Gerhard Rümenapf1, Stephan Morbach, Andrej Schmidt, Martin Sigl. 1. Department of Angiology, Center of Vascular Medicine "Oberrhein" Speyer, Diakonissen-Stiftungs-Krankenhaus, Speyer; Department of Diabetology and Angiology, Marienkrankenhaus, Soest; Department of Angiology, University Hospital Leipzig; Department of Angiology, Department of Medicine 1, University Hospital Mannheim.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The conservative treatment of peripheral arterial disease (PAD), as recommended in current guidelines, encompasses measures such as lifestyle modification and risk-factor management. In addition, in patients with vasogenic intermittent claudication (IC), it is recommended that patients first be given drugs to improve perfusion and undergo supervised gait training. Revascularization is not recommended for asymptomatic persons, but it is considered mandatory for patients with critical ischemia. In this article on conservative and revascularizing treatment strategies for IC, we address the following questions: whether all treatment options are available, how effective they are, and whether the reality of treatment for IC in Germany corresponds to what is recommended in the guidelines. METHODS: In 2014, the German Society for Angiology carried out a comprehensive literature search in order to prepare a new version of the S3 guideline on PAD. This literature search was updated up to 2018, with identical methods, for the present review. RESULTS: The benefit of lifestyle modification and risk factor treatment is supported by high-level evidence ( evidence level I, recommendation grade A ). The distance patients are able to walk without pain is increased by drug therapy as well (evidence level IIb), but the therapeutic effect is only moderate. Supervised exercise training (SET), though supported by high-level evidence (I, A), is of limited efficacy, availability, and applicability, and patient compliance with it is also limited. In patients with IC, revascularization leads to complete relief of symptoms more rapidly than gait training, and its long-term benefit is steadily improving owing to advances in medical technology. A combination of arterial revascularization and gait training yields the best results. In a clinical trial, patients with IC who underwent combined therapy increased the distance they could walk without pain by 954 m in six months, compared to 407 m in a group that underwent gait training alone. CONCLUSION: In the treatment of vasogenic IC, SET and drugs to increase perfusion are now giving way to revascularization, which is more effective. As far as can be determined, SET is not currently implemented at all in the German health care system. It would be desirable for SET to be more available and more widely used, both to sustain the benefit of revascularization over the long term and to lower the general cardiovascular risk.
BACKGROUND: The conservative treatment of peripheral arterial disease (PAD), as recommended in current guidelines, encompasses measures such as lifestyle modification and risk-factor management. In addition, in patients with vasogenic intermittent claudication (IC), it is recommended that patients first be given drugs to improve perfusion and undergo supervised gait training. Revascularization is not recommended for asymptomatic persons, but it is considered mandatory for patients with critical ischemia. In this article on conservative and revascularizing treatment strategies for IC, we address the following questions: whether all treatment options are available, how effective they are, and whether the reality of treatment for IC in Germany corresponds to what is recommended in the guidelines. METHODS: In 2014, the German Society for Angiology carried out a comprehensive literature search in order to prepare a new version of the S3 guideline on PAD. This literature search was updated up to 2018, with identical methods, for the present review. RESULTS: The benefit of lifestyle modification and risk factor treatment is supported by high-level evidence ( evidence level I, recommendation grade A ). The distance patients are able to walk without pain is increased by drug therapy as well (evidence level IIb), but the therapeutic effect is only moderate. Supervised exercise training (SET), though supported by high-level evidence (I, A), is of limited efficacy, availability, and applicability, and patient compliance with it is also limited. In patients with IC, revascularization leads to complete relief of symptoms more rapidly than gait training, and its long-term benefit is steadily improving owing to advances in medical technology. A combination of arterial revascularization and gait training yields the best results. In a clinical trial, patients with IC who underwent combined therapy increased the distance they could walk without pain by 954 m in six months, compared to 407 m in a group that underwent gait training alone. CONCLUSION: In the treatment of vasogenic IC, SET and drugs to increase perfusion are now giving way to revascularization, which is more effective. As far as can be determined, SET is not currently implemented at all in the German health care system. It would be desirable for SET to be more available and more widely used, both to sustain the benefit of revascularization over the long term and to lower the general cardiovascular risk.
Authors: Sandra Spronk; Johanna L Bosch; Pieter T den Hoed; Hermanus F Veen; Peter M T Pattynama; M G Myriam Hunink Journal: Radiology Date: 2009-02 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: J Gelin; L Jivegård; C Taft; J Karlsson; M Sullivan; A G Dahllöf; R Sandström; B Arfvidsson; K Lundholm Journal: Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg Date: 2001-08 Impact factor: 7.069
Authors: Ambarish Pandey; Subhash Banerjee; Christian Ngo; Purav Mody; Steven P Marso; Emmanouil S Brilakis; Ehrin J Armstrong; Jay Giri; Marc P Bonaca; Aruna Pradhan; Anthony A Bavry; Dharam J Kumbhani Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2017-04-10 Impact factor: 11.195
Authors: Timothy P Murphy; Donald E Cutlip; Judith G Regensteiner; Emile R Mohler; David J Cohen; Matthew R Reynolds; Joseph M Massaro; Beth A Lewis; Joselyn Cerezo; Niki C Oldenburg; Claudia C Thum; Michael R Jaff; Anthony J Comerota; Michael W Steffes; Ingrid H Abrahamsen; Suzanne Goldberg; Alan T Hirsch Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2015-03-17 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: F Gerald R Fowkes; Diana Rudan; Igor Rudan; Victor Aboyans; Julie O Denenberg; Mary M McDermott; Paul E Norman; Uchechukwe K A Sampson; Linda J Williams; George A Mensah; Michael H Criqui Journal: Lancet Date: 2013-08-01 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Spence M Taylor; David L Cull; Corey A Kalbaugh; Herman F Senter; Eugene M Langan; Christopher G Carsten; John W York; Bruce A Snyder; Bruce H Gray; Mark P Androes; Dawn W Blackhurst Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2009-03-26 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Edita Jakubsevičienė; Donatas Vasiliauskas; Linas Velička; Raimondas Kubilius; Eglė Milinavičienė; Jonė Venclovienė Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2014-08-07 Impact factor: 3.390