Moritz S Bischoff1, K Meisenbacher2, A S Peters2, D Weber3, T Bisdas4,5, G Torsello4,5, D Böckler2. 1. Department of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. moritz.bischoff@med.uni-heidelberg.de. 2. Department of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. 3. Institute of Medical Biometry and Informatics, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. 4. Department of Vascular Surgery, St. Franziskus Hospital Münster GmbH, Münster, Germany. 5. Department of Vascular Surgery, University Clinic of Münster, Münster, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the significance of perioperative changes in ankle-brachial index (ABI) with regard to extremity-related outcome in non-diabetic patients with critical limb ischemia (CLI) following revascularization. METHODS: The study represents a subanalysis of the multicentric Registry of First-line Treatment in Patients with CLI (CRITISCH). After exclusion of diabetic patients, conservative cases, and primary major amputation, 563 of 1200 CRITISCH patients (mean age 74 ± 10.7 years) were analyzed. This population was divided into two groups regarding perioperative ABI changes ∆ + 0.15 (Group 1) or ∆ - 0.15 (Group 2). Study endpoints were reintervention and major amputation during a mean follow-up of 14.6 ± 9 months. Logistic regression was performed in order to identify factors for ABI group affiliation. RESULTS: There were 279 patients in Group 1 (49.5%) and 284 in Group 2 (51.5%). ABI sensitivity and specificity regarding vessel patency were calculated to be 54 and 87%. A preoperative ABI ≤ 0.4 [odds ratio (OR) 7.7], patent vessels at discharge (OR 12.2), and secondary interventions (OR 2.4) were identified as factors for Group 1 affiliation. Contrariwise, previous revascularization (OR 0.6), a glomerular filtration rate ≤ 15 ml/min/1.73 m2 (OR 0.3), and TASC A lesions (OR 0.2) were associated with Group 2 affiliation. No statistical difference was found with regard to the need of reintervention. However, time to reintervention was significantly shorter in Group 2 compared to that in Group 1 (10.0 ± 9.5 months vs 12.1 ± 9.1 months; p = 0.005). Amputation rate in Group 2 was 14.4%, significantly higher compared to that in Group 1 (6.0%; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Failure of perioperative ABI improvement is associated with a higher probability for amputation and should be valued as prognostic factor in non-diabetic patients with CLI. Patients with no/marginal improvement in ABI after revascularization require close follow-up monitoring and may benefit from early reintervention.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the significance of perioperative changes in ankle-brachial index (ABI) with regard to extremity-related outcome in non-diabeticpatients with critical limb ischemia (CLI) following revascularization. METHODS: The study represents a subanalysis of the multicentric Registry of First-line Treatment in Patients with CLI (CRITISCH). After exclusion of diabeticpatients, conservative cases, and primary major amputation, 563 of 1200 CRITISCH patients (mean age 74 ± 10.7 years) were analyzed. This population was divided into two groups regarding perioperative ABI changes ∆ + 0.15 (Group 1) or ∆ - 0.15 (Group 2). Study endpoints were reintervention and major amputation during a mean follow-up of 14.6 ± 9 months. Logistic regression was performed in order to identify factors for ABI group affiliation. RESULTS: There were 279 patients in Group 1 (49.5%) and 284 in Group 2 (51.5%). ABI sensitivity and specificity regarding vessel patency were calculated to be 54 and 87%. A preoperative ABI ≤ 0.4 [odds ratio (OR) 7.7], patent vessels at discharge (OR 12.2), and secondary interventions (OR 2.4) were identified as factors for Group 1 affiliation. Contrariwise, previous revascularization (OR 0.6), a glomerular filtration rate ≤ 15 ml/min/1.73 m2 (OR 0.3), and TASC A lesions (OR 0.2) were associated with Group 2 affiliation. No statistical difference was found with regard to the need of reintervention. However, time to reintervention was significantly shorter in Group 2 compared to that in Group 1 (10.0 ± 9.5 months vs 12.1 ± 9.1 months; p = 0.005). Amputation rate in Group 2 was 14.4%, significantly higher compared to that in Group 1 (6.0%; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Failure of perioperative ABI improvement is associated with a higher probability for amputation and should be valued as prognostic factor in non-diabeticpatients with CLI. Patients with no/marginal improvement in ABI after revascularization require close follow-up monitoring and may benefit from early reintervention.
Authors: Michal Tendera; Victor Aboyans; Marie-Louise Bartelink; Iris Baumgartner; Denis Clément; Jean-Philippe Collet; Alberto Cremonesi; Marco De Carlo; Raimund Erbel; F Gerry R Fowkes; Magda Heras; Serge Kownator; Erich Minar; Jan Ostergren; Don Poldermans; Vincent Riambau; Marco Roffi; Joachim Röther; Horst Sievert; Marc van Sambeek; Thomas Zeller Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2011-08-26 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Victor Aboyans; Michael H Criqui; Pierre Abraham; Matthew A Allison; Mark A Creager; Curt Diehm; F Gerry R Fowkes; William R Hiatt; Björn Jönsson; Philippe Lacroix; Benôit Marin; Mary M McDermott; Lars Norgren; Reena L Pande; Pierre-Marie Preux; H E Jelle Stoffers; Diane Treat-Jacobson Journal: Circulation Date: 2012-11-16 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: V Jacomella; A Shenoy; K Mosimann; M K Kohler; B Amann-Vesti; M Husmann Journal: Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg Date: 2013-02-28 Impact factor: 7.069
Authors: Victor Aboyans; Elena Ho; Julie O Denenberg; Lindsey A Ho; Loki Natarajan; Michael H Criqui Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2008-08-09 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Michael S Conte; Patrick J Geraghty; Andrew W Bradbury; Nathanael D Hevelone; Stuart R Lipsitz; Gregory L Moneta; Mark R Nehler; Richard J Powell; Anton N Sidawy Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2009-11-07 Impact factor: 4.268