Contemporary Revascularization Strategies and Outcomes Among Patients With Diabetes With Critical Limb Ischemia: Insights From the National Inpatient Sample

Infective endocarditis surgery timing

BACKGROUND

The optimum timing of surgical intervention in complicated left-sided infective endocarditis is not well established. Guidelines from various professional societies are not consistent regarding this. Data concerning this remains limited with conflicting results.

METHODS

The national inpatient database (NIS) was used to identify patients hospitalized from the year 2016 to 2020 for infective endocarditis and who underwent surgical intervention for complicated left-sided endocarditis. Primary and secondary outcomes were analyzed in patients who had surgical intervention within 7 days (early surgery group) and after 7 days (late surgery group) of the index hospitalization.

RESULTS

Primary outcome [composite of all-cause death, acute cerebrovascular accident (CVA), peripheral septic emboli, intracranial or intraspinal abscess, and cardiac arrest] was better in the early surgery group compared to the late surgery group 32.6 % vs 45.1 % [adjusted Odds ratio (aOR) = 0.59, 95 % Confidence interval (CI) = 0.52-0.67, P value ≪ 0.001]. This was mainly due to better incidence of acute CVA (15.7 %vs 24 %, aOR = 0.59, CI = 0.50-0.69, P value ≪ 0.001), peripheral septic emboli (18.5 % vs 27.3 %, aOR = 0.60, CI = 0.52-0.70, P value ≪ 0.001) and intracranial/intraspinal abscess (1.2 % vs 4.74 %, aOR = 0.24, CI = 0.14-0.38, P value ≪ 0.001). There is no difference in the incidence of all-cause in-hospital death (7.57 % vs 7.75 % aOR = 0.97, CI = 0.77-1.23, P value = 0.82) or cardiac arrest (3.4 % vs 3.54 %, aOR = 0.96, CI = 0.68-1.35, P value = 0.80).

CONCLUSION

Surgical intervention within 7 days of index hospitalization is associated with a better incidence of acute CVA, peripheral septic emboli, and intracranial or intraspinal abscess but not with a better incidence of all-cause in-hospital death.

Long-Term Outcome of Lower Extremity Bypass Surgery in Diabetic and Non-Diabetic Patients with Critical Limb-Threatening Ischaemia in Germany

AIM

To present the short- and long-term outcomes of lower extremity bypass (LEB) surgery in patients with critical limb-threatening ischaemia (CLTI), comparing diabetic (DM) and non-diabetic (non-DM) patients.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of anonymised data from a nationwide health insurance company (AOK). Data from 22,633 patients (DM: n = 7266; non-DM: n = 15,367; men: n = 14,523; women: n = 8110; mean patient age: 72.5 years), who underwent LEB from 2010 to 2015, were analysed. The cut-off date for follow-up was December 31, 2018 (mean follow-up period: 55 months).

RESULTS

Perioperative mortality was 10.0% for DM and 8.2% for non-DM (p < 0.001). Patients with crural/pedal bypasses (n = 8558) had a significantly higher perioperative mortality (10.3%) than those with above-the-knee (n = 7246; 5.8%; p < 0.001) and below-the-knee bypasses (n = 6829; 8.9%; p = 0.003). The 9-year survival rates in DM patients were significantly worse, at 21.5%, compared to non-DM, at 31.1% (p < 0.001). This applied to both PAD stage III (DM: 34.4%; non-DM: 45.7%; p < 0.001) and PAD stage IV (DM: 18.5%; non-DM: 25.0%; p < 0.001). Patients with crural/pedal bypasses had a significantly inferior survival rate (25.5%) compared to those with below-the-knee (27.7%; p < 0.001) and above-the-knee bypasses (31.7%; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Perioperative and long-term outcomes regarding survival and major amputation rate for CLTI patients undergoing LEB are consistently worse for DM patients compared to non-DM patients.

TAVR vs balloon aortic valvotomy for severe aortic stenosis and cardiogenic shock: An insight from the National Inpatient Sample database

BACKGROUND

Severe Aortic stenosis (AS) complicated by cardiogenic shock (CS) represents a grave clinical condition with limited treatment options. Evidence from small observation studies favors that Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR) might be a feasible option in these patients in contrast to emergent Balloon Aortic Valvuloplasty (BAV) which is associated with very high short and long-term mortality.

