RESUMEN
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The prevalence of peripheral artery disease is growing, with millions of people globally suffering its end-stage manifestation, chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI). Revascularization procedures like lower extremity bypass play a vital role in limb salvage but optimal medical therapy is essential for maximizing the benefit of these procedures and reducing long-term risks of cardiovascular and limb-related events. RECENT FINDINGS: Patients with PAD who undergo lower extremity bypass warrant a comprehensive approach to risk factor modification for both primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular and limb-related complications. This includes appropriate use of high-intensity statins, smoking cessation, and management of hypertension and diabetes. Additionally, antiplatelet therapy is indicated for all patients with CLTI and additional treatment with low-dose anticoagulation may also be beneficial. SUMMARY: Optimal medical therapy is essential for optimizing outcomes in patients with PAD undergoing lower extremity bypass.
Asunto(s)
Extremidad Inferior , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica , Humanos , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica/cirugía , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica/tratamiento farmacológico , Extremidad Inferior/cirugía , Inhibidores de Hidroximetilglutaril-CoA Reductasas/uso terapéutico , Inhibidores de Agregación Plaquetaria/uso terapéutico , Isquemia Crónica que Amenaza las Extremidades/cirugía , Cese del Hábito de Fumar/métodos , Factores de Riesgo , Anticoagulantes/uso terapéutico , Recuperación del Miembro/métodosRESUMEN
Acute vascular injury provokes an inflammatory response, resulting in neointimal hyperplasia (NIH) and downstream pathologies. The resolution of inflammation is an active process in which specialized proresolving lipid mediators (SPM) and their receptors play a central role. We sought to examine the acute phase response of SPM and their receptors in both circulating blood and the arterial wall in a rat angioplasty model. We found that the ratio of proresolving to pro-inflammatory lipid mediators (LM) in plasma decreased sharply 1 day after vascular injury, then increased slightly by day 7, while that in arteries remained depressed. Granulocyte expression of SPM receptors ALX/FPR2 and DRV2/GPR18, and a leukotriene B4 receptor BLT1 increased postinjury, while ERV1/ChemR23 expression was reduced early and then recovered by day 7. Importantly, we show unique arterial expression patterns of SPM receptors in the acute setting, with generally low levels through day 7 that contrasted sharply with that of the pro-inflammatory CCR2 receptor. Overall, these data document acute, time-dependent changes of LM biosynthesis and SPM receptor expression in plasma, leukocytes, and artery walls following acute vascular injury. A biochemical imbalance between inflammation and resolution LM pathways appears persistent 7 days after angioplasty in this model. These findings may help guide therapeutic approaches to accelerate vascular healing and improve the outcomes of vascular interventions for patients with advanced atherosclerosis.
Asunto(s)
Ratas Sprague-Dawley , Animales , Masculino , Ratas , Lesiones del Sistema Vascular/metabolismo , Lesiones del Sistema Vascular/patología , Receptores Acoplados a Proteínas G/metabolismo , Receptores Acoplados a Proteínas G/genética , Receptores de Leucotrieno B4/metabolismo , Mediadores de Inflamación/metabolismoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Sustained clinical and hemodynamic benefit following revascularization for chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) is needed to resolve symptoms and prevent limb loss. We sought to compare rates of clinical and hemodynamic failure as well as resolution of initial and prevention of recurrent CLTI following endovascular (ENDO) vs bypass (OPEN) revascularization in the BEST-CLI trial. METHODS: As planned secondary analyses of the BEST-CLI trial, we examined the rates of A) clinical failure (a composite of all-cause death, above-ankle amputation, major reintervention, and degradation of WIfI stage); B) hemodynamic failure (a composite of above-ankle amputation, major and minor reintervention to maintain index limb patency, failure to initially increase or a subsequent decrease in ankle brachial index of 0.15 or toe brachial index of 0.10, and radiographic evidence of treatment stenosis or occlusion); C) time to resolution of presenting CLTI symptoms; and D) incidence of recurrent CLTI. Time-to-event analyses were by intention-to-treat assignment in both trial cohorts (cohort 1: suitable single segment great saphenous vein [SSGSV], N=1434; cohort 2: lacking suitable SSGSV, N= 396) and multivariate stratified Cox regression models were created. RESULTS: In cohort 1, there was a significant difference in time to clinical failure (log-rank p<0.001), hemodynamic failure (log-rank p<0.001), and resolution of presenting symptoms (log-rank p=0.009) in favor of OPEN. In cohort 2, there was a significantly lower rate of hemodynamic failure (log-rank p=0.006) favoring OPEN, and no significant difference in time to clinical failure or resolution of presenting symptoms. Multivariate analysis revealed that assignment to OPEN was associated with significantly lower risk of clinical and hemodynamic failure in both cohorts, and a significantly higher likelihood of resolving initial and preventing recurrent CLTI symptoms in cohort 1, including after adjustment for key baseline patient covariates (end stage renal disease (ESRD), prior revascularization, smoking, diabetes, age>80, WIfI stage, tissue loss, infrapopliteal disease). Factors independently associated with clinical failure included age>80 in cohort 1 and ESRD across both cohorts. ESRD was associated with hemodynamic failure in cohort 1. Factors associated with slower resolution of presenting symptoms included diabetes in cohort 1 and WIfI stage in cohort 2. CONCLUSIONS: Durable clinical and hemodynamic benefit following revascularization for CLTI is important to avoid persistent and recurrent CLTI, reinterventions and limb loss. When compared with ENDO, initial treatment with OPEN surgical bypass, particularly with available saphenous vein, is associated with improved clinical and hemodynamic outcomes and enhanced resolution of CLTI symptoms.