Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 1 de 1
Filtrar
Más filtros











Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Ann Vasc Surg ; 64: 33-42, 2020 Apr.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31629123

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare cryopreserved arterial allograft (CAA) to heparin-bonded prosthesis (HBP) in infragenicular bypasses for patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI). METHODS: This retrospective study took place in 2 university hospitals and included 41 consecutive patients treated for CLTI. In the absence of a suitable saphenous vein, an infragenicular bypass was performed using either CAA (24 cases) or HBP (17 cases). Kaplan-Meyer analysis compared primary and secondary patency and amputation-free survival rates. Binomial logistic regression analyzed risk factors for major amputation and thrombosis. RESULTS: The mean followup was 18.5 months (±14.3) in the CAA group, 17.6 (±6.1) in the HBP group. In the CAA group, primary and secondary patency rates at 12 months were 52% (±10.6) and 61% (±10.3), compared to 88% (±7.8) and 94% (±5.7) in the HBP group, respectively. The difference in patency rates was not statistically different (P = 0.27 and P = 0.28, respectively). The statistically significant factors of graft thrombosis were, a stage 4 from the WIfI classification (Wound Ischemia foot Infection) with a 6 times higher risk (P = 0.04), and a distal anastomosis on a leg artery with a 9 times higher risk of thrombosis (P = 0.03). Amputation-free survival rates at 18 months were similar between the groups (CCA: 75% (±9) versus HBP: 94% (±6), P = 0.11). Patients classified as WIfI stage 4 had 13 times higher odds to undergo major amputation than patients with WIfI stage 2 or 3 (95% CI, 1.16-160.93; P = 0.04). The intervention was longer in the CCA group of 74 min (278 min ± 86) compared to the HBP group (203 min ± 69). This difference was statistically significant (95% CI, 17.86-132.98), t(35) = 2.671, P = 0.01. CONCLUSIONS: CCA is not superior to HBP in infragenicular bypasses for CLTI, and may not be worth the extra cost and the longer operative duration.


Asunto(s)
Anticoagulantes/administración & dosificación , Bioprótesis , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/instrumentación , Prótesis Vascular , Materiales Biocompatibles Revestidos , Heparina/administración & dosificación , Isquemia/cirugía , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica/cirugía , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Aloinjertos , Amputación Quirúrgica , Anticoagulantes/efectos adversos , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/efectos adversos , Enfermedad Crónica , Criopreservación , Femenino , Francia , Oclusión de Injerto Vascular/etiología , Oclusión de Injerto Vascular/fisiopatología , Oclusión de Injerto Vascular/cirugía , Heparina/efectos adversos , Humanos , Isquemia/diagnóstico por imagen , Isquemia/fisiopatología , Recuperación del Miembro , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica/diagnóstico por imagen , Enfermedad Arterial Periférica/fisiopatología , Supervivencia sin Progresión , Diseño de Prótesis , Reoperación , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Trombosis/etiología , Trombosis/fisiopatología , Trombosis/cirugía , Factores de Tiempo , Grado de Desobstrucción Vascular
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA