater in the bypass group (87% vs 69%; P = .004). In the tissue loss subgroup, there was a greater limb salvage rate for bypass patients versus atherectomy (79% vs 60%; P = .04). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with critical limb ischemia may do better with open bypass compared with atherectomy as first-line therapy for limb salvage.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of atherectomy for limb salvage compared with open bypass in patients with critical limb ischemia. METHODS: Ninety-nine consecutive bypass and atherectomy procedures performed for critical limb ischemia between January 2003 and October 2006 were reviewed. RESULTS: A total of 99 cases involving TASC C (n = 43, 44%) and D (n = 56, 56%) lesions were treated with surgical bypass in 59 patients and atherectomy in 33 patients. Bypass and atherectomy achieved similar 1-year primary patency (64% vs 63%; P = .2). However, the 1-year limb salvage rate was greater in the bypass group (87% vs 69%; P = .004). In the tissue loss subgroup, there was a greater limb salvage rate for bypass patients versus atherectomy (79% vs 60%; P = .04). CONCLUSIONS:Patients with critical limb ischemia may do better with open bypass compared with atherectomy as first-line therapy for limb salvage.
Authors: L Norgren; W R Hiatt; J A Dormandy; M R Nehler; K A Harris; F G R Fowkes; Kevin Bell; Joseph Caporusso; Isabelle Durand-Zaleski; Kimihiro Komori; Johannes Lammer; Christos Liapis; Salvatore Novo; Mahmood Razavi; Johns Robbs; Nicholaas Schaper; Hiroshi Shigematsu; Marc Sapoval; Christopher White; John White; Denis Clement; Mark Creager; Michael Jaff; Emile Mohler; Robert B Rutherford; Peter Sheehan; Henrik Sillesen; Kenneth Rosenfield Journal: Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg Date: 2006-11-29 Impact factor: 7.069
Authors: Shoaib Shafique; Ryan D Nachreiner; Michael P Murphy; Dolores F Cikrit; Alan P Sawchuk; Michael C Dalsing Journal: Semin Vasc Surg Date: 2007-03 Impact factor: 1.000
Authors: W Brent Keeling; Murray L Shames; Patrick A Stone; Paul A Armstrong; Brad L Johnson; Martin R Back; Dennis F Bandyk Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2007-01 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Venkatesh Ramaiah; Roger Gammon; Stefan Kiesz; Joseph Cardenas; John Paul Runyon; Peter Fail; Craig Walker; David E Allie; Jack Chamberlin; Maurice Solis; Lawrence Garcia; David Kandzari Journal: J Endovasc Ther Date: 2006-10 Impact factor: 3.487
Authors: Michael S Conte; Dennis F Bandyk; Alexander W Clowes; Gregory L Moneta; Hamid Namini; Lynn Seely Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2005-09 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: William A Marston; Stephen W Davies; Brian Armstrong; Mark A Farber; Robert C Mendes; Joseph J Fulton; Blair A Keagy Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2006-07 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: W Brent Keeling; Patrick A Stone; Paul A Armstrong; Heather Kearney; Lisa Klepczyk; Elizabeth Blazick; Martin R Back; Brad L Johnson; Dennis F Bandyk; Murray L Shames Journal: J Endovasc Ther Date: 2006-08 Impact factor: 3.487
Authors: Andrea E Yancey; David J Minion; Christian Rodriguez; Donald E Patterson; Eric D Endean Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2006-09 Impact factor: 4.268