Tracy J Cheun1, Lalithapriya Jayakumar1, Maureen K Sheehan1, Matthew J Sideman1, Lori L Pounds1, Mark G Davies2. 1. Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Long School of Medicine, University of Texas Health at San Antonio, San Antonio, Tex; South Texas Center for Vascular Care, South Texas Medical Center, San Antonio, Tex. 2. Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Long School of Medicine, University of Texas Health at San Antonio, San Antonio, Tex; South Texas Center for Vascular Care, South Texas Medical Center, San Antonio, Tex. Electronic address: daviesm@uthscsa.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Critical hand ischemia owing to below-the-elbow atherosclerotic occlusive disease is relatively uncommon. The aim of this study was to examine the outcomes in patients presenting with critical ischemia owing to below-the-elbow arterial atherosclerotic disease who underwent nonoperative and operative management. METHODS: A database of patients undergoing operative and nonoperative management for symptomatic below-the-elbow atherosclerotic disease between 2006 and 2016 was retrospectively queried. Patients with critical ischemia (tissue loss and rest pain) were identified. Three management groups were identified: no revascularization (None), endovascular revascularization (Endo), and open revascularization by bypass (Bypass). Patients with acute embolism, active vasculitis, end-stage renal disease, ipsilateral dialysis access complications of steal, and ipsilateral trauma were excluded. RESULTS: One hundred eight patients (56% male; average age, 59 years) presented with symptomatic below-the-elbow disease: 93% presented with digital ulceration and the remainder with rest pain. Eighty-one percent had diabetes and 41% had chronic renal insufficiency (not on dialysis). All underwent catheter-based angiography. Fifty-three patients (49%) had no intervention and subsequently were committed to wound care; 26 of these required no further intervention, 10 had an interval palmar sympathectomy, and 17 underwent either a phalanx or digital amputation. Thirty-four patients (31%) underwent an endovascular intervention with a median of 1.5 vessels (ulnar, radial, or interosseous arteries) intervened on. Technical success was achieved in 29 patients (85%). Of the five technical failures, two went on to bypass, one had a focal endarterectomy and patch angioplasty, and one was treated conservatively. Ten patients in the Endo group required either a phalanx or digital amputation. Twenty-one patients (19%) underwent a saphenous vein bypass (reversed or nonreserved) to the radial in 12 and the ulnar in 11 limbs. In follow-up, 11 patients underwent open or endovascular intervention to maintain patency of the bypass. There were nine phalanx or digital amputations in the Bypass group. No below-the-elbow or above-the-elbow amputations were performed within 30 days. The wound healing rate without amputation was 78% (85 of 108). The predictors of wound healing were technical success of the revascularization, intact palmar arch and presence of digital run-off. The presence of an incomplete arch and poor digital run-off were associated with a phalanx or digital amputation. CONCLUSIONS: Upper extremity interventions for critical ischemia are associated with a high rate of success. Major amputations are rare and the many can be treated nonoperatively. In appropriately selected patients, both endovascular and open interventions have a high rate of success.
BACKGROUND: Critical hand ischemia owing to below-the-elbow atherosclerotic occlusive disease is relatively uncommon. The aim of this study was to examine the outcomes in patients presenting with critical ischemia owing to below-the-elbow arterial atherosclerotic disease who underwent nonoperative and operative management. METHODS: A database of patients undergoing operative and nonoperative management for symptomatic below-the-elbow atherosclerotic disease between 2006 and 2016 was retrospectively queried. Patients with critical ischemia (tissue loss and rest pain) were identified. Three management groups were identified: no revascularization (None), endovascular revascularization (Endo), and open revascularization by bypass (Bypass). Patients with acute embolism, active vasculitis, end-stage renal disease, ipsilateral dialysis access complications of steal, and ipsilateral trauma were excluded. RESULTS: One hundred eight patients (56% male; average age, 59 years) presented with symptomatic below-the-elbow disease: 93% presented with digital ulceration and the remainder with rest pain. Eighty-one percent had diabetes and 41% had chronic renal insufficiency (not on dialysis). All underwent catheter-based angiography. Fifty-three patients (49%) had no intervention and subsequently were committed to wound care; 26 of these required no further intervention, 10 had an interval palmar sympathectomy, and 17 underwent either a phalanx or digital amputation. Thirty-four patients (31%) underwent an endovascular intervention with a median of 1.5 vessels (ulnar, radial, or interosseous arteries) intervened on. Technical success was achieved in 29 patients (85%). Of the five technical failures, two went on to bypass, one had a focal endarterectomy and patch angioplasty, and one was treated conservatively. Ten patients in the Endo group required either a phalanx or digital amputation. Twenty-one patients (19%) underwent a saphenous vein bypass (reversed or nonreserved) to the radial in 12 and the ulnar in 11 limbs. In follow-up, 11 patients underwent open or endovascular intervention to maintain patency of the bypass. There were nine phalanx or digital amputations in the Bypass group. No below-the-elbow or above-the-elbow amputations were performed within 30 days. The wound healing rate without amputation was 78% (85 of 108). The predictors of wound healing were technical success of the revascularization, intact palmar arch and presence of digital run-off. The presence of an incomplete arch and poor digital run-off were associated with a phalanx or digital amputation. CONCLUSIONS: Upper extremity interventions for critical ischemia are associated with a high rate of success. Major amputations are rare and the many can be treated nonoperatively. In appropriately selected patients, both endovascular and open interventions have a high rate of success.
Authors: Ghassan Awad El-Karim; Sean A Kennedy; Roberto Ferraresi; Jamil A K Addas; George D Oreopoulos; Arash Jaberi; Kong Teng Tan; Sebastian Mafeld Journal: J Endovasc Ther Date: 2021-10-08 Impact factor: 3.089