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Postoperative delirium is a common complication following open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (OAR). Opioids have been found to contribute to delirium, especially at higher doses. This study assessed the impact of early postoperative opioid analgesia on postoperative delirium incidence and time to onset. We hypothesized that higher early postoperative opioid utilization would be associated with increased postoperative delirium incidence. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of OAR cases at a single quaternary care center from years 2012-2020. The primary exposure was oral morphine equivalents use (OME), calculated for postoperative days 1-7. A cut point analysis using a receiver operator curve for postoperative delirium determined the threshold for high OME (OME>37 mg). The primary outcome was postoperative delirium incidence identified via chart review. Multivariable logistic regression was performed for postoperative delirium and adjusted for covariates meeting P < 0.1 on bivariate analysis. RESULTS: Among 194 OAR cases, 67 (35%) developed postoperative delirium with median time to onset of 3 days (IQR = 2-6). Patients with postoperative delirium were older (74 years vs. 69 years), more frequently presented with symptomatic AAA (47% vs. 27%) and had a higher proportion of comorbidities (all P < 0.05). Cases with high OME utilization on postoperative day 1 (55%) were younger (69 vs. 73 years), less frequently had an epidural (46% vs. 77%), and more frequently developed delirium (42% vs. 25%, all P < 0.05). Epidural use was associated with a significant decrease in OME utilization on postoperative day 1 (33 vs. 83, P < 0.01). Postoperative delirium onset was later in those with high OME use (4 vs. 2 days, P = 0.04). On multivariable analysis, high OME remained associated with postoperative delirium (Table II). CONCLUSIONS: High opioid utilization on postoperative day 1 is associated with increased postoperative delirium and epidural along with acetaminophen use reduced opioid utilization. Future study should examine the impact of opioid reduction strategies on outcomes after major vascular surgery.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Infrapopliteal peripheral vascular interventions (PVIs) for claudication are still performed in the USA. This study aimed to evaluate whether infrapopliteal PVI is associated with worse long term outcomes than isolated femoropopliteal PVI for treatment of claudication. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of fee for service claims in a national administrative database was conducted using 100% of the Medicare fee for service claims between 2017 and 2019 to capture all Medicare beneficiaries who underwent an index infra-inguinal PVI for claudication. Hierarchical Cox proportional hazards models were performed to assess the association of infrapopliteal PVI with conversion to chronic limb threatening ischaemia (CLTI), repeat PVI, and major amputation. RESULTS: In total, 36 147 patients (41.1% female; 89.7% age ≥ 65 years; 79.0% non-Hispanic White ethnicity) underwent an index PVI for claudication, of whom 32.6% (n = 11 790) received an infrapopliteal PVI. Of these, 61.4% (n = 7 245) received a concomitant femoropopliteal PVI and 38.6% (n = 4 545) received an isolated infrapopliteal PVI. The median follow up time was 3.5 years (interquartile range 2.7, 4.3). Patients receiving infrapopliteal PVI had a higher three year cumulative incidence of conversion to CLTI (26.0%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 24.9 - 27.2% vs. 19.9%; 95% CI 19.1 - 20.7%), repeat PVI (56.0%; 95% CI 54.8 - 57.3% vs. 45.7%; 95% CI 44.9 - 46.6%), and major amputation (2.2%; 95% CI 1.8 - 2.6% vs. 1.3%; 95% CI 1.1 - 1.5%) compared with patients receiving isolated femoropopliteal PVI. After adjusting for patient and physician level characteristics, the risk of conversion to CLTI (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.31, 95% CI 1.23 - 1.39), repeat PVI (aHR 1.12, 95% CI 1.05 - 1.20), and major amputation (aHR 1.72, 95% CI 1.42 - 2.07) remained significantly higher for patients receiving infrapopliteal PVI. An increasing number of infrapopliteal vessels treated during the index intervention was associated with increasingly poor outcomes (p < .001 for trend). CONCLUSION: Infrapopliteal PVI for claudication is associated with worse long term outcomes relative to isolated femoropopliteal PVI.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: There are limited data supporting or opposing the use of infrapopliteal peripheral vascular interventions (PVI) for the treatment of claudication. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate the association of infrapopliteal PVI with long-term outcomes compared with isolated femoropopliteal PVI for the treatment of claudication. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of all patients in the Medicare-matched Vascular Quality Initiative database who underwent an index infrainguinal PVI for claudication from January 2004-December 2019 using Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Of 14,261 patients (39.9% female; 85.6% age ≥65 years, 87.7% non-Hispanic white) who underwent an index infrainguinal PVI for claudication, 16.6% (N=2,369) received an infrapopliteal PVI. The median follow-up after index PVI was 3.7 years (IQR 2.1-6.1). Compared to patients who underwent isolated femoropopliteal PVI, patients receiving any infrapopliteal PVI had a higher 3-year cumulative incidence of conversion to CLTI (33.3% vs. 23.8%; P<0.001); repeat PVI (41.0% vs. 38.2%; P<0.01); and amputation (8.1% vs. 2.8%; P<0.001). After risk-adjustment, patients undergoing infrapopliteal PVI had a higher risk of conversion to CLTI (aHR 1.39, 95% CI, 1.25-1.53); repeat PVI (aHR 1.10, 95% CI, 1.01-1.19); and amputation (aHR 2.18, 95% CI, 1.77-2.67). Findings were consistent after adjusting for competing risk of death; in a 1:1 propensity-matched analysis; and in subgroup analyses stratified by TASC disease, diabetes, and end-stage kidney disease. CONCLUSIONS: Infrapopliteal PVI is associated with worse long-term outcomes than femoropopliteal PVI for claudication. These risks should be discussed with patients.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: The recent publication of randomized trials comparing open bypass surgery to endovascular therapy in patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia, namely, Best Endovascular vs Best Surgical Therapy in Patients with Critical Limb Ischemia (BEST-CLI) and Bypass versus Angioplasty in Severe Ischaemia of the Leg-2 (BASIL-2), has resulted in potentially contradictory findings. The trials differed significantly with respect to anatomical disease patterns and primary end points. We performed an analysis of patients in BEST-CLI with significant infrapopliteal disease undergoing open tibial bypass or endovascular tibial interventions to formulate a relevant comparator with the outcomes reported from BASIL-2. METHODS: The study population consisted of patients in BEST-CLI with adequate single segment saphenous vein conduit randomized to open bypass or endovascular intervention (cohort 1) who additionally had significant infrapopliteal disease and underwent tibial level intervention. The primary outcome was major adverse limb event (MALE) or all-cause death. MALE included any major limb amputation or major reintervention. Outcomes were evaluated using Cox proportional regression models. RESULTS: The analyzed subgroup included a total of 665 patients with 326 in the open tibial bypass group and 339 in the tibial endovascular intervention group. The primary outcome of MALE or all-cause death at 3 years was significantly lower in the surgical group at 48.5% compared with 56.7% in the endovascular group (P = .0018). Mortality was similar between groups (35.5% open vs 35.8% endovascular; P = .94), whereas MALE events were lower in the surgical group (23.3% vs 35.0%; P<.0001). This difference included a lower rate of major reinterventions in the surgical group (10.9%) compared with the endovascular group (20.2%; P = .0006). Freedom from above ankle amputation or all-cause death was similar between treatment arms at 43.6% in the surgical group compared with 45.3% the endovascular group (P = .30); however, there were fewer above ankle amputations in the surgical group (13.5%) compared with the endovascular group (19.3%; P = .0205). Perioperative (30-day) death rates were similar between treatment groups (2.5% open vs 2.4% endovascular; P = .93), as was 30-day major adverse cardiovascular events (5.3% open vs 2.7% endovascular; P = .12). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with suitable single segment great saphenous vein who underwent infrapopliteal revascularization for chronic limb-threatening ischemia, open bypass surgery was associated with a lower incidence of MALE or death and fewer major amputation compared with endovascular intervention. Amputation-free survival was similar between the groups. Further investigations into differences in comorbidities, anatomical extent, and lesion complexity are needed to explain differences between the BEST-CLI and BASIL-2 reported outcomes.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: The recent Best Endovascular vs Best Surgical Therapy in Patients with Critical Limb Ischemia (BEST-CLI) study showed that bypass was superior to endovascular therapy (ET) in patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) deemed suitable for either approach who had an available single-segment great saphenous vein (GSV). However, the superiority of bypass among those lacking GSV was not established. We aimed to examine comparative treatment outcomes from a real-world CLTI population using the Vascular Quality Initiative-Medicare-linked database. METHODS: We queried the Vascular Quality Initiative-Medicare-linked database for patients with CLTI who underwent first-time lower extremity revascularization (2010-2019). We performed two one-to-one propensity score matchings (PSMs): ET vs bypass with GSV (BWGSV) and ET vs bypass with a prosthetic graft (BWPG). The primary outcome was amputation-free survival. Secondary outcomes were freedom from amputation and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Three cohorts were queried: BWGSV (N = 5279, 14.7%), BWPG (N = 2778, 7.7%), and ET (N = 27,977, 77.6%). PSM produced two sets of well-matched cohorts: 4705 pairs of ET vs BWGSV and 2583 pairs of ET vs BWPG. In the matched cohorts of ET vs BWGSV, ET was associated with greater hazards of death (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.34, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.25-1.43; P < .001), amputation (HR = 1.30, 95% CI, 1.17-1.44; P < .001), and amputation/death (HR = 1.32, 95% CI, 1.24-1.40; P < .001) up to 4 years. In the matched cohorts of ET vs BWPG, ET was associated with greater hazards of death up to 2 years (HR = 1.11, 95% CI, 1.00-1.22; P = .042) but not amputation or amputation/death. CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world multi-institutional Medicare-linked PSM analysis, we found that BWGSV is superior to ET in terms of OS, freedom from amputation, and amputation-free survival up to 4 years. Moreover, BWPG was superior to ET in terms of OS up to 2 years. Our study confirms the superiority of BWGSV to ET as observed in the BEST-CLI trial.
