Preliminary Report of Endovascular Treatment for Critical Limb Ischemia Patients with Connective Tissue Disease: Cases Series and Review of the Literature.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Obara H
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4452610 | biostudies-other | 2015 Jun
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectiveOur objective was to analyze periprocedural and 1-year outcomes of peripheral endovascular intervention (PVI) for critical limb ischemia (CLI).MethodsWe reviewed 1244 patients undergoing 1414 PVIs for CLI (rest pain, 29%; tissue loss, 71%) within the Vascular Study Group of New England (VSGNE) from January 2010 to December 2011. Overall survival (OS), amputation-free survival (AFS), and freedom from major amputation at 1 year were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox proportional hazards models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).ResultsThe number of arteries treated during each procedure were 1 (49%), 2 (35%), 3 (12%), and ≥4 (5%). Target arterial segments and TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus classifications were aortoiliac, 27% (A, 48%; B, 28%; C, 12%; and D, 12%); femoral-popliteal, 48% (A, 29%; B, 34%; C, 20%; and D, 17%); and infrapopliteal, 25% (A, 17%; B, 14%; C, 25%; D, 44%). Technical success was 92%. Complications included access site hematoma (5.0%), occlusion (0.3%), and distal embolization (2.4%). Mortality and major amputation rates were 2.8% and 2.2% at 30 days, respectively. Overall percutaneous or open reintervention rate was 8.0% during the first year. At 1-year, OS, AFS, and freedom from major amputation were 87%, 87%, and 94% for patients with rest pain and 80%, 71%, and 81% for patients with tissue loss. Independent predictors of reduced 1-year OS (C index = .74) included dialysis (HR, 3.8; 95% CI, 2.8-5.1; P < .01), emergency procedure (HR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.0-6.2; P = .05), age >80 years (HR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.7-2.8; P < .01), not living at home preoperatively (HR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.4-2.8; P < .01), creatinine >1.8 mg/dL (HR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.3-2.8; P < .01), congestive heart failure (HR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.3-2.2; P < .01), and chronic β-blocker use (HR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.0-1.9; P = .03), whereas independent preoperative ambulation (HR, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.6-0.9; P = .014) was protective. Independent predictors of major amputation (C index = .69) at 1 year included dialysis (HR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.6-4.5; P < .01), tissue loss (HR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.1-3.7; P = .02), prior major contralateral amputation (HR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.1-3.5; P = .02), non-Caucasian race (HR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.0-2.9; P = .045), and male gender (HR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1-2.6; P = .03), whereas smoking (HR, .60; 95% CI, 0.4-1.0; P = .042) was protective.ConclusionsSurvival and major amputation after PVI for CLI are associated with different patient characteristics. Dialysis dependence is a common predictor that portends especially poor outcomes. These data may facilitate efforts to improve patient selection and, after further validation, enable risk-adjusted outcome reporting for CLI patients undergoing PVI.
| S-EPMC5315445 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:Lower extremity bypass (LEB) has traditionally been the "gold standard" in the treatment of critical limb ischemia (CLI). Infrainguinal endovascular intervention (IEI) has become more commonly performed than LEB, but comparative outcomes are limited. We sought to compare rates of major adverse limb events (MALEs) and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) after LEB and IEI in a propensity score-matched, national cohort of patients with CLI. METHODS:The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) vascular targeted files (2011-2014) for LEB and IEI were merged. CLI patients were identified by ischemic rest pain or tissue loss. Patients were matched on a 1:1 basis for propensity to undergo LEB or IEI. Primary outcomes were 30-day MALEs and MACEs. Within the propensity-matched cohort, multivariate logistic regression was used to identify independent predictors of MALEs and MACEs. RESULTS:A total of 13,294 LEBs and IEIs were identified, with 8066 cases performed for CLI. Propensity matching identified 3848 cases (1924 per group). There were no differences in preoperative variables between the propensity-matched LEB and IEI groups (all P > .05). At 30 days, rates of MALEs were significantly lower in the LEB group (9.2% LEB vs IEI 12.2%; P = .003). On multivariate logistic regression, bypass with single-segment saphenous vein vs IEI (odds ratio [OR], 0.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-0.92; P = .01), bypass with alternative conduit (prosthetic, spliced vein, or composite) vs IEI (OR, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.56-0.98; P = .04), antiplatelet therapy (OR, 0.8; 95% CI, 0.58-1.00; P = .049), and statin therapy (OR, 0.8; 95% CI, 0.62-0.99; P = .04) were protective against MALEs, whereas infrageniculate intervention (OR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.09-1.72; P = .01) and a history of prior bypass of the same arterial segment (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.41-2.41; P <. 0001) were predictive. Rates of 30-day MACEs were not significantly different (4.9% LEB vs 3.7% IEI; P = .07) between the groups. Independent predictors of MACEs included age (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01-1.04; P = .01), steroid use (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.08-2.99; P = .03), congestive heart failure (OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.00-1.96; P = .02), beta blocker use (OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.09-1.43; P = .01), dialysis (OR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.55-3.45; P < .0001), totally dependent functional status (OR, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.25-7.58; P = .02), and suboptimal conduit for LEB compared with IEI (OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.08-2.36; P = .02). CONCLUSIONS:Within this large, propensity-matched, national cohort, LEB predicted lower risk-adjusted 30-day MALE rate compared with IEI. Furthermore, there was no difference in 30-day MACE rate between the groups despite higher inherent risk with open surgical procedures. Therefore, this study supports the effectiveness and primacy of LEB for revascularization in CLI.
