Charles DeCarlo1, Laura T Boitano2, Brandon Sumpio2, Christopher A Latz2, Zach Feldman2, Anna A Pendleton2, Elizabeth L Chou2, Jordan R Stern3, Anahita Dua2. 1. Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA. Electronic address: csdecarlo@partners.org. 2. Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA. 3. Division of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stanford Hospital, Palo Alto, CA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The gold-standard for management of combined common femoral artery (CFA) and superficial femoral artery (SFA) atherosclerotic occlusive disease has traditionally been open femoral endarterectomy and femoral-popliteal bypass. Hybrid approaches involving an open and endovascular component are increasingly common. The aim of this study was to compare perioperative outcomes in patients who underwent an open versus hybrid revascularization. METHODS: NSQIP data, years 2012-2017, were queried for patients who underwent nonemergent CFA endarterectomy with either SFA transluminal intervention or bypass. The primary outcome of interest was a composite of cardiovascular, pulmonary, and renal complications (systemic) and mortality. Two propensity-weight adjusted analyses were performed: 1) comparing hybrid and prosthetic bypass 2) comparing hybrid and vein bypass. RESULTS: There were 4,478 patients included (1,537 hybrid, 1,408 prosthetic, 1,533 vein); 64.8% were men, and the mean age was 67.8 ± 9.7 years; 29.9% had claudication, 38.8% had tissue loss, and 31.3 were unspecified. In the propensity-weighted analysis comparing hybrid to prosthetic bypass, there was no difference in systemic complications (OR = 1.29 for prosthetic vs. hybrid; 95% CI: 0.95-1.76; P = 0.107) or mortality (OR = 1.54; 95% CI: 0.71-3.33; P = 0.275). Prosthetic bypass was associated with more deep surgical-site infections (OR = 2.02; 95% CI: 1.19-3.45; P = 0.010), postoperative sepsis (OR = 2.07; 95% CI: 1.13-3.76; P = 0.018), unplanned 30-day readmission (OR = 1.28; 95% CI: 1.04-1.58; P = 0.021), and the composite of any complication (OR = 1.38; 95% CI: 1.18-1.61; P < 0.001). In the propensity-weighted analysis comparing hybrid to vein bypass, there was no difference in systemic complications (OR = 1.10 for vein vs. hybrid; 95% CI: 0.81-1.49; P = 0.552) or mortality (OR = 0.91; 95% CI: 0.42-2.00; P = 0.819). Vein bypass was associated with more superficial surgical-site infections (OR = 1.45; 95% CI: 1.04-2.02; P = 0.028), and the composite of any complication (OR = 1.32; 95% CI: 1.13-1.54; P = 0.001). Overall mortality was significantly higher patients with systemic complications (13.9% vs 0.1%; P < 0.001). Systemic complications were less common in patients with claudication undergoing hybrid revascularization than vein or prosthetic bypass. CONCLUSIONS: Claudicants undergoing bypass experienced more systemic complications than those undergoing hybrid procedures, but there appears to be no increased risk of systemic complications or mortality with open reconstruction when compared to hybrid procedures for other indications. Other complications, such as infection, postoperative transfusion, and readmission, were more common in the bypass groups.
INTRODUCTION: The gold-standard for management of combined common femoral artery (CFA) and superficial femoral artery (SFA) atherosclerotic occlusive disease has traditionally been open femoral endarterectomy and femoral-popliteal bypass. Hybrid approaches involving an open and endovascular component are increasingly common. The aim of this study was to compare perioperative outcomes in patients who underwent an open versus hybrid revascularization. METHODS: NSQIP data, years 2012-2017, were queried for patients who underwent nonemergent CFA endarterectomy with either SFA transluminal intervention or bypass. The primary outcome of interest was a composite of cardiovascular, pulmonary, and renal complications (systemic) and mortality. Two propensity-weight adjusted analyses were performed: 1) comparing hybrid and prosthetic bypass 2) comparing hybrid and vein bypass. RESULTS: There were 4,478 patients included (1,537 hybrid, 1,408 prosthetic, 1,533 vein); 64.8% were men, and the mean age was 67.8 ± 9.7 years; 29.9% had claudication, 38.8% had tissue loss, and 31.3 were unspecified. In the propensity-weighted analysis comparing hybrid to prosthetic bypass, there was no difference in systemic complications (OR = 1.29 for prosthetic vs. hybrid; 95% CI: 0.95-1.76; P = 0.107) or mortality (OR = 1.54; 95% CI: 0.71-3.33; P = 0.275). Prosthetic bypass was associated with more deep surgical-site infections (OR = 2.02; 95% CI: 1.19-3.45; P = 0.010), postoperative sepsis (OR = 2.07; 95% CI: 1.13-3.76; P = 0.018), unplanned 30-day readmission (OR = 1.28; 95% CI: 1.04-1.58; P = 0.021), and the composite of any complication (OR = 1.38; 95% CI: 1.18-1.61; P < 0.001). In the propensity-weighted analysis comparing hybrid to vein bypass, there was no difference in systemic complications (OR = 1.10 for vein vs. hybrid; 95% CI: 0.81-1.49; P = 0.552) or mortality (OR = 0.91; 95% CI: 0.42-2.00; P = 0.819). Vein bypass was associated with more superficial surgical-site infections (OR = 1.45; 95% CI: 1.04-2.02; P = 0.028), and the composite of any complication (OR = 1.32; 95% CI: 1.13-1.54; P = 0.001). Overall mortality was significantly higher patients with systemic complications (13.9% vs 0.1%; P < 0.001). Systemic complications were less common in patients with claudication undergoing hybrid revascularization than vein or prosthetic bypass. CONCLUSIONS: Claudicants undergoing bypass experienced more systemic complications than those undergoing hybrid procedures, but there appears to be no increased risk of systemic complications or mortality with open reconstruction when compared to hybrid procedures for other indications. Other complications, such as infection, postoperative transfusion, and readmission, were more common in the bypass groups.