RESUMEN
The clinical judgment of a physician is one of the most important aspects of medical quality, yet it is rarely captured with quality measures in use today. We propose a novel approach using individualized physician benchmarking that measures the appropriateness of care that a physician delivers by looking at their practice pattern in a specific clinical situation. A prime application of our novel approach to appropriateness measures is the surgical management of peripheral artery disease and claudication. We discuss 4 potential consensus metrics for the treatment of claudication that explore appropriateness of care of claudication management and are meaningful, actionable, and quantifiable. Given the multitude of medical specialties involved in the care of patients with peripheral artery disease and the consequences of both preemptive and delayed care, it is in all of our interests to promote data transparency with confidential communications to outlier physicians while advocating for evidence-based management.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Cardiovascular complications after revascularization to treat chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) are a major concern that guides treatment. Our goal was to assess periprocedural cardiac and vascular serious adverse events (SAEs) in the Best Endovascular vs Best Surgical Therapy in Patients with CLTI (BEST-CLI) trial. METHODS: BEST-CLI was a prospective randomized trial comparing surgical (OPEN) and endovascular (ENDO) revascularization for patients with CLTI. Thirty-day SAEs, classified as cardiac or vascular, were analyzed. Adverse events are defined as serious when they affect safety in the trial, require prolonged hospitalization, result in significant disability or incapacitation, are life-threatening, or result in death. Interventions were analyzed in a per protocol fashion. RESULTS: In the BEST-CLI trial, 850 OPEN and 896 ENDO interventions were evaluated. Forty (4.7%) and 34 (3.8%) patients experienced at least one cardiac SAE after OPEN and ENDO intervention, respectively (P = .35). Overall, there were 53 cardiac SAEs (0.06 per patient) after OPEN and 40 (0.045 per patient) after ENDO interventions. Cardiac SAEs in the OPEN arm were classified as related to ischemia (50.9%), arrhythmias (17%), heart failure (15.1%), arrest (13.2%), and heart block (3.8%); in the ENDO arm, they were classified as ischemia (47.5%), heart failure (17.5%), arrhythmias (15%), arrest (15%), and heart block (5%). Approximately half of SAEs were classified as severe for both OPEN and ENDO. SAEs were definitely or probably related to the procedure in 30.2% and 25% in the OPEN and ENDO arms, respectively (P = .2). Vascular SAEs occurred in 58 (6.8%) and 86 (9.6%) of patients after OPEN and ENDO revascularization, respectively (P = .19). In total, there were 59 (0.07 per patient) and 87 (0.097 per patient) vascular SAEs after OPEN and ENDO procedures. Vascular SAEs in the OPEN arm were classified as distal ischemia/infection (44.1%), bleeding (16.9%), occlusive (15.3%), thromboembolic (15.3%), cerebrovascular (5.1%), and other (3.4%); in the ENDO arm, they were distal ischemia/infection (40.2%), occlusive (31%), bleeding (12.6%), thromboembolic (8%), cerebrovascular (1.1%), and other (4.6%). SAEs were classified as severe for OPEN in 45.8% and ENDO in 46%. SAEs were definitely or probably related to the procedure in 23.7% and 35.6% in the OPEN and ENDO arms (P = .35), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing OPEN and ENDO revascularization experienced similar degrees of cardiac and vascular SAEs. The majority were not related to the index intervention, but approximately half were severe.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In the BEST-CLI trial (Best Endovascular Versus Best Surgical Therapy for Patients With Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia), a prespecified secondary objective was to assess the effects of revascularization strategy on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). METHODS: Patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia were randomized to surgical bypass (Bypass) or endovascular intervention (Endo) in 2 parallel trials. Cohort 1 included patients with single-segment great saphenous vein; cohort 2 included those lacking suitable single-segment great saphenous vein. HRQoL was assessed over the trial duration using Vascular Quality-of-Life (VascuQoL), European Quality-of-Life-5D (EQ-5D), the Short Form-12 (SF-12) Physical Component Summary (SF-12 PCS), SF-12 Mental Component Summary (SF-12 MCS), Utility Index Score (SF-6D R2), and numeric rating scales of pain. HRQoL was summarized by cohort and compared within and between groups using mixed-model linear regression. RESULTS: A total of 1193 and 335 patients in cohorts 1 and 2 with a mean follow-up of 2.9 and 2.0 years, respectively, were analyzed. In cohort 1, HRQoL significantly improved from baseline to follow-up for both groups across all measures. For example, mean (SD) VascuQoL scores were 3.0 (1.3) and 3.0 (1.2) for Bypass and Endo at baseline and 4.7 (1.4) and 4.8 (1.5) over follow-up. There were significant group differences favoring Endo when assessed with VascuQoL (difference, -0.14 [95% CI, -0.25 to -0.02]; P=0.02), SF-12 MCS (difference, -1.03 [95% CI, -1.89 to -0.18]; P=0.02), SF-6D R2 (difference, -0.01 [95% CI, -0.02 to -0.001]; P=0.03), numeric rating scale pain at present (difference, 0.26 [95% CI, 0.03 to 0.49]; P=0.03), usual level during previous week (difference, 0.26 [95% CI, 0.04 to 0.48]; P=0.02), and worst level during previous week (difference, 0.29 [95% CI, 0.02 to 0.56]; P=0.04). There was no difference between treatment arms on the basis of EQ-5D (difference, -0.01 [95% CI, -0.03 to 0.004]; P=0.12) or SF-12 PCS (difference, -0.41 [95% CI, -1.2 to 0.37]; P=0.31). In cohort 2, HRQoL also significantly improved from baseline to the end of follow-up for both groups based on all measures, but there were no differences between Bypass and Endo on any measure. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia deemed eligible for either Bypass or Endo, revascularization resulted in significant and clinically meaningful improvements in HRQoL. In patients with an available single-segment great saphenous vein for bypass, but not among those without one, Endo was statistically superior on some HRQoL measures; however, these differences were below the threshold of clinically meaningful difference.
