Rehabilitation experiences following major lower limb amputation due to complications of vascular disease: a UK qualitative study.

PURPOSE: Rehabilitation experiences of lower limb amputees with poorer physical health have not been fully explored. This study aimed to qualitatively explore experiences of rehabilitation amongst patients who had recently undergone amputation due to complications of vascular disease. METHODS: Semi-structured, face-to-face interviews were conducted with 14 patients participating in the PLACEMENT randomised controlled feasibility trial (ISRCTN: 85710690; EudraCT: 2016-003544-37), which investigated the effectiveness of using a perineural catheter for postoperative pain relief following major lower limb amputation. Framework analysis was used to identify key themes and compare participant data. FINDINGS: Three main themes and corresponding sub-themes were identified: (i) other patients as inspiration; (ii) other patients as competition; and (iii) imagined futures. Perceptions relating to other patients played a key role in rehabilitation, providing a source of motivation, support, and competition. Participants' imagined futures were uncertain, and this was compounded by a lack of information and delays in equipment and/or adaptations. CONCLUSIONS: Findings highlight the importance of fellow patients in supporting rehabilitation following lower limb amputation. Enabling contact with other patients should thus be a key consideration when planning rehabilitation. There is a clear unmet need for realistic information relating to post-amputation recovery, tailored to the needs of individual patients.

There is a clear unmet need for patient information on rehabilitation following major lower limb amputation.Information about future mobility - particularly prosthesis use - should be realistic and individually tailored.The key role of fellow patients should be fully considered when planning post-amputation rehabilitation.

Clinical Effects of Tourniquet Use for Nontraumatic Major Lower Limb Amputation: A Two-Center Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: To investigate the effect of tourniquet use on outcomes after major lower limb amputation (MLLA) due to peripheral arterial disease or complications from diabetes mellitus. METHODS: In this 2-center retrospective observational study, vascular patients who underwent MLLA between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2020 at 2 UK hospitals were identified using operating theater databases. Hospital databases were used to access medical records, operation notes, and laboratory reports. The use of a tourniquet in each MLLA was noted. The primary outcome was postoperative hemoglobin (Hb) drop (g/L). Secondary outcomes were units of allogeneic blood transfused perioperatively, 90-day revision rates, 90-day wound breakdown rates, surgical site infection (SSI) rates (at 30 days), and 90-day mortality. A follow-up index (a measure of follow-up completeness) was calculated for all 30-day and 90-day outcomes. RESULTS: Four hundred seventy two patients underwent MLLA, of which 124 had a tourniquet applied. The median postoperative Hb drop was significantly lower in the tourniquet group compared to the nontourniquet group (13 [interquartile range 5-22] g/L vs. 20 [interquartile range 11-28] g/L; P ≤ 0.001). Thirty three point one percent (41) of tourniquet patients received a blood transfusion perioperatively, compared to 35.6% (124) of nontourniquet patients (P = 0.82). Sixteen percent (76) of patients required surgical revision within 90 days, with no significant difference between the tourniquet and nontourniquet group (20.2% tourniquet vs. 14.7% no tourniquet; P = 0.15). SSI rates (12.0% tourniquet vs. 10.6% no tourniquet, P = 0.66) and 90-day mortality (6.5% tourniquet vs. 10.1% no tourniquet; P = 0.23) were similar. Multivariable regression demonstrated that tourniquet use was independently associated with a reduced hemoglobin drop (ß = -4.671, 95% confidence interval -7.51 to -1.83, P ≤ 0.001) but was not associated with wound breakdown, revision surgery, or SSI. Hypertension, SSI, and below-knee amputation using the skew flap technique were all significant predictors of revision surgery. All follow-up indices were ≥ 0.97. CONCLUSIONS: Tourniquet use in MLLA was associated with a significantly lower fall in postoperative Hb without evidence of harm in terms of SSI, wound breakdown/revision rates, or mortality.

Comparing the Benefit of Duplex Ultrasound Surveillance Following Both Infrainguinal Bypass Surgery and Stenting for Femoro-Popliteal Disease.

OBJECTIVE: Duplex ultrasound surveillance (DUS) is commonly used following infrainguinal vein bypass. The role of DUS following endovascular revascularisation is as yet unclear. This study focuses on the role of DUS in a contemporary group of patients undergoing infrainguinal bypass or stent insertion. METHODS: All patients undergoing either an infrainguinal vein graft bypass or stent insertion into the femoro-popliteal segment (November 2014 - January 2017) were identified. Patients were followed up for 2 years. Data on entry into DUS, pre-operative characteristics, adjunctive pharmacotherapy and reintervention were collated. The primary outcomes were major lower limb amputation and mortality at 2 years post revascularisation. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-five patients underwent infrainguinal vein bypass and 100 patients underwent stent insertion. 107 patients in the bypass cohort and 58 patients in the stent cohort entered DUS. For the bypass cohort, entering DUS was associated with a lower mortality rate (P = .003) but was not associated with an improvement in amputation rates. The odds ratio of major amputation or mortality was greater in the no surveillance group (4.58, 95% CI: 1.855 - 11.364). In the stent cohort, DUS was not associated with a significant improvement in either major amputation or death (odds ratio 2.13 (95% CI 0.903 - 5.051; P = .081). CONCLUSION: DUS was associated with improved survival rates in patients undergoing lower limb bypass but had no benefit in those patients undergoing stent insertion. The role of DUS following stent insertion in the femoropopliteal segment needs to be better defined.

Editor's Choice - Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis of Randomised Controlled Trials Supporting Implantable Devices for Vascular and Endovascular Procedures.

OBJECTIVE: To identify implantable devices currently used for vascular and endovascular procedures, to ascertain how many have randomised controlled trial (RCT) evidence available, and to assess the quality of that evidence. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, DARE, PROSPERO, clinical trial registries, and Cochrane databases. REVIEW METHODS: A list of current devices used in both vascular and endovascular procedures was generated by searching conference proceedings, manufacturer catalogues, and websites. MEDLINE, Embase, DARE, PROSPERO, clinical trial registries, and Cochrane databases were searched from inception up to June 2020. The primary outcome was the availability of RCTs to support the use of a vascular implantable device. RCTs were then quality assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. RESULTS: A total of 116 current vascular implantable devices were identified. The systematic literature review identified 165 RCTs. Eighty-three of the RCTs (50.3%) applied to 33 of the 116 (28.4%) current implantable devices. When grouped by device type, eight of the 13 types (62%) had at least one RCT performed. There was a high risk of bias across the majority of the RCTs, with only nine (5.4%) deemed to be at low risk of bias. Only 22 (13.3%) RCTs had a clear safety outcome. CONCLUSION: Sixty-two per cent of implantable device types for use in vascular and endovascular interventions had at least one RCT available to show equivalence to previous devices or safety. RCTs were generally of low quality and are decreasing in frequency with time. With medical implantable device failure being increasingly recognised as causing significant harm to patients worldwide, there is a clear need for a more robust implantable device regulation and approval systems.

Systematic review and narrative synthesis of surveillance practices after endovascular intervention for lower limb peripheral arterial disease.

OBJECTIVE: The optimal timing and modality of surveillance after endovascular intervention for peripheral arterial disease is controversial, and no randomized trial to assess the value of peripheral endovascular intervention has ever been performed. The aim of this systematic review was to examine the practice of surveillance after peripheral endovascular intervention in randomized trials. METHODS: We used the Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and WHO trial registry databases in this systematic review of the literature to capture surveillance strategies used in randomized trials comparing endovascular interventions. Surveillance protocols were assessed for completeness, modalities used, duration, and intensity. RESULTS: Ninety-six different surveillance protocols were reported in 103 trials comparing endovascular interventions. Protocol specification was incomplete in 32% of trials. The majority of trials used multiple surveillance modalities (mean of 3.46 modalities), most commonly clinical examination (96%), ankle-brachial index (80%), duplex ultrasound examination (75%), and digital subtraction angiography (51%). Trials involving infrapopliteal lesions used more angiographic surveillance than trials with femoropopliteal lesions (P = .006). The median number of surveillance visits in the first 12 months after intervention was three and the mean surveillance duration was 21 months. Trials treating infrapopliteal vessels had a higher surveillance intensity compared with those treating femoropopliteal lesions in the first 12 months after endovascular intervention (mean 5 vs 3 surveillance visits; P = .017). Trials with drug-eluting devices had longer surveillance duration compared with those without (mean 26 vs 19 months; P = .020). CONCLUSIONS: There is a high level of variation in the modality, duration, and intensity of surveillance protocols used in randomized trials comparing different types of peripheral endovascular arterial intervention. Further research is required to determine the value and impact of postprocedural surveillance on patient outcomes.

The PReliMinAry (Pain Relief in Major Amputation) Survey.

OBJECTIVES: Major Lower Limb Amputation (MLLA) is associated with significant peri- and post-operative pain and has been identified as a research priority by patient and healthcare groups. The PReliMinAry survey was designed to evaluate existing MLLA analgesia strategies; identifying areas of equipoise and informing future research. METHODS: A targeted multi-national, multi-disciplinary survey was conducted via SurveyMonkey® (October 5, 2020-November 3, 2020) and advertised via social media and society email lists. The 10-questions explored 'pain-team' services, pre-operative neuroleptic medication, pre-incision peripheral nerve blocks and catheters, surgically placed nerve catheters, post-operative adjunctive regimens, future research engagement and equipoise. RESULTS: Seventy-six responses were received from 60 hospitals worldwide. Twelve hospitals(20%) had a dedicated MLLA pain team, 7(12%) had none. Most pain teams (n = 52; 87%) assessed pain with a 0-10 numerical rating scale. Over half of respondents "never" preloaded patients with oral neuroleptic agents(n= 42/76; 55%). Forty-seven hospitals(78%) utilized patient controlled opioid analgesia. Most hospitals are able to provide pre-incision loco-regional peripheral nerve blocks, nerve catheters and surgical nerve catheters (95%, 77%, and 90% respectively), but use was variable. Ultrasound(US) guided peripheral nerve catheters were "infrequently" or "never" used in 57% of hospitals, whilst 23% "infrequently" or "never" utilize surgically placed nerve catheters. CONCLUSIONS: The survey revealed a preference towards 'single-shot' nerve blocks and surgical catheters. A difference between the use of US guided nerve catheters and those surgically placed likely reflects the difference of literature evaluating these techniques. Most respondents felt there was equipoise surrounding future trials evaluating nerve blocks/catheters, but less so for surgical catheters.

Exploring patients' experiences of analgesia after major lower limb amputation: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: To explore patient experiences, understanding and perceptions of analgesia following major lower limb amputation. DESIGN: Qualitative interview study, conducted as part of a randomised controlled feasibility trial. SETTING: Participants were recruited from two general hospitals in South Wales. PARTICIPANTS: Interview participants were patients enrolled in PLACEMENT (Perineural Local Anaesthetic Catheter aftEr Major lowEr limb amputatioN Trial): a randomised controlled feasibility trial comparing the use of perineural catheter (PNC) versus standard care for postoperative pain relief following major lower limb amputation. PLACEMENT participants who completed 5-day postoperative follow-up, were able and willing to participate in a face-to-face interview, and had consented to be contacted, were eligible to take part in the qualitative study. A total of 20 interviews were conducted with 14 participants: 10 male and 4 female. METHODS: Semi-structured, face-to-face interviews were conducted with participants over two time points: (1) up to 1 month and (2) at least 6 months following amputation. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using a framework approach. RESULTS: Interviews revealed unanticipated benefits of PNC usage for postoperative pain relief. Participants valued the localised and continuous nature of this mode of analgesia in comparison to opioids. Concerns about opioid dependence and side effects of pain relief medication were raised by participants in both treatment groups, with some reporting trying to limit their intake of analgesics. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest routine placement of a PNC following major lower limb amputation could reduce postoperative pain, particularly for patient groups at risk of postoperative delirium. This method of analgesic delivery also has the potential to reduce preoperative anxiety, alleviate the burden of pain management and minimise opioid use. Future research could further examine the comparison between patient-controlled analgesia and continuous analgesia in relation to patient anxiety and satisfaction with pain management. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN: 85710690; EudraCT: 2016-003544-37.

Groin Wound Infection after Vascular Exposure (GIVE) Risk Prediction Models: Development, Internal Validation, and Comparison with Existing Risk Prediction Models Identified in a Systematic Literature Review.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to develop and internally validate risk prediction models for predicting groin wound surgical site infections (SSIs) following arterial intervention and to evaluate the utility of existing risk prediction models for this outcome. METHODS: Data from the Groin wound Infection after Vascular Exposure (GIVE) multicentre cohort study were used. The GIVE study prospectively enrolled 1 039 consecutive patients undergoing an arterial procedure through 1 339 groin incisions. An overall SSI rate of 8.6% per groin incision, and a deep/organ space SSI rate of 3.8%, were reported. Eight independent predictors of all SSIs, and four independent predictors of deep/organ space SSIs were included in the development and internal validation of two risk prediction models. A systematic search of the literature was conducted to identify relevant risk prediction models for their evaluation. RESULTS: The "GIVE SSI risk prediction model" ("GIVE SSI model") and the "GIVE deep/organ space SSI risk prediction model" ("deep SSI model") had adequate discrimination (C statistic 0.735 and 0.720, respectively). Three other groin incision SSI risk prediction models were identified; both GIVE risk prediction models significantly outperformed these other risk models in this cohort (C statistic 0.618 - 0.629; p < .050 for inferior discrimination in all cases). CONCLUSION: Two models were created and internally validated that performed acceptably in predicting "all" and "deep" groin SSIs, outperforming current existing risk prediction models in this cohort. Future studies should aim to externally validate the GIVE models.

