Objective performance goals after endovascular intervention for critical limb ischemia

Perioperative complications of minor and major reinterventions for peripheral arterial disease

INTRODUCTION

Patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD) frequently require reinterventions after lower-extremity revascularization (LER) to maintain perfusion. Current Society for Vascular Surgery guidelines define reinterventions as major or minor based on the magnitude of the procedure. While prior studies have compared primary LER procedures of different magnitudes, similar studies for reinterventions have not been performed. The objective of this study is to compare perioperative outcomes associated with major and minor reinterventions.

METHODS

Patients undergoing LER for PAD at a tertiary care center from 2013 to 2017 were included. A retrospective review of electronic medical records was performed, and reinterventions were categorized as major or minor based on the procedure magnitude. Minor reinterventions included endovascular procedures and open revision with patch angioplasty, while major reinterventions were characterized by open surgical or endovascular LER with catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT). Perioperative outcomes following LER were captured and compared for major and minor reinterventions. An additional subgroup analysis was performed comparing outcomes associated with major reinterventions stratified into open major surgical reinterventions and CDT.

RESULTS

This study included 713 patients over a mean follow-up of 2.5 years. A total of 291 patients underwent 696 ipsilateral reinterventions (range = 1-12 reinterventions). Most reinterventions were minor (72.1%, N = 502) and 27.9% (N = 194) were major. Patients receiving reinterventions had an average age of 67.2 ± 11.5 and most were white (73.5%) males (60.1%) initially treated for claudication (58.2%) and CLTI (41.8%). There was significantly higher post-operative bleeding (9.8% vs 3.4%, p = .001), arterial thrombosis (3.1% vs 1.0%, p = .047), and acute renal failure (6.2% vs 2.4%, p = .014) after major reinterventions than minor. Additionally, major reinterventions had significantly higher return to the OR (17.0% vs 11.3%, p = .046) and longer hospital stays (7.5 vs 4.3 days, p = <.0001). Overall, major reinterventions were associated with significantly increased perioperative morbidity (37.6% vs 19.7%, p ≤ .001) with no difference in perioperative mortality. In the subgroup analysis, open reinterventions resulted in significantly longer hospital stays (8.6 days vs 5.5 days, p ≤ .001) and more wound infections than CDT (11.0% vs 0%, p = .017). However, there was no other significant difference in morbidity or mortality following treatment with open surgical reinterventions or CDT.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, major reinterventions after LER were associated with greater perioperative morbidity than minor reinterventions, with no difference in mortality. Major reinterventions performed via open surgery and CDT had similar morbidity and mortality.

Objective Performance Goals Based on a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Clinical Outcomes for Bare-Metal Stents and Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty for Hemodialysis-Related Central Venous Obstruction

PURPOSE

To use safety and efficacy outcomes following treatment with percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) and/or stent placement for thoracic central venous obstruction in hemodialysis-dependent patients to establish objective performance goals (OPGs).

METHODS

A systematic literature review and meta-analysis were conducted for articles published between January 1, 2000, and August 31, 2021. Efficacy outcomes included primary patency rates at 6 and 12 months, and safety outcomes included adverse events (AEs) categorized as access loss, procedure-related AEs, and serious AEs (SAEs). OPGs were derived from the upper and lower bounds of the 95% confidence intervals for primary patency and SAE rates.

RESULTS

Of 66 articles reviewed, 17 met the inclusion criteria (PTA, n = 4; stent placement, n = 5; PTA/stent, n = 8). The 6- and 12-month primary patency rates for PTA were 50.9% and 36.7%, respectively. Based on these findings, the proposed 6- and 12-month primary patency OPGs identifying superiority against PTA were 66.5% and 52.6%, respectively, and those for noninferiority were 39.0% and 25.7%, respectively. For stent placement, the 6- and 12-month primary patency rates were 69.7% and 47.9%, respectively. The proposed 6- and 12-month primary patency OPGs identifying superiority were 82.1% and 64.1%, respectively, and those for noninferiority were 59.3% and 35.8%, respectively. SAE rates for PTA and stent placement were 3.8% and 8.1%, respectively. Proposed safety OPGs for noninferiority versus superiority for PTA and stent placement were 10.1% versus 1.4% and 13.6% versus 4.8%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The OPGs derived from real-world studies of PTA and stent placement may serve as a benchmark for future interventions indicated for this patient population.

Variability in 30-day major amputation rates following endovascular peripheral vascular intervention for critical limb ischemia

Introduction: Patients with critical limb ischemia (CLI) can undergo endovascular peripheral vascular intervention (PVI) to restore blood flow and decrease risk of amputation. As a potential indicator of quality for CLI care, we sought to describe 30-day major amputation rates following PVI. We also examined rate variability, and patient-level and site-level factors predicting amputations, using a national electronic health record (EHR) database. Methods: Using the Cerner Health Facts de-identified EHR database, patients with CLI diagnosis codes undergoing PVI were identified. The rate of amputation within 30 days of PVI was calculated. Risk ratios predicting amputation were derived using a mixed effects Poisson regression model adjusting for 16 patient and clinical factors. Median risk ratios (MRRs) were calculated to quantify site-level variability in amputations. Results: A total of 20,204 PVI procedures for CLI from 179 healthcare sites were identified. Mean age at procedure was 69.0 ± 12.6 years, 58.0% were male, and 29.6% were persons of color. Amputation within 30 days of PVI occurred after 570 (2.8%) procedures. Malnutrition, previous amputation, diabetes, and being of Black race were predictors of amputation. Amputation rates across sites ranged from 0.0% to 10.0%. The unadjusted MRR was 1.40 (95% CI 1.35-1.46), which was attenuated after adjusting for patient-level factors (MRR 1.30, 95% CI 1.26-1.34) and site characteristics (MRR 1.11, 95% CI 1.09-1.13). Conclusions: Among PVI procedures for CLI treatment, 30-day amputation rates varied across institutions. Although patient-level factors explained some variability, site-level factors explained most variation in the rates of these outcomes.

Initial Post-Operative Visit Absenteeism is Associated with Worse Amputation-Free Survival after Tibial Angioplasty

OBJECTIVES

Tibial revascularization is often performed in the setting of critical limb ischemia and tissue loss requiring close patient monitoring in the early post-operative period for worsening gangrene and/or ischemia. Multiple studies have shown loss to follow-up (LTF) is an independent risk factor for poor outcomes in several vascular procedures. Therefore, we evaluated the risk factors relating to LTF against outcomes in patients undergoing tibial endovascular procedures with the hypothesis that poor post-operative visit compliance is associated with decreased amputation-free survival rates.

METHODS

We performed a single-institution retrospective chart review of patients who underwent therapeutic endovascular tibial revascularization between 2014-2018. Patient follow-up and outcomes of death or major amputation (trans-tibial/trans-femoral) were followed up to 36-months post-operatively. Patients who had undergone previous infra-geniculate interventions or reached mortality/major amputation within 30-days post-operatively were excluded from analysis.

RESULTS

We identified 89 patients who met inclusion criteria. The overall rate of attendance at less than <1 month, 1-6 months, 6-15 months and 15-36 months post-operatively were 60%, 64%, 60 and 40% respectively. 16% of patients had complete loss to follow-up. Patients without tissue loss (≤ Rutherford 4) were less likely to attend early <1 month and 1-6 month follow-up intervals. Notably, absenteeism from the first immediate post-operative visit was a significant risk factor for further absenteeism at 1-6 months (51% vs 26%; p=.01) and at greater than 6 month follow-up (48% vs 31%; p=.05). Compared to the cohort of all patients, failure to follow-up within 1 month was associated with a decrease in attendance from 64% to 26% at 1-6 months and 63% to 31% at more than 6 months. Missing the first post-operative visit was also associated with decreased amputation-free survival (p=.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Absenteeism from the first post-operative visit is associated with worse amputation-free survival and a significant risk factor for further absenteeism from post-operative care. Given these results, ensuring close immediate post-operative follow up is essential to improving outcomes in patients undergoing tibial revascularization.