Asunto(s)
Isquemia Crónica que Amenaza las Extremidades , Calidad de Vida , Humanos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Vasculares , Dolor , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Patients undergoing revascularization for chronic limb-threatening ischemia experience a high burden of target limb reinterventions. We analyzed data from the Best Endovascular versus Best Surgical Therapy in Patients with Critical Limb Ischemia (BEST-CLI) randomized trial comparing initial open bypass (OPEN) and endovascular (ENDO) treatment strategies, with a focus on reintervention-related study endpoints. METHODS: In a planned secondary analysis, we examined the rates of major reintervention, any reintervention, and the composite of any reintervention, amputation, or death by intention-to-treat assignment in both trial cohorts (cohort 1 with suitable single-segment great saphenous vein [SSGSV], n = 1434; cohort 2 lacking suitable SSGSV, n = 396). We also compared the cumulative number of major and all index limb reinterventions over time. Comparisons between treatment arms within each cohort were made using univariable and multivariable Cox regression models. RESULTS: In cohort 1, assignment to OPEN was associated with a significantly reduced hazard of a major limb reintervention (hazard ratio [HR], 0.37; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.28-0.49; P < .001), any reintervention (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.53-0.75; P < .001), or any reintervention, amputation, or death (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.60-0.78; P < .001). Findings were similar in cohort 2 for major reintervention (HR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.33-0.84; P = .007) or any reintervention (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.52-0.98; P = .04). In both cohorts, early (30-day) limb reinterventions were notably higher for patients assigned to ENDO as compared with OPEN (14.7% vs 4.5% of cohort 1 subjects; 16.6% vs 5.6% of cohort 2 subjects). The mean number of major (mean events per subject ratio [MR], 0.45; 95% CI, 0.34-0.58; P < .001) or any target limb reinterventions (MR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.57-0.80; P < .001) per year was significantly less in the OPEN arm of cohort 1. The mean number of reinterventions per limb salvaged per year was lower in the OPEN arm of cohort 1 (MR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.35-0.57; P < .001 and MR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.55-0.79; P < .001 for major and all, respectively). The majority of index limb reinterventions occurred during the first year following randomization, but events continued to accumulate over the duration of follow-up in the trial. CONCLUSIONS: Reintervention is common following revascularization for chronic limb-threatening ischemia. Among patients deemed suitable for either approach, initial treatment with open bypass, particularly in patients with available SSGSV conduit, is associated with a significantly lower number of major and minor target limb reinterventions.