A systematic review of outcome reporting for interventions to treat people with diabetic foot ulceration.

BACKGROUND: Diabetic foot ulceration (DFU) is a challenging clinical problem that affects up to a quarter of patients with diabetes in their lifetime. An agreed set of outcomes for assessing treatments or interventions for DFU has not previously been considered. The aim of this study was to identify outcomes that are reported in clinical studies assessing a treatment or intervention for DFU, to inform the development of a core outcome set (COS). METHODS: Systematic literature searches were performed between January 2016 and March 2019. The search strategy was pre-registered with PROSPERO (CRD42019128250). Two authors independently screened abstracts for full text review. Outcomes were extracted from selected papers verbatim and categorized into domains according to established taxonomy. Consistency of outcome reporting was assessed. Overlapping outcomes were merged independently to condense the extracted list of outcomes for use in forthcoming consensus processes. RESULTS: Of 4645 abstracts identified, 114 studies met the inclusion criteria. There were 69 randomized studies, 40 prospective studies and 5 protocols. Some 948 outcomes were extracted verbatim. Outcome reporting was consistent for 474 (53%) outcomes. De-duplication left 714 unique verbatim outcomes across 33 domains. Merging of overlapping unique verbatim outcomes established 95 merged outcomes. CONCLUSION: This study describes contemporary outcomes reported in studies assessing interventions for DFU. Outcome reporting is considered to be poor as it was consistent in just over half of outcomes extracted. Merging of outcomes has identified 95 outcomes that can be taken forward in the development of a COS.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Effect of Perineural Catheters in Major Lower Limb Amputations.

OBJECTIVE: Controlling pain after major lower limb amputation (MLLA) is of critical importance to patients and clinicians. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the effect of perineural catheters (PNCs) on post-operative pain, post-operative morphine requirement, in-hospital mortality, long term phantom limb pain, and chronic stump pain. METHODS: A systematic review using PubMed, EMBASE via OVID and the Cochrane library from database inception (1946) to 20 October 2020 was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. Studies involving patients undergoing MLLA which reported on post-operative morphine requirement, pain scores, in-hospital mortality, phantom limb pain (PLP), and chronic stump pain were included. Studies comparing PNC use with epidural or wound site local anaesthetic infusions were excluded. Outcome data were extracted from individual studies and meta-analysis was performed using a random effects (Mantel-Haenszel) model for dichotomous data using an odds ratio (OR) summary statistic with 95% confidence intervals (CI), and with an inverse variance random effects model for continuous data using a standardised mean difference (SMD) summary statistic with 95% CIs. Sensitivity analyses were performed for post-operative pain scores and post-operative morphine requirement. Study quality was assessed using the Downs and Black score, and outcomes were assessed using the GRADE tool. RESULTS: Ten studies reporting on 731 patients were included, with 350 patients receiving a PNC and 381 receiving standard care. PNC use is associated with a reduction in post-operative pain (SMD -0.30, 95% CI -0.58 - -0.01, p = .040, I2 = 54%, GRADE quality of evidence: low) and post-operative morphine requirements (SMD -0.63, 95% CI -1.03 - -0.23, p = .002, I2 = 75%, GRADE quality of evidence: moderate), although the effect of PNC on reduced post-operative morphine requirements is lost on sensitivity analysis of randomised trials only (p = .40). No demonstrable effect was found on in-hospital mortality, PLP, or chronic stump pain (GRADE quality of evidence: low). CONCLUSION: PNC use in amputees is associated with a significant reduction in post-operative pain scores and post-operative morphine requirements, although this latter finding is lost on sensitivity analysis of randomised trials only.

Editor's Choice - Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Wound Adjuncts for the Prevention of Groin Wound Surgical Site Infection in Arterial Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Groin incision surgical site infections (SSIs) following arterial surgery are common and are a source of considerable morbidity. This review evaluates interventions and adjuncts delivered immediately before, during, or after skin closure, to prevent SSIs in patients undergoing arterial interventions involving a groin incision. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases were searched. REVIEW METHODS: This review was undertaken according to established international reporting guidelines and was registered prospectively with the International prospective register of systematic reviews (CRD42020185170). The MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases were searched using pre-defined search terms without date restriction. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies recruiting patients with non-infected groin incisions for arterial exposure were included; SSI rates and other outcomes were captured. Interventions reported in two or more studies were subjected to meta-analysis. RESULTS: The search identified 1 532 articles. Seventeen RCTs and seven observational studies, reporting on 3 747 patients undergoing 4 130 groin incisions were included. A total of seven interventions and nine outcomes were reported upon. Prophylactic closed incision negative pressure wound therapy (ciNPWT) reduced groin SSIs compared with standard dressings (odds ratio [OR] 0.34, 95% CI 0.23 - 0.51; p < .001, GRADE strength of evidence: moderate). Local antibiotics did not reduce groin SSIs (OR 0.60 95% CI 0.30 - 1.21 p = .15, GRADE strength: low). Subcuticular sutures (vs. transdermal sutures or clips) reduced groin SSI rates (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.17 - 0.65, p = .001, GRADE strength: low). Wound drains, platelet rich plasma, fibrin glue, and silver alginate dressings did not show any significant effect on SSI rates. CONCLUSION: There is evidence that ciNPWT and subcuticular sutures reduce groin SSI in patients undergoing arterial vascular interventions involving a groin incision. Local antibiotics did not reduce groin wound SSI, although the strength of this evidence is lower. No other interventions demonstrated a significant effect.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures for Major Lower Limb Amputation Caused by Peripheral Artery Disease or Diabetes: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: Most major lower limb amputations are related to peripheral artery disease (PAD) or diabetes. Just 40% of patients who undergo major lower limb amputation will use a prosthesis yet measures of surgical success commonly focus on prosthesis use. Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) are valuable to comprehensively evaluate health related quality of life (HRQL) after surgery. This systematic review aimed to identify and describe PROMs available to assess HRQL in patients after amputation for PAD or diabetes. METHODS: A search was conducted based on the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) for systematic reviews of PROMs. Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Cochrane CENTRAL were also searched from inception until August 2019. Included were articles describing the development, measurement properties, or evaluation of HRQL via a PROM in adult patients after amputation for PAD or diabetes. Studies of amputation exclusively for trauma or malignancy were excluded. Data were collected on study characteristics, PROM characteristics (generic/disease specific), and properties of amputation specific PROMs. RESULTS: Of 3 317 abstracts screened, 111 full text articles were assessed for eligibility and 64 included. Fifty-six studies evaluated HRQL, with 23 (46%) of these using an amputation specific PROM to do so. Eleven different amputation specific PROMs were identified, 10 (91%) of which were developed only for prosthesis users. One measure was suitable for use in all patients after amputation. This "Amputee single item mobility measure" includes a single item evaluating mobility. Nine studies reported some psychometric testing of an amputation specific PROM. CONCLUSION: A well tested, multidimensional PROM applicable to wheelchair and prosthetic users after amputation is lacking and urgently needed for studies in this field. Future work to develop an appropriate measure is required.

Correction to: The CLEAR (Considering Leading Experts' Antithrombotic Regimes around peripheral angioplasty) survey: an international perspective on antiplatelet and anticoagulant practice for peripheral arterial endovascular intervention.

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article.

Atherectomy for peripheral arterial disease.