The comparative and added prognostic value of biomarkers to the Revised Cardiac Risk Index for preoperative prediction of major adverse cardiac events and all-cause mortality in patients who undergo noncardiac surgery

BACKGROUND

The Revised Cardiac Risk Index (RCRI) is a widely acknowledged prognostic model to estimate preoperatively the probability of developing in-hospital major adverse cardiac events (MACE) in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. However, the RCRI does not always make accurate predictions, so various studies have investigated whether biomarkers added to or compared with the RCRI could improve this.

OBJECTIVES

Primary: To investigate the added predictive value of biomarkers to the RCRI to preoperatively predict in-hospital MACE and other adverse outcomes in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. Secondary: To investigate the prognostic value of biomarkers compared to the RCRI to preoperatively predict in-hospital MACE and other adverse outcomes in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. Tertiary: To investigate the prognostic value of other prediction models compared to the RCRI to preoperatively predict in-hospital MACE and other adverse outcomes in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE and Embase from 1 January 1999 (the year that the RCRI was published) until 25 June 2020. We also searched ISI Web of Science and SCOPUS for articles referring to the original RCRI development study in that period.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies among adults who underwent noncardiac surgery, reporting on (external) validation of the RCRI and: - the addition of biomarker(s) to the RCRI; or - the comparison of the predictive accuracy of biomarker(s) to the RCRI; or - the comparison of the predictive accuracy of the RCRI to other models. Besides MACE, all other adverse outcomes were considered for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We developed a data extraction form based on the CHARMS checklist. Independent pairs of authors screened references, extracted data and assessed risk of bias and concerns regarding applicability according to PROBAST. For biomarkers and prediction models that were added or compared to the RCRI in ≥ 3 different articles, we described study characteristics and findings in further detail. We did not apply GRADE as no guidance is available for prognostic model reviews.

MAIN RESULTS

We screened 3960 records and included 107 articles.   Over all objectives we rated risk of bias as high in ≥ 1 domain in 90% of included studies, particularly in the analysis domain. Statistical pooling or meta-analysis of reported results was impossible due to heterogeneity in various aspects: outcomes used, scale by which the biomarker was added/compared to the RCRI, prediction horizons and studied populations.  Added predictive value of biomarkers to the RCRI Fifty-one studies reported on the added value of biomarkers to the RCRI. Sixty-nine different predictors were identified derived from blood (29%), imaging (33%) or other sources (38%). Addition of NT-proBNP, troponin or their combination improved the RCRI for predicting MACE (median delta c-statistics: 0.08, 0.14 and 0.12 for NT-proBNP, troponin and their combination, respectively). The median total net reclassification index (NRI) was 0.16 and 0.74 after addition of troponin and NT-proBNP to the RCRI, respectively. Calibration was not reported. To predict myocardial infarction, the median delta c-statistic when NT-proBNP was added to the RCRI was 0.09, and 0.06 for prediction of all-cause mortality and MACE combined. For BNP and copeptin, data were not sufficient to provide results on their added predictive performance, for any of the outcomes. Comparison of the predictive value of biomarkers to the RCRI  Fifty-one studies assessed the predictive performance of biomarkers alone compared to the RCRI. We identified 60 unique predictors derived from blood (38%), imaging (30%) or other sources, such as the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification (32%). Predictions were similar between the ASA classification and the RCRI for all studied outcomes. In studies different from those identified in objective 1, the median delta c-statistic was 0.15 and 0.12 in favour of  BNP and NT-proBNP alone, respectively, when compared to the RCRI, for the prediction of MACE. For C-reactive protein, the predictive performance was similar to the RCRI. For other biomarkers and outcomes, data were insufficient to provide summary results. One study reported on calibration and none on reclassification. Comparison of the predictive value of other prognostic models to the RCRI   Fifty-two articles compared the predictive ability of the RCRI to other prognostic models. Of these, 42% developed a new prediction model, 22% updated the RCRI, or another prediction model, and 37% validated an existing prediction model. None of the other prediction models showed better performance in predicting MACE than the RCRI. To predict myocardial infarction and cardiac arrest, ACS-NSQIP-MICA had a higher median delta c-statistic of 0.11 compared to the RCRI. To predict all-cause mortality, the median delta c-statistic was 0.15 higher in favour of ACS-NSQIP-SRS compared to the RCRI. Predictive performance was not better for CHADS₂, CHA₂DS₂-VASc, R₂CHADS₂, Goldman index, Detsky index or VSG-CRI compared to the RCRI for any of the outcomes. Calibration and reclassification were reported in only one and three studies, respectively.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Studies included in this review suggest that the predictive performance of the RCRI in predicting MACE is improved when NT-proBNP, troponin or their combination are added. Other studies indicate that BNP and NT-proBNP, when used in isolation, may even have a higher discriminative performance than the RCRI. There was insufficient evidence of a difference between the predictive accuracy of the RCRI and other prediction models in predicting MACE. However, ACS-NSQIP-MICA and ACS-NSQIP-SRS outperformed the RCRI in predicting myocardial infarction and cardiac arrest combined, and all-cause mortality, respectively. Nevertheless, the results cannot be interpreted as conclusive due to high risks of bias in a majority of papers, and pooling was impossible due to heterogeneity in outcomes, prediction horizons, biomarkers and studied populations. Future research on the added prognostic value of biomarkers to existing prediction models should focus on biomarkers with good predictive accuracy in other settings (e.g. diagnosis of myocardial infarction) and identification of biomarkers from omics data. They should be compared to novel biomarkers with so far insufficient evidence compared to established ones, including NT-proBNP or troponins. Adherence to recent guidance for prediction model studies (e.g. TRIPOD; PROBAST) and use of standardised outcome definitions in primary studies is highly recommended to facilitate systematic review and meta-analyses in the future.

Early and Midterm Outcomes of Open and Endovascular Revascularization of Chronic Mesenteric Ischemia

Background

Revascularization strategies for chronic mesenteric ischemia (CMI) include open (OR) and endovascular (ER) modalities. The primary objective of this study was to analyze the safety and effectiveness of OR and ER and the impact of clinical and morphological variables on early and midterm outcomes in a consecutive series of CMI patients in a tertiary referral center.

Patients and methods

From 2004 to 2017, all CMI patients treated with OR and ER were retrospectively identified. Patient records, preoperative imaging, as well as peri- and postoperative outcomes were analyzed. Univariable and multivariable analysis was performed to identify clinical or morphological variables affecting reintervention rates within 2 years.

Results

In total, 63 patients (33% male; mean age 71, range 60–76 years) were treated by ER (41 patients) or OR (22 patients) for CMI. Mean follow-up was 26 (10–71) months. 30-day mortality was 0.0% after ER and 4.5% after OR (p = 0.069); 30-day morbidity was 9.8% vs. 31.8%, respectively (p = 0.030). Length of stay was significantly longer after OR (14 vs. 4 days; p < 0.001). Freedom from reintervention rate after 2 years was 82% after OR and 73% after ER (p = 0.14). Overall survival did not differ after 2 years (OR 85% vs. ER 86%; p = 0.35). Multivariable analysis revealed that smoking was associated with higher risk of reintervention (hazard ratio, HR: 4.14; 95% confidence interval, CI 1.11–15.53; p = 0.03). Additionally, a nonsignificant trend of lower reintervention rates after OR was detected (HR 0.23 95% CI 0.05–1.08; p = 0.06).

Conclusion

Due to a lower invasiveness, despite the higher reintervention rate, an “endovascular first” strategy is justified and recommended.

Antithrombotic therapy for postinterventional management of peripheral arterial disease

PURPOSE

Evidence on the use of antithrombotic pharmacotherapy in patients undergoing revascularization of lower extremities for symptomatic peripheral arterial disease (PAD) is reviewed.

SUMMARY

Individuals with PAD can experience leg pain, intermittent claudication, critical limb ischemia, and acute limb ischemia. In such patients, revascularization may be indicated to improve the quality of life and to prevent amputations. Antithrombotic therapy is often intensified in the postrevascularization period to prevent restenosis of the index artery and to counteract the prothrombotic state induced by the intervention. Therapeutic modalities include dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), anticoagulation, a combination of antiplatelet and anticoagulation therapy, and addition of cilostazol to single antiplatelet therapy. Subgroup analyses of data from randomized clinical trials provided low-quality evidence for the use of DAPT in patients with a below-knee prosthetic bypass graft and anticoagulation for those with a venous bypass graft. Cilostazol, when added to aspirin therapy, has been shown to prevent index vessel reocclusion after an endovascular intervention in patients at low risk for thrombosis in several small randomized trials.

CONCLUSION

There is a considerable paucity of high-quality evidence on the optimal antithrombotic regimen for patients undergoing lower extremity revascularization, with no particular therapy shown to consistently improve patient outcomes. The decision to initiate intensified antithrombotic therapy should include a close examination of its risk-benefit profile. The demonstrated benefit of such treatment is restricted to the prevention of index artery reocclusion, while an increased risk of bleeding may lead to significant morbidity and mortality.

Registry Assessment of Peripheral Interventional Devices objective performance goals for superficial femoral and popliteal artery peripheral vascular interventions

BACKGROUND

The Superficial Femoral Artery-Popliteal EvidencE Development Study Group developed contemporary objective performance goals (OPGs) for peripheral vascular interventions (PVI) for superficial femoral artery (SFA)-popliteal artery disease using the Registry Assessment of Peripheral Interventional Devices.

METHODS

The Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative PVI registry from January 2010 to October 2016 was used to develop OPGs based on SFA-popliteal procedures (n = 21,377) for intermittent claudication and critical limb ischemia (CLI). OPGs included 1-year rates for target lesion revascularization (TLR), major amputation, and 1 and 4-year survival rates. OPGs were calculated for the SFA and popliteal arteries and stratified by four treatments: angioplasty alone (percutaneous transluminal angioplasty [PTA]), self-expanding stenting, atherectomy, and any treatment type. Outcomes were illustrated by unadjusted Kaplan-Meier analyses.

RESULTS

Cohorts included PTA (n = 7505), stenting (n = 9217), atherectomy (n = 2510) and any treatment (n = 21,377). The mean age was 69 years, 58% were male, 79% were White, and 52% had CLI. The freedom from TLR OPGs at 1 year in the SFA were 80.3% (PTA), 83.2% (stenting), 83.9% (atherectomy), and 81.9% (any treatments). The freedom from TLR OPGs at 1 year in the popliteal were 81.3% (PTA), 81.3% (stenting), 80.2% (atherectomy), and 81.1% (any treatments). The freedom from major amputation OPGs at 1 year after SFA PVI were 93.4% (PTA), 95.7% (stenting), 95.1% (atherectomy), and 94.8% (any treatments). The freedom from major amputation OPG at 1 year after popliteal PVI were 90.5% (PTA), 93.7% (stenting), 91.8% (atherectomy), and 91.8%, (any treatments). The 4-year survival OPGs after SFA PVI were 76% (PTA), 80% (stenting), 82% (atherectomy), and 79% (any treatments), and for the popliteal artery were 72% (PTA), 77% (stenting), 82% (atherectomy), and 75% (any treatment). On a multivariable analysis, which included patient-level, leg-level, and lesion-level covariates, CLI was the single independent factor associated with increased TLR, amputation, and mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

The Superficial Femoral Artery-Popliteal EvidencE Development OPGs define a new, contemporary benchmark for SFA-popliteal interventions using a large subset of real-world evidence to inform more efficient peripheral device clinical trial designs to support regulatory and clinical decision-making. It is appropriate to discuss proposals intended for regulatory approval with the US Food and Drug Administration to refine the OPG to match the specific trial population. The OPGs may be updated using coordinated registry networks to assess long-term real-world device performance.