METHODS

11,405 hospitalizations with severe AS complicated by CS between 2016 and 2020 were identified using the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) Database, and patients were then stratified according to whether they received TAVR or BAV. Propensity-score matching was used to account for differences in the baseline characteristics. Primary and secondary outcomes were then compared between 3485 hospitalizations in direct TAVR group and with 3485 matched hospitalizations in the BAV group. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause in-hospital death, acute cerebrovascular accident (CVA), and myocardial infarction (MI). Secondary outcomes and safety outcomes were also compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

TAVR was associated with fewer primary outcomes events as compared to BAV {36.8 % vs 56.8 %, aOR (95%CI) = 0.38(0.30-0.47)}, due to fewer all-cause in-hospital deaths {17.8 % vs 38.9 %, aOR (95%CI) =0.34 (0.26-0.43)} and MI {12.3 % vs 32.4 %, aOR (95%CI) = 0.29 (0.22-0.39)}. TAVR was associated with higher rates of acute CVA {6.17 % vs 3.44 %, aOR (95%CI) = 1.84 (1.08-3.21)} and pacemaker implantation post procedure {11.9 % vs 6.03 %, aOR (95%CI) = 2.10 (1.41-3.18)}.

CONCLUSION

Direct TAVR in shock and severe Aortic stenosis is a better strategy than rescue Balloon aortic valvotomy.

Praliciguat Promotes Ischemic Leg Reperfusion in Leptin Receptor-Deficient Mice

BACKGROUND

Lower-limb peripheral artery disease is one of the major complications of diabetes. Peripheral artery disease is associated with poor limb and cardiovascular prognoses, along with a dramatic decrease in life expectancy. Despite major medical advances in the treatment of diabetes, a substantial therapeutic gap remains in the peripheral artery disease population. Praliciguat is an orally available sGC (soluble guanylate cyclase) stimulator that has been reported both preclinically and in early stage clinical trials to have favorable effects in metabolic and hemodynamic outcomes, suggesting that it may have a potential beneficial effect in peripheral artery disease.

METHODS

We evaluated the effect of praliciguat on hind limb ischemia recovery in a mouse model of type 2 diabetes. Hind limb ischemia was induced in leptin receptor-deficient (Lepr^db/db) mice by ligation and excision of the left femoral artery. Praliciguat (10 mg/kg/day) was administered in the diet starting 3 days before surgery.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight days after surgery, ischemic foot perfusion and function parameters were better in praliciguat-treated mice than in vehicle controls. Improved ischemic foot perfusion was not associated with either improved traditional cardiovascular risk factors (ie, weight, glycemia) or increased angiogenesis. However, treatment with praliciguat significantly increased arteriole diameter, decreased ICAM1 (intercellular adhesion molecule 1) expression, and prevented the accumulation of oxidative proangiogenic and proinflammatory muscle fibers. While investigating the mechanism underlying the beneficial effects of praliciguat therapy, we found that praliciguat significantly downregulated Myh2 and Cxcl12 mRNA expression in cultured myoblasts and that conditioned medium form praliciguat-treated myoblast decreased ICAM1 mRNA expression in endothelial cells. These results suggest that praliciguat therapy may decrease ICAM1 expression in endothelial cells by downregulating Cxcl12 in myocytes.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results demonstrated that praliciguat promotes blood flow recovery in the ischemic muscle of mice with type 2 diabetes, at least in part by increasing arteriole diameter and by downregulating ICAM1 expression.

Endovascular revascularisation versus surgical revascularisation in patients with lower limb atherosclerosis obliterans: a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis and meta-regression

INTRODUCTION

The revascularisation strategy for lower limb atherosclerosis obliterans (ASO) remains controversial. In this meta-analysis, we will summarise existing evidence to compare the long-term and short-term outcomes between endovascular revascularisation and open revascularisation for patients with ASO.

METHODS

Relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies are included from the following databases: MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library. The last search time is 1 August 2022. Two reviewers will independently identify RCTs and cohort studies according to eligibility and exclusion criteria. The risk of bias of included cohort studies, and RCTs are assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, Methodological Index of Non-randomized Studies and Cochrane Collaboration's tool, respectively. The primary outcomes include overall survival, amputation-free survival and 30-day mortality. TSA Beta Software V.0.9.5.10 is used to perform the trial sequential analysis for primary outcomes. The Grades of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) tool will be used to assess the level of evidence for outcome from RCTs. Stata V.17.0 software is used to pool primary outcomes.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals or conference reports. No ethical approval requirements are required because the results presented in this study are conducted based on published data.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42022359591.

