Literature DB >> 27575813

The accuracy and cost-effectiveness of strategies used to identify peripheral artery disease among patients with diabetic foot ulcers.

Neal R Barshes1, Everardo Flores2, Michael Belkin3, Panos Kougias4, David G Armstrong5, Joseph L Mills4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Patients with diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) should be evaluated for peripheral artery disease (PAD). We sought to estimate the overall diagnostic accuracy for various strategies that are used to identify PAD in this population.
METHODS: A Markov model with probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses was used to simulate the clinical events in a population of 10,000 patients with diabetes. One of 14 different diagnostic strategies was applied to those who developed DFUs. Baseline data on diagnostic accuracy of individual noninvasive tests were based on a meta-analysis of previously reported studies. The overall sensitivity and cost-effectiveness of the 14 strategies were then compared.
RESULTS: The overall sensitivity of various combinations of diagnostic testing strategies ranged from 32.6% to 92.6%. Cost-effective strategies included ankle-brachial indices for all patients; skin perfusion pressures (SPPs) or toe-brachial indices (TBIs) for all patients; and SPPs or TBIs to corroborate normal pulse examination findings, a strategy that lowered leg amputation rates by 36%. Strategies that used noninvasive vascular testing to investigate only abnormal pulse examination results had low overall diagnostic sensitivity and were weakly dominated in cost-effectiveness evaluations. Population prevalence of PAD did not alter strategy ordering by diagnostic accuracy or cost-effectiveness.
CONCLUSIONS: TBIs or SPPs used uniformly or to corroborate a normal pulse examination finding are among the most sensitive and cost-effective strategies to improve the identification of PAD among patients presenting with DFUs. These strategies may significantly reduce leg amputation rates with only modest increases in cost. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27575813     DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2016.04.056

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


  7 in total

Review 1.  Noninvasive Arterial Testing: What and When to Use.

Authors:  Derek Mittleider
Journal:  Semin Intervent Radiol       Date:  2019-02-05       Impact factor: 1.513

2.  Utility of perioperative skin perfusion pressure measurement for treatment of ulcers caused by arteriovenous access ischaemic steal.

Authors:  Daisuke Atomura; Junko Aihara; Makoto Omori; Hiroto Terashi
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2018-01-22       Impact factor: 3.315

Review 3.  Australian guideline on diagnosis and management of peripheral artery disease: part of the 2021 Australian evidence-based guidelines for diabetes-related foot disease.

Authors:  Vivienne Chuter; Frank Quigley; Patrik Tosenovsky; Jens Carsten Ritter; James Charles; Jane Cheney; Robert Fitridge
Journal:  J Foot Ankle Res       Date:  2022-07-05       Impact factor: 3.050

Review 4.  Promoting Limb Salvage through Multi-Disciplinary Care of the Diabetic Patient.

Authors:  Nichol L Salvo; Mark D Walsh; Luke P Brewster
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2017-07

5.  Cost-effectiveness analysis of asymptomatic peripheral artery disease screening with the ABI test.

Authors:  Nathan K Itoga; Hataka R Minami; Meenadachi Chelvakumar; Keon Pearson; Matthew M Mell; Eran Bendavid; Douglas K Owens
Journal:  Vasc Med       Date:  2018-01-18       Impact factor: 3.239

6.  Cost-Effectiveness of Hypochlorous Acid Preserved Wound Cleanser versus Saline Irrigation in Conjunction with Ultrasonic Debridement for Complex Wounds.

Authors:  Peter J Mallow; John M Hiebert; Martin C Robson
Journal:  J Health Econ Outcomes Res       Date:  2021-11-01

7.  Coadministration of DPP-4 inhibitor and insulin therapy does not further reduce the risk of cardiovascular events compared with DPP-4 inhibitor therapy in diabetic foot patients: a nationwide population-based study.

Authors:  Yi-Hsuan Lin; Yu-Yao Huang; Yi-Ling Wu; Cheng-Wei Lin; Pei-Chun Chen; Chee Jen Chang; Sheng-Hwu Hsieh; Jui-Hung Sun; Szu-Tah Chen; Chia-Hung Lin
Journal:  Diabetol Metab Syndr       Date:  2018-10-17       Impact factor: 3.320

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.