Literature DB >> 21514777

Outcomes after endovascular intervention for chronic critical limb ischemia.

Monica S O'Brien-Irr1, Hasan H Dosluoglu, Linda M Harris, Maciej L Dryjski.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated outcomes after endovascular intervention (EVI) for chronic critical limb ischemia (CLI) by Rutherford category (RC) 4, rest pain; and 5, tissue loss.
METHODS: The medical records of all EVI performed for RC-4 to RC-5 by vascular surgeons at a single institution during a 3-year period were reviewed for sustained clinical success (SCS), defined as Rutherford improvement score (RIS) 2(+), without target extremity revascularization (TER). The RC-5 group was evaluated for patency until healing and healing ≤4 months without recurrence or new ulceration. Secondary sustained clinical success (SSCS) was a RIS of 2(+) with TER. The RC-5 group was evaluated for patency until healing and healing at any time during follow-up, without recurrent or new ulceration. Significance was established at the 0.05 level.
RESULTS: Of 106 EVI performed for CLI, 78 (74%) were RC-5. There were 39 (37%) men. Mean age was 73 ± 12 years. Mean follow-up was 19 months (range, 1-44 months). RC-5 patients were significantly more likely than RC-4 to be diabetic (58% vs 32%; P = .020), dialysis dependent (14% vs 0%; P = .036), and to require distal EVI (53% vs 29%; P = .029). RC-4 patients were more likely to be current smokers (57% vs 32%; P = .023). At 24 months, survival was comparable, with RC-4 at 84% ± 8% vs RC-5 at 62% ± 7% (P = .09), but limb salvage was significantly better for RC-4 (100%) vs RC-5 (83% ± 4%; P = .026), as was SCS (48% vs 21%; P = .006) and SSCS (85% vs 39%; P < .001). Independent predictors of failed SSCS were diabetes (odds ratio [OR], 2.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07-7.46; P = .036), congestive heart failure (CHF; OR, 3.62; 95% CI, 1.19-10.99; P = .023), and RC-5 (OR, 5.5; 95% CI, 2.4-30.3; P = .001). SSCS was 94% in RC-4 patients without diabetes mellitus (DM) or CHF and 10% in RC-5 with DM or CHF (P < .001) but improved to 67% in RC-5 when neither CHF nor DM were present (P = .004).
CONCLUSIONS: RC-4 have fewer comorbidities, less advanced ischemia, and better outcome than RC-5. These groups should be evaluated individually. Limb salvage was acceptable, yet early wound healing without TER (SCS) occurred in only 21%. RC-5, DM, and CHF were predictors of poor SSCS. Careful selection of patients should improve outcome.
Copyright © 2011 Society for Vascular Surgery. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21514777     DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2011.01.068

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Vasc Surg        ISSN: 0741-5214            Impact factor:   4.268


  8 in total

1.  Sex-Related Differences in the Outcomes of Endovascular Interventions for Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia: Results from the LIBERTY 360 Study.

Authors:  Stefanos Giannopoulos; Nicolas W Shammas; Ian Cawich; Cezar S Staniloae; George L Adams; Ehrin J Armstrong
Journal:  Vasc Health Risk Manag       Date:  2020-07-08

2.  The current role of endovascular intervention in the management of diabetic peripheral arterial disease.

Authors:  Benjamin J Pearce; Boulos Toursarkissian
Journal:  Diabet Foot Ankle       Date:  2012-10-01

3.  Primary infragenicular angioplasty for diabetic neuroischemic foot ulcers following the angiosome distribution: a new paradigm for the vascular interventionist?

Authors:  Vlad Alexandrescu; Gerard Hubermont
Journal:  Diabetes Metab Syndr Obes       Date:  2011-08-22       Impact factor: 3.168

4.  Endovascular reconstruction of popliteal and infrapopliteal arteries for limb salvage and wound healing in patients with critical limb ischemia - A retrospective analysis.

Authors:  Uday B Khanolkar; Biju Ephrem
Journal:  Indian Heart J       Date:  2016-01-18

5.  One-Year Outcomes of Peripheral Endovascular Device Intervention in Critical Limb Ischemia Patients: Sub-Analysis of the LIBERTY 360 Study.

Authors:  Jihad A Mustapha; Zsuzsanna Igyarto; David O'Connor; Ehrin J Armstrong; Anthony R Iorio; Vickie R Driver; Fadi Saab; Ann N Behrens; Brad J Martinsen; George L Adams
Journal:  Vasc Health Risk Manag       Date:  2020-02-10

6.  Intradialytic hypotension is an important risk factor for critical limb ischemia in patients on hemodialysis.

Authors:  Ryo Matsuura; Sumi Hidaka; Takayasu Ohtake; Yasuhiro Mochida; Kunihiro Ishioka; Kyoko Maesato; Machiko Oka; Hidekazu Moriya; Shuzo Kobayashi
Journal:  BMC Nephrol       Date:  2019-12-19       Impact factor: 2.388

7.  Long-term Clinical Outcomes and Prognostic Factors After Endovascular Treatment in Patients With Chronic Limb Threatening Ischemia.

Authors:  Jung-Joon Cha; Jong-Youn Kim; Hyoeun Kim; Young-Guk Ko; Donghoon Choi; Jae-Hwan Lee; Chang-Hwan Yoon; In-Ho Chae; Cheol Woong Yu; Seung Whan Lee; Sang-Rok Lee; Seung Hyuk Choi; Yoon Seok Koh; Pil-Ki Min
Journal:  Korean Circ J       Date:  2022-02-10       Impact factor: 3.101

8.  Clinical characteristics of patients with Rutherford category IV, compared with V and VI.

Authors:  Taketsugu Tsuchiya; Osamu Iida; Tatsuya Shiraki; Yoshimitsu Soga; Keisuke Hirano; Kenji Suzuki; Terutoshi Yamaoka; Yusuke Miyashita; Michihiko Kitayama; Koji Kajinami
Journal:  SAGE Open Med       Date:  2015-07-22
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.