Comparison of 6-Month Outcomes of Endovascular vs Surgical Revascularization for Patients With Critical Limb Ischemia

IMPORTANCE

The 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.

OBJECTIVE

To compare ER and SR treatment strategies for 6-month outcomes among patients with CLI.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This 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.

EXPOSURES

Endovascular or surgical revascularization.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The 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.

RESULTS

A 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 RELEVANCE

The 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.

Quantifying tissue perfusion after peripheral endovascular procedures: Novel tissue perfusion endpoints to improve outcomes

Peripheral artery disease (PAD) is a flow-limiting condition caused by narrowing of the peripheral arteries typically due to atherosclerosis. It affects almost 200 million people globally with patients either being asymptomatic or presenting with claudication or critical or acute limb ischemia. PAD-affected patients display increased mortality rates, rendering their management critical. Endovascular interventions have proven crucial in PAD treatment and decreasing mortality and have significantly increased over the past years. However, for the functional assessment of the outcomes of revascularization procedures for the treatment of PAD, the same tests that have been used over the past decades are still being employed. Those only allow an indirect evaluation, while an objective quantification of limb perfusion is not feasible. Standard intraarterial angiography only demonstrates post-intervention vessel patency, hence is unable to accurately estimate actual limb perfusion and is incapable of quantifying treatment outcome. Therefore, there is a significant necessity for real-time objectively measurable procedural outcomes of limb perfusion that will allow vascular experts to intraoperatively quantify and assess outcomes, thus optimizing treatment, obviating misinterpretation, and providing significantly improved clinical results. The purpose of this review is to familiarize readers with the currently available perfusion-assessment methods and to evaluate possible prospects.

Low-intensity pulsed ultrasound decreases major amputation in patients with critical limb ischemia: 5-year follow-up study

Various therapeutic strategies for angiogenesis are performed to improve symptoms in patients with critical limb ischemia (CLI). Pre-clinical studies have shown that low-intensity pulsed ultrasound (LIPUS) exposure induces angiogenesis. LIPUS may be a new stratergy for treatment of CLI. The purpose of this pilot trial was to evaluate outcomes in patients with CLI who were treated with LIPUS. Fourteen patients with CLI, who were not candidates for angioplasty or surgical revascularization, were enrolled in this study. Historical control data were obtained from the Hiroshima University PAD database. The primary endpoints were major amputation and death. The outcomes were compared in 16 lower limbs of the 14 patients with CLI who were treated with LIPUS and in 14 lower limbs of 14 patients with CLI as historical controls. All patients were followed for after 5 years after treatment with LIPUS. The mean duration of LIPUS exposure in the LIPUS group was 381± 283 days. During the 5-year follow-up periods, there were 3 major amputations and 7 deaths in the LIPUS group and there were 14 major amputations and 7 deaths in the historical control group. The overall amputation-free survival rate was significantly higher in patients who were treated with LIPUS than in historical controls. There was no significant difference between overall mortality-free survival rates in the LIPUS group and historical control group. LIPUS is a noninvasive option for therapeutic angiogenesis with the potential to reduce the incidence of major amputations in patients with CLI.

Advances in Revascularization for Peripheral Artery Disease: Revascularization in PAD

Effective revascularization of the patient with peripheral artery disease is about more than the procedure. The approach to the patient with symptom-limiting intermittent claudication or limb-threatening ischemia begins with understanding the population at risk and variation in clinical presentation. The urgency of revascularization varies significantly by presentation; from patients with intermittent claudication who should undergo structured exercise rehabilitation before revascularization (if needed) to those with acute limb ischemia, a medical emergency, who require revascularization within hours. Recent years have seen the rapid development of new tools including wires, catheters, drug-eluting technology, specialized balloons, and biomimetic stents. Open surgical bypass remains an important option for those with advanced disease. The strategy and techniques employed vary by clinical presentation, lesion location, and lesion severity. There is limited level 1 evidence to guide practice, but factors that determine technical success and anatomic durability are largely understood and incorporated into decision-making. Following revascularization, medical therapy to reduce adverse limb outcomes and a surveillance plan should be put in place. There are many hurdles to overcome to improve the efficacy of lower extremity revascularization, such as restenosis, calcification, microvascular disease, silent embolization, and tools for perfusion assessment. This review highlights the current state of revascularization in peripheral artery disease with an eye toward technologies at the cusp, which may significantly impact current practice.