Asunto(s)
Amputación Quirúrgica , Procedimientos Endovasculares , Isquemia , Recuperación del Miembro , Reoperación , Humanos , Procedimientos Endovasculares/efectos adversos , Procedimientos Endovasculares/mortalidad , Masculino , Femenino , Anciano , Isquemia/cirugía , Isquemia/mortalidad , Isquemia/fisiopatología , Isquemia/diagnóstico , Resultado del Tratamiento , Factores de Tiempo , Factores de Riesgo , Persona de Mediana Edad , Modelos de Riesgos Proporcionales , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica/cirugía , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica/mortalidad , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica/diagnóstico por imagen , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica/fisiopatología , Isquemia Crónica que Amenaza las Extremidades/cirugía , Enfermedad Crónica , Injerto Vascular/efectos adversos , Injerto Vascular/mortalidad , Análisis Multivariante , Enfermedad Crítica , Análisis de Intención de Tratar , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Vena Safena/trasplante , Vena Safena/cirugíaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Inadequate vein quality or prior harvest precludes use of autologous single segment greater saphenous vein (ssGSV) in many patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI). Predictors of patient outcome after infrainguinal bypass with alternative (non-ssGSV) conduits are not well-understood. We explored whether limb presentation, bypass target, and conduit type were associated with amputation-free survival (AFS) after infrainguinal bypass using alternative conduits. METHODS: A single-center retrospective study (2013-2020) was conducted of 139 infrainguinal bypasses performed for CLTI with cryopreserved ssGSV (cryovein) (n = 71), polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) (n = 23), or arm/spliced vein grafts (n = 45). Characteristics, Wound, Ischemia, and foot Infection (WIfI) stage, and outcomes were recorded. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards and classification and regression tree analysis modeled predictors of AFS. RESULTS: Within 139 cases, the mean age was 71 years, 59% of patients were male, and 51% of cases were nonelective. More patients undergoing bypass with cryovein were WIfI stage 4 (41%) compared with PTFE (13%) or arm/spliced vein (27%) (P = .04). Across groups, AFS at 2 years was 78% for spliced/arm, 79% for PTFE, and 53% for cryovein (adjusted hazard ratio for cryovein, 2.5; P = .02). Among cases using cryovein, classification and regression tree analysis showed that WIfI stage 3 or 4, age >70 years, and prior failed bypass were predictive of the lowest AFS at 2 years of 36% vs AFS of 58% to 76% among subgroups with less than two of these factors. Although secondary patency at 2 years was worse in the cryovein group (26% vs 68% and 89% in arm/spliced and PTFE groups; P < .01), in patients with tissue loss there was no statistically significant difference in wound healing in the cryovein group (72%) compared with other bypass types (72% vs 87%, respectively; P = .12). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with CLTI lacking suitable ssGSV, bypass with autogenous arm/spliced vein or PTFE has superior AFS compared with cryovein, although data were limited for PTFE conduits for distal targets. Despite poor patency with cryovein, wound healing is achieved in a majority of cases, although it should be used with caution in older patients with high WIfI stage and prior failed bypass, given the low rates of AFS.
Asunto(s)
Amputación Quirúrgica , Recuperación del Miembro , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica , Vena Safena , Cicatrización de Heridas , Humanos , Masculino , Estudios Retrospectivos , Femenino , Anciano , Vena Safena/trasplante , Factores de Riesgo , Factores de Tiempo , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica/cirugía , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica/fisiopatología , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica/mortalidad , Persona de Mediana Edad , Medición de Riesgo , Politetrafluoroetileno , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Isquemia Crónica que Amenaza las Extremidades/cirugía , Prótesis Vascular , Injerto Vascular/efectos adversos , Injerto Vascular/mortalidad , Injerto Vascular/métodos , Grado de Desobstrucción Vascular , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/efectos adversos , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/instrumentación , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/mortalidad , Supervivencia sin Progresión , Criopreservación , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Major adverse limb event-free survival (MALE-FS) differed significantly by initial revascularization approach in the BEST-CLI randomized trial. The BEST-CLI trial represented a highly selected subgroup of patients seen in clinical practice; thus, we examined the endpoint of MALE-FS in an all-comers tertiary care practice setting. METHODS: This is a single-center retrospective study of consecutive, unique patients who underwent technically successful infrainguinal revascularization for chronic limb-threatening ischemia (2011-2021). MALE was major amputation (transtibial or above) or major reintervention (new bypass, open bypass revision, thrombectomy, or thrombolysis). RESULTS: Among 469 subjects, the mean age was 70 years, and 34% were female. Characteristics included diabetes (68%), end-stage renal disease (ESRD) (16%), Wound, Ischemia, and foot Infection (WIfI) stage 4 (44%), Global Limb Anatomic Staging System (GLASS) stage 3 (62%), and high pedal artery calcium score (pMAC) (22%). Index revascularization was autogenous vein bypass (AVB) (30%), non-autogenous bypass (NAB) (13%), or endovascular (ENDO) (57%). The composite endpoint of MALE or death occurred in 237 patients (51%) at a median time of 189 days from index revascularization. In an adjusted Cox model, factors independently associated with MALE or death included younger age, ESRD, WIfI stage 4, higher GLASS stage, and moderate-severe pMAC, whereas AVB was associated with improved MALE-FS. Freedom from MALE-FS, MALE, and major amputation at 30 days were 90%, 92%, and 95%; and at 1 year were 63%, 70%, and 83%, respectively. MALE occurred in 144 patients (31%) and was associated with ESRD, WIfI stage, GLASS stage, pMAC score, and index revascularization approach. AVB had superior durability, with adjusted 2-year freedom from MALE of 72%, compared with 66% for ENDO and 51% for NAB. Within the AVB group, spliced vein conduit had higher MALE compared with single-segment vein (hazard ratio, 1.8; 95% confidence interval, 0.9-3.7; P = .008 after inverse propensity weighting), but there was no statistically significant difference in major amputation. Of the 144 patients with any MALE, the first MALE was major reintervention in 47% and major amputation in 53%. Major amputation as first MALE was associated with non-AVB index approach. Indications for major reintervention were symptomatic stenosis/occlusion (54%), lack of clinical improvement (28%), asymptomatic graft stenosis (16%), and iatrogenic events (3%). Conversion to bypass occurred after 6% of ENDO cases, two-thirds of which involved distal bypass targets at the ankle or foot. CONCLUSIONS: In this consecutive, all-comers cohort, disease complexity was associated with procedural selection and MALE-FS. AVB independently provided the greatest MALE-FS and freedom from MALE and major amputation. Compared with the BEST-CLI randomized trial, MALE after ENDO in this series was more frequently major amputation, with relatively few conversions to open bypass.
