Miguel Montero-Baker1, Alejandro Zulbaran-Rojas2, Jayer Chung3, Neal R Barshes3, Hector Elizondo-Adamchik2, Mohammad Shahbazi3, Jeffrey Ross3, Hadi Rahemi4, Bijan Najafi5, Joseph L Mills3. 1. Division of Vascular Surgery and Endovascular Therapy, Michael E DeBakey Department of Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston TX. Electronic address: miguel.montero@bcm.edu. 2. Interdisciplinary Consortium on Advanced Motion Performance, Michael E DeBakey Department of Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX. 3. Division of Vascular Surgery and Endovascular Therapy, Michael E DeBakey Department of Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston TX. 4. Interdisciplinary Consortium on Advanced Motion Performance, Michael E DeBakey Department of Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX; Circulation Concepts INC, Houston, TX. 5. Division of Vascular Surgery and Endovascular Therapy, Michael E DeBakey Department of Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston TX; Interdisciplinary Consortium on Advanced Motion Performance, Michael E DeBakey Department of Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to describe the applicability of the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) objective performance goals (OPGs) as a tool to evaluate results in the context of endovascular management of noncomplex and complex patients (i.e., end stage renal disease/history of prosthetic conduit) with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI). METHODS: Patients diagnosed with CLTI undergoing endovascular procedures from March 2016 to April 2017 were included, and medical records were examined. Patients were categorized as OPG risk (OPGR) and non-OPG risk (nOPGR) groups in accordance with the SVS performance criteria. We compared clinical events between the two groups and then further to the SVS OPGs. Thirty-day outcomes (safety) were major amputation (AMP), major adverse limb events (MALEs), and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), and 1-year outcomes (efficacy) were limb salvage, MALE + 30-day perioperative death (MALE + POD), and survival. Mortality was demonstrated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS: A total of 72 patients were included (OPGR = 58.3% vs. nOPGR = 41.7%). Mean follow-up was 20 months (range, 1-40 months). Retrograde pedal access was used in 65.2% of patients. The overall AMP rate was 2.7% (OPGR = 4.7%, nOPGR = 0%, P = 0.225, vs. SVS OPG<3%), MALE was 4.1% (OPGR = 7.1%, nOPGR = 0%, P = 0.135, vs. SVS OPG<8%), and MACE was 6.9% (OPGR = 2.3%, nOPGR = 13.3%, P = 0.071, vs. SVS OPG<8%). The limb salvage was 90.3% (OPGR = 88%, nOPGR = 93.3%, P = 0.46, vs. SVS OPG>84%), MALE + POD was 76.4% (OPGR = 78.6%, nOPGR = 73.4%, P = 0.606, vs. SVS OPG>71%), and survival was 77.7% (OPGR = 83.3%, nOPGR = 70%, P = 0.18, vs. SVS OPG>80%). CONCLUSIONS: The SVS OPGs set appropriate safety and efficacy standards as a bar for new technologies. In this series, endovascular therapy in all-comers exceeded the safety and efficacy endpoints proposed by the limited risk OPG panel.
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to describe the applicability of the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) objective performance goals (OPGs) as a tool to evaluate results in the context of endovascular management of noncomplex and complex patients (i.e., end stage renal disease/history of prosthetic conduit) with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI). METHODS:Patients diagnosed with CLTI undergoing endovascular procedures from March 2016 to April 2017 were included, and medical records were examined. Patients were categorized as OPG risk (OPGR) and non-OPG risk (nOPGR) groups in accordance with the SVS performance criteria. We compared clinical events between the two groups and then further to the SVS OPGs. Thirty-day outcomes (safety) were major amputation (AMP), major adverse limb events (MALEs), and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), and 1-year outcomes (efficacy) were limb salvage, MALE + 30-day perioperative death (MALE + POD), and survival. Mortality was demonstrated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS: A total of 72 patients were included (OPGR = 58.3% vs. nOPGR = 41.7%). Mean follow-up was 20 months (range, 1-40 months). Retrograde pedal access was used in 65.2% of patients. The overall AMP rate was 2.7% (OPGR = 4.7%, nOPGR = 0%, P = 0.225, vs. SVS OPG<3%), MALE was 4.1% (OPGR = 7.1%, nOPGR = 0%, P = 0.135, vs. SVS OPG<8%), and MACE was 6.9% (OPGR = 2.3%, nOPGR = 13.3%, P = 0.071, vs. SVS OPG<8%). The limb salvage was 90.3% (OPGR = 88%, nOPGR = 93.3%, P = 0.46, vs. SVS OPG>84%), MALE + POD was 76.4% (OPGR = 78.6%, nOPGR = 73.4%, P = 0.606, vs. SVS OPG>71%), and survival was 77.7% (OPGR = 83.3%, nOPGR = 70%, P = 0.18, vs. SVS OPG>80%). CONCLUSIONS: The SVS OPGs set appropriate safety and efficacy standards as a bar for new technologies. In this series, endovascular therapy in all-comers exceeded the safety and efficacy endpoints proposed by the limited risk OPG panel.
Authors: Bijan Najafi; Narek Veranyan; Alejandro Zulbaran-Rojas; Catherine Park; Hung Nguyen; Quinn Kaleikaumaka Nakahara; Hector Elizondo-Adamchik; Jayer Chung; Joseph L Mills; Miguel Montero-Baker; David G Armstrong; Vincent Rowe Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2020-11-02