BACKGROUND: Symptomatic peripheral arterial disease (PAD) has several treatment options, including angioplasty, stenting, exercise therapy, and bypass surgery. Atherectomy is an alternative procedure, in which atheroma is cut or ground away within the artery. This is the first update of a Cochrane Review published in 2014. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of atherectomy for peripheral arterial disease compared to other established treatments. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and Allied and Complementary Medicine (AMED) databases, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to 12 August 2019. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised controlled trials that compared atherectomy with other established treatments. All participants had symptomatic PAD with either claudication or critical limb ischaemia and evidence of lower limb arterial disease. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors screened studies for inclusion, extracted data, assessed risk of bias and used GRADE criteria to assess the certainty of the evidence. We resolved any disagreements through discussion. Outcomes of interest were: primary patency (at six and 12 months), all-cause mortality, fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular events, initial technical failure rates, target vessel revascularisation rates (TVR; at six and 12 months); and complications. MAIN RESULTS: We included seven studies, with a total of 527 participants and 581 treated lesions. We found two comparisons: atherectomy versus balloon angioplasty (BA) and atherectomy versus BA with primary stenting. No studies compared atherectomy with bypass surgery. Overall, the evidence from this review was of very low certainty, due to a high risk of bias, imprecision and inconsistency. Six studies (372 participants, 427 treated lesions) compared atherectomy versus BA. We found no clear difference between atherectomy and BA for the primary outcomes: six-month primary patency rates (risk ratio (RR) 1.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94 to 1.20; 3 studies, 186 participants; very low-certainty evidence); 12-month primary patency rates (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.84; 2 studies, 149 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or mortality rates (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.10 to 2.66, 3 studies, 210 participants, very low-certainty evidence). One study reported cardiac failure and acute coronary syndrome as causes of death at 24 months but it was unclear which arm the participants belonged to, and one study reported no cardiovascular events. There was no clear difference when examining: initial technical failure rates (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.08; 6 studies, 425 treated vessels; very low-certainty evidence), six-month TVR (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.06 to 4.42; 2 studies, 136 treated vessels; very low-certainty evidence) or 12-month TVR (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.42; 3 studies, 176 treated vessels; very low-certainty evidence). All six studies reported complication rates (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.68; 6 studies, 387 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and embolisation events (RR 2.51, 95% CI 0.64 to 9.80; 6 studies, 387 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Atherectomy may be less likely to cause dissection (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.54; 4 studies, 290 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and may be associated with a reduction in bailout stenting (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.74; 4 studies, 315 treated vessels; very low-certainty evidence). Four studies reported amputation rates, with only one amputation event recorded in a BA participant. We used subgroup analysis to compare the effect of plain balloons/stents and drug-eluting balloons/stents, but did not detect any differences between the subgroups. One study (155 participants, 155 treated lesions) compared atherectomy versus BA and primary stenting, so comparison was extremely limited and subject to imprecision. This study did not report primary patency. The study reported one death (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.23; 155 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and three complication events (RR 7.04, 95% CI 0.80 to 62.23; 155 participants; very low-certainty evidence) in a very small data set, making conclusions unreliable. We found no clear difference between the treatment arms in cardiovascular events (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.23; 155 participants; very low-certainty evidence). This study found no initial technical failure events, and TVR rates at six and 24 months showed little difference between treatment arms (RR 2.27, 95% CI 0.95 to 5.46; 155 participants; very low-certainty evidence and RR 2.05, 95% CI 0.96 to 4.37; 155 participants; very low-certainty evidence, respectively). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review update shows that the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of atherectomy on patency, mortality and cardiovascular event rates compared to plain balloon angioplasty, with or without stenting. We detected no clear differences in initial technical failure rates or TVR, but there may be reduced dissection and bailout stenting after atherectomy although this is uncertain. Included studies were small, heterogenous and at high risk of bias. Larger studies powered to detect clinically meaningful, patient-centred outcomes are required.

Development of Core Outcome Sets for People Undergoing Major Lower Limb Amputation for Complications of Peripheral Vascular Disease.

OBJECTIVE: Every year, thousands of patients with peripheral vascular disease undergo major lower limb amputation. Despite this, evidence for optimal management is weak. Core outcome sets capture consensus on the most important outcomes for a patient group to improve the consistency and quality of research. The aim was to define short and medium term core outcome sets for studies involving patients undergoing major lower limb amputation. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature and focus groups involving patients, carers, and healthcare professionals were used to derive a list of potential outcomes. Findings informed a three round online Delphi consensus process, where outcomes were rated for both short and medium term studies. The results of the Delphi process were discussed at a face to face consensus meeting, and recommendations were made for each core outcome set. RESULTS: A systematic review revealed 45 themes to carry forward to the consensus survey. These were supplemented by a further five from focus groups. The consensus survey received responses from 123 participants in round one, and 91 individuals completed all three rounds. In the final round, nine outcomes were rated as "core" for short term studies and a further nine for medium term studies. Wound infection and healing were rated as "core" for both short and medium term studies. Outcomes related to mortality, quality of life, communication, and additional healthcare needs were also rated as "core" for short term studies. In medium term studies, outcomes related to quality of life, mobility, and social integration/independence were rated as "core". The face to face stakeholder meeting ratified inclusion of all outcomes from the Delphi and suggested that deterioration of the other leg and psychological morbidity should also be reported for both short and medium term studies. CONCLUSION: Consensus was established on 11 core outcomes for short and medium term studies. It is recommended that all future studies involving patients undergoing major lower limb amputation should report these outcomes.