Asunto(s)
Amputación Quirúrgica , Recuperación del Miembro , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Estudios Retrospectivos , Anciano , Factores de Riesgo , Factores de Tiempo , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica/cirugía , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica/mortalidad , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica/diagnóstico por imagen , Persona de Mediana Edad , Medición de Riesgo , Isquemia Crónica que Amenaza las Extremidades/cirugía , Supervivencia sin Progresión , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Procedimientos Endovasculares/efectos adversos , Procedimientos Endovasculares/mortalidad , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
As a progressive disease process, early diagnosis and ongoing monitoring and treatment of lower limb peripheral artery disease (PAD) is critical to reduce the risk of diabetes-related foot ulcer (DFU) development, non-healing of wounds, infection and amputation, in addition to cardiovascular complications. There are a variety of non-invasive tests available to diagnose PAD at the bedside, but there is no consensus as to the most diagnostically accurate of these bedside investigations or their reliability for use as a method of ongoing monitoring. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review was to first determine the diagnostic accuracy of non-invasive bedside tests for identifying PAD compared to an imaging reference test and second to determine the intra- and inter-rater reliability of non-invasive bedside tests in adults with diabetes. A database search of Medline and Embase was conducted from 1980 to 30 November 2022. Prospective and retrospective investigations of the diagnostic accuracy of bedside testing in people with diabetes using an imaging reference standard and reliability studies of bedside testing techniques conducted in people with diabetes were eligible. Included studies of diagnostic accuracy were required to report adequate data to calculate the positive likelihood ratio (PLR) and negative likelihood ratio (NLR) which were the primary endpoints. The quality appraisal was conducted using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies and Quality Appraisal of Reliability quality appraisal tools. From a total of 8517 abstracts retrieved, 40 studies met the inclusion criteria for the diagnostic accuracy component of the review and seven studies met the inclusion criteria for the reliability component of the review. Most studies investigated the diagnostic accuracy of ankle -brachial index (ABI) (N = 38). In people with and without DFU, PLRs ranged from 1.69 to 19.9 and NLRs from 0.29 to 0.84 indicating an ABI <0.9 increases the likelihood of disease (but the extent of the increase ranges from a small to large amount) and an ABI within the normal range (≥0.90 and <1.3) does not exclude PAD. For toe-brachial index (TBI), a threshold of <0.70 has a moderate ability to rule PAD in and out; however, this is based on limited evidence. Similarly, a small number of studies indicate that one or more monophasic Doppler waveforms in the pedal arteries is associated with the presence of PAD, whereas tri- or biphasic waveform suggests that PAD is less likely. Several forms of bedside testing may also be useful as adjunct tests and 7 studies were identified that investigated the reliability of bedside tests including ABI, toe pressure, TBI, transcutaneous oxygen pressure (TcPO2 ) and pulse palpation. Inter-rater reliability was poor for pulse palpation and moderate for TcPO2. The ABI, toe pressure and TBI may have good inter- and intra-rater reliability, but margins of error are wide, requiring a large change in the measurement for it to be considered a true change rather than error. There is currently no single bedside test or a combination of bedside tests that has been shown to have superior diagnostic accuracy for PAD in people with diabetes with or without DFU. However, an ABI <0.9 or >1.3, TBI of <0.70, and absent or monophasic pedal Doppler waveforms are useful to identify the presence of disease. The ability of the tests to exclude disease is variable and although reliability may be acceptable, evidence of error in the measurements means test results that are within normal limits should be considered with caution and in the context of other vascular assessment findings (e.g., pedal pulse palpation and clinical signs) and progress of DFU healing.
Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus , Pie Diabético , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica , Adulto , Humanos , Estudios Prospectivos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica/complicaciones , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica/diagnóstico , Pie Diabético/etiología , Pie Diabético/complicaciones , Índice Tobillo BraquialRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Based on data supporting a volume-outcome relationship in elective aortic aneurysm repair, the Society of Vascular Surgery (SVS) guidelines recommend that endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) be localized to centers that perform ≥10 operations annually and have a perioperative mortality and conversion-to-open rate of ≤2% and that open aortic repair (OAR) be localized to centers that perform ≥10 open aortic operations annually and have a perioperative mortality ≤5%. However, the number and distribution of centers meeting the SVS criteria remains unclear. This study aimed to estimate the temporal trends and geographic distribution of Centers Meeting the SVS Aortic Guidelines (CMAG) in the United States. METHODS: The SVS Vascular Quality Initiative was queried for all OAR, aortic bypasses, and EVAR from 2011 to 2019. Annual OAR and EVAR volume, 30-day elective operative mortality for OAR or EVAR, and EVAR conversion-to-open rate for all centers were calculated. The SVS guidelines for OAR and EVAR, individually and combined, were applied to each institution leading to a CMAG designation. The proportion of CMAGs by region (West, Midwest, South, and Northeast) were compared by year using a χ2 test. Temporal trends were estimated using a multivariable logistic regression for CMAG, adjusting by region. RESULTS: Overall, 67,865 patients (49,264 EVAR; 11,010 OAR; 7591 aortic bypasses) at 336 institutions were examined. The proportion of EVAR CMAGs increased nationally by 1.7% annually from 51.6% (n = 33/64) in 2011 to 67.1% (n = 190/283) in 2019 (ß = .05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.01-0.09; P = .02). The proportion of EVAR CMAGs across regions ranged from 27.3% to 66.7% in 2011 to 63.9% to 72.9% in 2019. In contrast, the proportion of OAR CMAGs has decreased nationally by 1.8% annually from 32.8% (n = 21/64) in 2011 to 16.3% (n = 46/283) in 2019 (ß = -.14; 95% CI, -0.19 to -0.10; P < .01). Combined EVAR and OAR CMAGs were even less frequent and decreased by 1.5% annually from 26.6% (n = 17/64) in 2011 to 13.1% (n = 37/283) in 2019 (ß = -.12; 95% CI, -0.17 to -0.07; P < .01). In 2019, there was no significant difference in regional variation of the proportion of combined EVAR and OAR CMAGs (P = .82). CONCLUSIONS: Although an increasing proportion of institutions nationally meet the SVS guidelines for EVAR, a smaller proportion meet them for OAR, with a concerning downward trend. These data question whether we can safely offer OAR at most institutions, have important implications about sufficient OAR exposure for trainees, and support regionalization of OAR.
