C Uhl1, C Hock2, T Betz2, S Bröckner2, I Töpel2, M Steinbauer2. 1. Department of Vascular Surgery, Krankenhaus Barmherzige Brüder Regensburg, Prüfeningerstraße 86, 93049 Regensburg, Germany. Electronic address: christian.uhl@barmherzige-regensburg.de. 2. Department of Vascular Surgery, Krankenhaus Barmherzige Brüder Regensburg, Prüfeningerstraße 86, 93049 Regensburg, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Endovascular recanalization has become the accepted first-line treatment strategy for most lower extremity arterial occlusions, especially in patients with critical limb ischemia (Rutherford 4-6). Prior endovascular interventions have been described as risk factors for the outcome of subsequent lower extremity bypass surgery. The effect on subsequent tibial and peroneal bypasses is controversial. We analyzed the impact of prior endovascular lower extremity revascularization procedures on the short- and mid-term results of femoro-tibial and femoro-peroneal bypasses. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted of all patients who had undergone tibial or peroneal bypass surgery after prior endovascular interventions (PEI-Group, n=40) of the same extremity in our department from October 2007 to October 2012. We compared this group with a group of patients who had received a tibial or peroneal bypass as primary revascularization procedure (BF-Group, n=93) during the same period of time because primary endovascular therapy had been deemed unfeasible in those cases. Indication in all cases was critical limb ischemia; the median age was 78 years (range 50-90 years), 45.1% were diabetics, and 42.9% were female. The graft material was autologous vein in 80 cases and HePTFE in 53 cases. Endpoints of the analysis were primary and secondary patency rates, limb salvage and survival at 2 years postoperatively. RESULTS: At 2 years overall primary patency was 68.4%, secondary patency was 69.5%, limb salvage was 83.6% and survival was 62.6%. Primary patency for the BF-Group was 74.3% vs. 55.1% for the PEI-Group (P=.310) at 2 years; secondary patency was 74.6% vs. 59.1% (P=.268). Prior endovascular intervention did not have any significant effects on limb salvage (83.7% vs. 83.6%; P=.470) or survival rates (61.0% vs. 65.0%; P=.258) at the 2-year mark, either. There were no significant differences in graft occlusion, death and major amputation rates within the first 30 postoperative days. Except for male gender, there were no significant differences in risk factors and indications between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Prior endovascular intervention of femoro-tibial vessels does not have a negative impact on the outcome of subsequent tibial or peroneal bypass surgery in patients with critical limb ischemia.
BACKGROUND: Endovascular recanalization has become the accepted first-line treatment strategy for most lower extremity arterial occlusions, especially in patients with critical limb ischemia (Rutherford 4-6). Prior endovascular interventions have been described as risk factors for the outcome of subsequent lower extremity bypass surgery. The effect on subsequent tibial and peroneal bypasses is controversial. We analyzed the impact of prior endovascular lower extremity revascularization procedures on the short- and mid-term results of femoro-tibial and femoro-peroneal bypasses. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted of all patients who had undergone tibial or peroneal bypass surgery after prior endovascular interventions (PEI-Group, n=40) of the same extremity in our department from October 2007 to October 2012. We compared this group with a group of patients who had received a tibial or peroneal bypass as primary revascularization procedure (BF-Group, n=93) during the same period of time because primary endovascular therapy had been deemed unfeasible in those cases. Indication in all cases was critical limb ischemia; the median age was 78 years (range 50-90 years), 45.1% were diabetics, and 42.9% were female. The graft material was autologous vein in 80 cases and HePTFE in 53 cases. Endpoints of the analysis were primary and secondary patency rates, limb salvage and survival at 2 years postoperatively. RESULTS: At 2 years overall primary patency was 68.4%, secondary patency was 69.5%, limb salvage was 83.6% and survival was 62.6%. Primary patency for the BF-Group was 74.3% vs. 55.1% for the PEI-Group (P=.310) at 2 years; secondary patency was 74.6% vs. 59.1% (P=.268). Prior endovascular intervention did not have any significant effects on limb salvage (83.7% vs. 83.6%; P=.470) or survival rates (61.0% vs. 65.0%; P=.258) at the 2-year mark, either. There were no significant differences in graft occlusion, death and major amputation rates within the first 30 postoperative days. Except for male gender, there were no significant differences in risk factors and indications between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Prior endovascular intervention of femoro-tibial vessels does not have a negative impact on the outcome of subsequent tibial or peroneal bypass surgery in patients with critical limb ischemia.
Authors: Thomas C F Bodewes; Klaas H J Ultee; Peter A Soden; Sara L Zettervall; Katie E Shean; Douglas W Jones; Frans L Moll; Marc L Schermerhorn Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2017-02-09 Impact factor: 4.268