| S-EPMC5612844 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The significance of hospital readmission after endovascular therapy for critical limb ischemia (CLI) is not well established. We sought to investigate the incidence, timing, and causes of readmissions after endovascular therapy for CLI and whether readmission is associated with major adverse limb events (MALE) or mortality.This was a retrospective study of 252 patients treated with endovascular therapy for CLI. During median follow-up of 381 days (interquartile range [IQR], 115-718), 140 (56%) were readmitted, with median time to readmission of 83 days (IQR, 33-190). Readmission within 30 days occurred in 14% of patients (n=35; 25% of readmissions). Most readmissions occurred between 30 and 180 days (n=67; 48% of readmissions). The most frequent reason for readmission was unhealed wounds (n=63; 45% of readmissions). Independent predictors of readmission by Cox proportional hazards analysis were unhealed wounds, presence of multiple wounds, age ≥70, female sex, hemodialysis, and history of heart failure (P<0.05 for each). By Kaplan-Meier analysis, readmission was greatest in patients with unhealed wounds, followed by patients who never had a wound, and lowest in patients whose wounds completely healed (P<0.0001 overall, and P<0.01 between groups). After multivariable adjustment, readmission remained an independent predictor of composite MALE (major amputation, bypass, or endarterectomy) or mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.5-6.5; P=0.002).Most readmissions occur 30 and 180 days after endovascular therapy for nonprocedural reasons. Unhealed wounds are an independent risk factor for readmission. Readmission is associated with increased MALE and mortality after endovascular therapy for CLI.
| S-EPMC4889187 | biostudies-other
Project description:We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes between endovascular treatment and inframalleolar bypass surgery for critical limb ischemia (CLI) in patients with thromboangiitis obliterans (TAO) and to assess the role of bypass surgery in the era of innovative endovascular treatment. Between January 2007 and December 2017, a total of 33 consecutive patients with the diagnosis of TAO presenting with CLI who underwent endovascular treatment (endovascular group, n = 22) or bypass surgery to the pedal or plantar vessels (bypass group, n = 11) were included and analyzed retrospectively. The primary endpoint was defined as a major amputation of the index limb, and the secondary endpoint was defined as graft occlusion, regardless of the number of subsequent procedures. In the bypass group, six patients (55%) had undergone previous failed endovascular procedures and/or arterial bypass surgery to the index limb before inframalleolar bypass, and two patients (18%) received microvascular flap reconstruction after bypass surgery. During the median follow-up period of 32 months (range 1-115 months), there were no significant differences in primary and secondary endpoints between the two groups although the bypass group had a higher Rutherford class than the endovascular group. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed that there were similar limb salvage (P = 0.95) and graft patency rates (P = 0.39). In conclusion, endovascular treatment is a valid strategy leading to an acceptable limb salvage rate for TAO patients, and surgical bypass to distal target vessels could play a vital role in cases of previous failed endovascular treatment or extensive soft tissue loss of the foot.