Asunto(s)
Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular , Procedimientos Endovasculares , Especialidades Quirúrgicas , Humanos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Procedimientos Endovasculares/efectos adversos , Prevalencia , Resultado del Tratamiento , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/diagnóstico por imagen , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/cirugía , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/efectos adversosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Nonhome discharge (NHD) to a rehabilitation or skilled nursing facility after elective endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) is uncommon. However, NHD after surgery has an important impact on patient quality of life and postdischarge outcomes. Understanding factors that put patients undergoing EVAR at high risk for NHD is essential to providing adequate preoperative counseling and shared decision making. This study aimed to identify independent predictors of NHD following elective EVAR and to create a clinically useful preoperative risk score. METHODS: Elective EVAR cases were queried from the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative 2014-2018. A risk score was created by splitting the data set into two-thirds for development and one-third for validation. A parsimonious stepwise hierarchical multivariable logistic regression controlling for hospital level variation was performed in the development dataset, and the beta-coefficients were used to assign points for a risk score. The score was then validated, and model performance assessed. RESULTS: Overall, 24,426 patients were included and 932 (3.8%) required NHD. Multivariable analysis in the development group identified independent predictors of NHD, which were used to create a 20-point risk score. Patients were stratified into 3 groups based upon their risk score: low risk (0-7 points; n = 16,699) with an NHD rate of 1.8%, moderate risk (8-13 points; n = 7,315) with an NHD rate of 7.3%, and high risk (≥14 points; n = 412) with an NHD rate of 21.8%. The risk score had good predictive ability with c-statistic = 0.75 for model development and c-statistic = 0.73 in the validation dataset. CONCLUSIONS: This novel risk score can predict NHD following EVAR using characteristics that can be identified preoperatively. Utilization of this score may allow for improved risk assessment, preoperative counseling, and shared decision making.
Asunto(s)
Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal , Aneurisma de la Aorta , Procedimientos Endovasculares , Humanos , Alta del Paciente , Cuidados Posteriores , Calidad de Vida , Procedimientos Endovasculares/efectos adversos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Medición de Riesgo , Aneurisma de la Aorta/cirugía , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/diagnóstico por imagen , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/cirugía , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/etiologíaRESUMEN
Diabetes related foot complications have become a major cause of morbidity and are implicated in most major and minor amputations globally. Approximately 50% of people with diabetes and a foot ulcer have peripheral artery disease (PAD) and the presence of PAD significantly increases the risk of adverse limb and cardiovascular events. The International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) has published evidence based guidelines on the management and prevention of diabetes related foot complications since 1999. This guideline is an update of the 2019 IWGDF guideline on the diagnosis, prognosis and management of peripheral artery disease in people with diabetes mellitus and a foot ulcer. For this guideline the IWGDF, the European Society for Vascular Surgery and the Society for Vascular Surgery decided to collaborate to develop a consistent suite of recommendations relevant to clinicians in all countries. This guideline is based on three new systematic reviews. Using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework clinically relevant questions were formulated, and the literature was systematically reviewed. After assessing the certainty of the evidence, recommendations were formulated which were weighed against the balance of benefits and harms, patient values, feasibility, acceptability, equity, resources required, and when available, costs. Through this process five recommendations were developed for diagnosing PAD in a person with diabetes, with and without a foot ulcer or gangrene. Five recommendations were developed for prognosis relating to estimating likelihood of healing and amputation outcomes in a person with diabetes and a foot ulcer or gangrene. Fifteen recommendations were developed related to PAD treatment encompassing prioritisation of people for revascularisation, the choice of a procedure and post-surgical care. In addition, the Writing Committee has highlighted key research questions where current evidence is lacking. The Writing Committee believes that following these recommendations will help healthcare professionals to provide better care and will reduce the burden of diabetes related foot complications.