How multidisciplinary clinics may mitigate socioeconomic barriers to care for chronic limb-threatening ischemia.

OBJECTIVE: Although multidisciplinary clinics improve outcomes in chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI), their role in addressing socioeconomic disparities is unknown. Our institution treats patients with CLTI at both traditional general vascular clinics and a multidisciplinary Limb Preservation Program (LPP). The LPP is in a minority community, providing expedited care at a single facility by a consistent team. We compared outcomes within the LPP with our institution's traditional clinics and explored patients' perspectives on barriers to care to evaluate if the LPP might address them. METHODS: All patients undergoing index revascularization for CLTI from 2014 to 2023 at our institution were stratified by clinic type (LPP or traditional). We collected clinical and socioeconomic variables, including Area Deprivation Index (ADI). Patient characteristics were compared using χ2, Student t, or Mood median tests. Outcomes were compared using log-rank and multivariable Cox analysis. We also conducted semi-structured interviews to understand patient-perceived barriers. RESULTS: From 2014 to 2023, 983 limbs from 871 patients were revascularized; 19.5% of limbs were treated within the LPP. Compared with traditional clinic patients, more LPP patients were non-White (43.75% vs 27.43%; P < .0001), diabetic (82.29% vs 61.19%; P < .0001), dialysis-dependent (29.17% vs 13.40%; P < .0001), had ADI in the most deprived decile (29.38% vs 19.54%; P = .0061), resided closer to clinic (median 6.73 vs 28.84 miles; P = .0120), and had worse Wound, Ischemia, and foot Infection (WIfI) stage (P < .001). There were no differences in freedom from death, major adverse limb event (MALE), or patency loss. Within the most deprived subgroup (ADI >90), traditional clinic patients had earlier patency loss (P = .0108) compared with LPP patients. Multivariable analysis of the entire cohort demonstrated that increasing age, heart failure, dialysis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and increasing WIfI stage were independently associated with earlier death, and male sex was associated with earlier MALE. Ten traditional clinic patients were interviewed via convenience sampling. Emerging themes included difficulty understanding their disease, high visit frequency, transportation barriers, distrust of the health care system, and patient-physician racial discordance. CONCLUSIONS: LPP patients had worse comorbidities and socioeconomic deprivation yet had similar outcomes to healthier, less deprived non-LPP patients. The multidisciplinary clinic's structure addresses several patient-perceived barriers. Its proximity to disadvantaged patients and ability to conduct multiple appointments at a single visit may address transportation and visit frequency barriers, and the consistent team may facilitate patient education and improve trust. Including these elements in a multidisciplinary clinic and locating it in an area of need may mitigate some negative impacts of socioeconomic deprivation on CLTI outcomes.

Revascularization Outcomes Stratified by Glycemic Control in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus and Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) has increased alongside rising rates of diabetes mellitus (DM). While diabetic patients with CLTI have worse outcomes compared to patients without diabetes, conflicting data exist on the relationship between the severity of DM and CLTI outcomes. Close inspection of the relationship between DM severity and outcomes in CLTI may benefit surgical decision-making and patient education. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients who received endovascular intervention or surgical bypass for CLTI at our multidisciplinary Limb Preservation Program from 2013 to 2019 to collect patient characteristics using Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) reporting standards, arterial lesion characteristics from recorded angiograms, and outcomes, including survival, amputation, wound healing, and revascularization patency. Controlled DM was defined as SVS Grade 1 (controlled, not requiring insulin) and Grade 2 (controlled, requiring insulin), while uncontrolled DM was defined as SVS Grade 3 (uncontrolled), and DM severity was assessed using preoperative hemoglobin A1c (HgbA1c) values. Product-limit Kaplan-Meier was used to estimate survival functions. Univariable Cox proportional hazards analyses guided variable selection for multivariable analyses. RESULTS: Our Limb Preservation Program treated 177 limbs from 141 patients with DM. Patients with uncontrolled DM were younger (60.44 ± 10.67 vs. 65.93 ± 10.89 years old, P = 0.0009) and had higher HgbA1c values (8.97 ± 1.85% vs. 6.79 ± 1.10%, P < 0.0001). Fewer patients with uncontrolled DM were on dialysis compared to patients with controlled DM (15.6% vs. 30.9%, P = 0.0278). By Kaplan-Meier analysis, DM control did not affect time to mortality, limb salvage, wound healing, or loss of patency. However, multivariable proportional hazards analysis demonstrated increased risk of limb loss in patients with increasing HgbA1C (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.96 [1.42-2.80], P < 0.0001) or dialysis dependence (HR = 15.37 [3.44-68.73], P = 0.0003), increased risk of death in patients with worsening pulmonary status (HR = 1.70 [1.20-2.39], P = 0.0026), and increased risk of delayed wound healing in patients who are male (HR = 0.48 [0.29-0.79], P = 0.0495). No independent association existed between loss of patency with any of the variables we collected. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with uncontrolled DM, as defined by SVS reporting standards, do not have worse outcomes following revascularization for CLTI compared to patients with controlled DM. However, increasing HgbA1c is associated with a greater risk for early amputation. Before revascularization, specific attention to the level of glycemic control in patients with DM is important, even if DM is "controlled." In addition to aggressive attempts at improved glycemic control, those with elevated HgbA1c should receive careful education regarding their increased risk of amputation despite revascularization. Future work is necessary to incorporate the severity of DM into risk models of revascularization for the CLTI population.

The natural history of chronic limb-threatening ischemia after technical failure of endovascular intervention.

OBJECTIVES: The treatment for chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) has changed dramatically in the last few decades with a shift toward an endovascular-first approach and aggressive revascularization to achieve limb salvage. As the size of the CLTI population and intervention rates increase, patients will continue to experience technical failure (TF). Here, we describe the natural history of patients after TF of endovascular intervention for CLTI. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients with CLTI who attempted endovascular intervention or bypass at our multidisciplinary limb salvage center from 2013 to 2019. Patient characteristics were collected according to the Society for Vascular Surgery's reporting standards. Primary outcomes included survival, limb salvage, wound healing, and revascularization patency. Product-limit Kaplan-Meier estimated survival functions for these outcomes, and between-group comparisons were made using Mantel-Cox log-rank nonparametric tests. RESULTS: We identified 242 limbs from 220 unique patients who underwent primary bypass (n = 30) or attempted endovascular intervention (n = 212) at our limb salvage center. Endovascular intervention was a TF in 31 (14.6%) limbs. After TF, 13 limbs underwent secondary bypass and 18 limbs were managed medically. Patients who experienced TF tended to be older (P < .001), male (P = .003), current tobacco users (P = .014), have longer lesions (P = .001), and have chronic total occlusions of target arteries (P < .001) as compared with those who experienced technical success. Furthermore, the TF group had worse limb salvage (P = .047) and slower wound healing (P = .028), but their survival was not different. Survival, limb salvage, and wound healing were not different in patients who received secondary bypass or medical management after TF. The secondary bypass group was older (P = .012) and had a lower prevalence of tibial disease (P = .049) than the primary bypass group and trended toward decreased survival, limb salvage, and wound healing (P = .059, P = .083, and P = .051, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Increased age, male sex, current tobacco use, longer arterial lesions, and occluded target arteries are associated with TF of endovascular intervention. Limb salvage and wound healing are relatively poor after TF of endovascular intervention, but survival appears comparable with patients who experience technical success. Secondary bypass may not always rescue patients after TF, though our sample size limits statistical power. Interestingly, patients who received a secondary bypass after TF trended toward decreased survival, limb salvage, and wound healing compared with primary bypass.