| S-EPMC6177182 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to compare different interventional methods for treatment of (sub)acute limb ischemia upon thrombotic occlusions of the lower extremity in terms of their safety and efficacy in a tertiary hospital setting.DesignThis is a retrospective, single-center study of non-randomized data.MethodsA total of 202 patients, including 26 critically ill patients, underwent rotational thrombectomy (Rotarex®), local thrombolysis (recombinant tissue plasminogen activator), or combination of both at the University Hospital Heidelberg (2006-2015). The different interventional procedures were compared in terms of overall and amputation-free survival, as well as patency in a 1-year follow-up (Kaplan-Meier analysis).ResultsThe study demonstrated a primary revascularization success of >98% in all groups. One year after revascularization, primary and secondary patency after mechanical thrombectomy alone were significantly better in comparison to local thrombolysis or a combination of Rotarex® and lysis (63% and 85%, P<0.05). Overall survival 12 months after intervention reached up to 96% in noncritically ill patients, and amputation-free survival was 94.3% in all three groups. Mean hospitalization duration and rate of major bleedings were significantly increased after thrombolysis compared to Rotarex® (P<0.05).ConclusionIn patients with (sub)acute limb ischemia, Rotarex® mechanical thrombectomy represents a safe and effective alternative to thrombolysis and is associated with a reduced rate of major bleedings, shorter hospitalization durations, and lower costs.
| S-EPMC5402877 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceThe Bypass Versus Angioplasty for Severe Ischemia of the Leg randomized controlled trial showed comparable outcomes between endovascular revascularization (ER) and surgical revascularization (SR) for patients with critical limb ischemia (CLI). However, several observational studies showed mixed results. Most of these studies were conducted before advanced endovascular technologies were available.ObjectiveTo compare ER and SR treatment strategies for 6-month outcomes among patients with CLI.Design, setting, and participantsThis retrospective, population-based cohort study used the Nationwide Readmissions Database to identify 66 277 patients with CLI who underwent ER or SR from January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2018. Data analyses were conducted from January 1, 2022, to February 8, 2022. A propensity score with 1:1 matching was applied. Patients with CLI who underwent ER or SR were identified, and those with missing information on the length of stay and/or younger than 18 years were excluded.ExposuresEndovascular or surgical revascularization.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was a major amputation at 6 months. Significant secondary outcomes were in-hospital and 6-month mortality and an in-hospital safety composite of acute kidney injury, major bleeding, and vascular complication. Subgroup analysis was conducted for major amputation in high-volume centers.ResultsA total of 66 277 patients were identified between 2016 and 2018 who underwent ER or SR for CLI. The Nationwide Readmissions Database does not provide racial and ethnic categories. The mean (SD) age of the cohort was 69.3 (12) years, and 62.5% of patients were male. A total of 54 546 patients (82.3%) underwent ER and 11 731 (17.7%) underwent SR. After propensity score matching, 11 106 matched pairs were found. Endovascular revascularization was associated with an 18% higher risk of major amputation compared with SR (997 of 10 090 [9.9%] vs 869 of 10 318 [8.4%]; hazard ratio, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.08-1.29; P = .001). However, no difference was observed in major amputation risk when both procedures were performed in high-volume centers. Endovascular revascularization and SR had similar mortality rates (517 of 11 106 [4.7%] vs 490 of 11 106 [4.4%]; hazard ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.93-1.20; P = .39). However, the ER group had a 17% lower risk of in-hospital safety outcomes compared with the SR group (2584 of 11 106 [23.3%] vs 2979 of 11 106 [26.8%]; odds ratio, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.78-0.88; P < .001).Conclusions and relevanceThe results of this study suggest that ER was safer, without any difference in mortality, but ER was associated with an increased risk of major amputation compared with SR. However, the risk of major amputation was similar when both procedures were performed at high-volume centers.
| S-EPMC9391961 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCritical limb ischemia remains a difficult disease to treat, with limited level one data. The BEST-CLI trial (Best Endovascular vs Best Open Surgical Therapy in Patients with Critical Limb Ischemia) is attempting to answer whether initial treatment with open surgical bypass or endovascular therapy improves outcomes, although it remains in enrollment. This study aims to compare amputation-free survival and reintervention rates in patients treated with initial open surgical bypass or endovascular intervention for ischemic ulcers of the lower extremities.Methods and resultsUsing California nonfederal hospital data linked to statewide death data, all patients with lower extremity ulcers and a diagnosis of peripheral artery disease who underwent a revascularization procedure from 2005 to 2013 were identified. Propensity scores were formulated from baseline patient characteristics. Inverse probability weighting was used with Kaplan-Meier analysis to determine amputation-free survival and time to reintervention for open versus endovascular treatment. Mixed-effects Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to adjust for patient ability to manage their disease and hospital revascularization volume. A total of 16 800 patients were identified. Open surgical bypass was the initial treatment in 5970 (36%) while 10 830 (64%) underwent endovascular interventions. Patients in the endovascular group were slightly younger compared with the open group (70 versus 71 years, ±12 years; P<0.001). Endovascular-first patients were more likely to have comorbid renal failure (36% versus 24%), coronary artery disease (34% versus 32%), congestive heart failure (19% versus 15%), and diabetes mellitus (65% versus 58%; all P values <0.05). After inverse propensity weighting as well as adjustment for patient ability to manage their disease and hospital revascularization experience, open surgery first was associated with a worse amputation-free survival (hazard ratio, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.13-1.20) with no difference in mortality (hazard ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.89-1.11). Endovascular first was associated with higher rates of reintervention (hazard ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.14-1.23).ConclusionsPatients with critical limb ischemia have multiple comorbidities, and initial surgical bypass is associated with poorer amputation-free survival compared with an endovascular-first approach, perhaps due to increased severity of wounds at the time of presentation.
| S-EPMC6668925 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Critical limb ischemia (CLI) is a severe form of peripheral artery disease associated with high morbidity and mortality. The primary therapeutic goals in treating CLI are to reduce the risk of adverse cardiovascular events, relieve ischemic pain, heal ulcers, prevent major amputation, and improve quality of life (QoL) and survival. These goals may be achieved by medical therapy, endovascular intervention, open surgery, or amputation and require a multidisciplinary approach including pain management, wound care, risk factors reduction, and treatment of comorbidities. No-option patients are potential candidates for the novel angiogenic therapies. The application of genetic, molecular, and cellular-based modalities, the so-called therapeutic angiogenesis, in the treatment of arterial obstructive diseases has not shown consistent efficacy. This article summarizes the current status related to the management of patients with CLI and discusses the current findings of the emerging modalities for therapeutic angiogenesis.
| S-EPMC3761355 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Peripheral artery disease, caused by chronic arterial occlusion of the lower extremities, affects over 200 million people worldwide. Peripheral artery disease can progress into critical limb ischemia (CLI), its more severe manifestation, which is associated with higher risk of limb amputation and cardiovascular death. Aiming to improve tissue perfusion, therapeutic angiogenesis held promise to improve ischemic limbs using delivery of growth factors but has not successfully translated into benefits for patients. Moreover, accumulating studies suggest that impaired downstream signaling of these growth factors (or angiogenic resistance) may significantly contribute to CLI, particularly under harsh environments, such as diabetes mellitus. Noncoding RNAs are essential regulators of gene expression that control a range of pathophysiologies relevant to CLI, including angiogenesis/arteriogenesis, hypoxia, inflammation, stem/progenitor cells, and diabetes mellitus. In this review, we summarize the role of noncoding RNAs, including microRNAs and long noncoding RNAs, as functional mediators or biomarkers in the pathophysiology of CLI. A better understanding of these ncRNAs in CLI may provide opportunities for new targets in the prevention, diagnosis, and therapeutic management of this disabling disease state.
| S-EPMC7047615 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesHeavy cannabis use has been associated with the development of acute myocardial infarction and stroke. The objective of this study was to determine if heavy, chronic cannabis use is associated with the development of acute limb ischemia (ALI) or critical limb ischemia (CLI).MethodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study within the National Inpatient Sample (2006-2015). Patients without cannabis use disorder (CUD) were matched to patients with CUD in a 2:1 ratio using propensity scores. Our primary outcomes were incidence of ALI and CLI. Secondary outcomes included incidence of acute mesenteric ischemia (AMI), chronic mesenteric ischemia (CMI), frequency of open or endovascular interventions, length of stay, and total costs. Sensitivity analyses were performed with alternative models, including in the entire unmatched cohort with regression models utilizing survey weights to account for sampling methodology.ResultsWe identified a cohort of 46,297 857 unmatched patients. Patients with CUD in the unmatched cohort were younger, with less cardiovascular risk factors, but higher rates of smoking and substance abuse. The matched cohort included 824,856 patients with CUD and 1,610,497 controls. Those with CUD had a higher incidence of ALI (OR 1.20 95% CI: 1.04-1.38 P=.016). Following multiple sensitivity analyses, there was no robust association between CLI and CUD. We observed no robust association of CUD with AMI, CMI, procedures performed, frequency of amputation, costs, or total length of stay.ConclusionsCannabis use disorder was associated with a significantly higher incidence of admission for acute limb ischemia. CUD was not associated with an increased risk of critical limb ischemia following sensitivity analysis. Given CUD is often seen in younger, less co-morbid patients it provides an important target for intervention in this population.
| S-EPMC9163779 | biostudies-literature