Six-month pivotal results of tack optimized balloon angioplasty using the Tack Endovascular System in below-the-knee arteries

OBJECTIVE

No vascular implant is commercially available in the United States to treat post-angioplasty dissections in below-the-knee (BTK) arteries. The Tack Endovascular System (Intact Vascular, Wayne, Pa) is purpose-built to repair postpercutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) BTK dissections. A trial was conducted to investigate the safety and efficacy of the first-of-a-kind implantable BTK device to treat post-PTA dissections in the setting of critical limb ischemia.

METHODS

The present prospective, single-arm, multicenter study evaluated the Tack Endovascular System for treating post-PTA dissections in the mid/distal popliteal, tibial, and peroneal arteries. The primary safety endpoint was major adverse limb events (MALE) plus perioperative death (POD), assessed at 30 days after the index procedure. The primary efficacy endpoint was a composite of MALE at 6 months and POD. The unpowered secondary endpoint was primary patency at 6 months. With no available on-label comparator, the primary endpoints of the present trial were determined using objective performance goals from a systematic literature search. The secondary endpoints included Tacked segment patency and target limb salvage at 6 months. The 6-month results are reported.

RESULTS

Of the 233 patients enrolled, 117 (50.2%) had Rutherford class 5 and 78 (33.5%) had Rutherford class 4. A total of 341 post-PTA dissections were treated. Each patient received at least one Tack implant, and 100% of the dissections resolved according to the angiographic core laboratory findings. The primary safety and efficacy endpoints were both met. The rate of MALE plus POD at 30 days was 1.3% (3 of 228) and freedom from MALE at 6 months plus POD at 30 days was 95.6% (196 of 205). The 6-month Tacked segment patency was 82.1% (247 of 301) and target limb salvage was 98.5% (202 of 205). The Kaplan-Meier freedom from clinically driven target lesion revascularization and amputation-free survival at 6 months was 92.0% and 95.7%, respectively. Rutherford improvement was reported in 79.4% (158 of 199). Most (90 of 122; 73.8%) preexisting wounds had healed or were improving.

CONCLUSIONS

The Tack Endovascular System is safe and effective for treating post-PTA BTK dissections through 6 months, with favorable rates of MALE plus POD, patency, clinically driven target lesion revascularization, limb salvage, and wound healing.

Endovascular Therapy in an "All-Comers" Risk Group for Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia Demonstrates Safety and Efficacy When Compared with the Established Performance Criteria Proposed by the Society for Vascular Surgery

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to describe the applicability of the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) objective performance goals (OPGs) as a tool to evaluate results in the context of endovascular management of noncomplex and complex patients (i.e., end stage renal disease/history of prosthetic conduit) with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI).

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with CLTI undergoing endovascular procedures from March 2016 to April 2017 were included, and medical records were examined. Patients were categorized as OPG risk (OPGR) and non-OPG risk (nOPGR) groups in accordance with the SVS performance criteria. We compared clinical events between the two groups and then further to the SVS OPGs. Thirty-day outcomes (safety) were major amputation (AMP), major adverse limb events (MALEs), and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), and 1-year outcomes (efficacy) were limb salvage, MALE + 30-day perioperative death (MALE + POD), and survival. Mortality was demonstrated using Kaplan-Meier analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 72 patients were included (OPGR = 58.3% vs. nOPGR = 41.7%). Mean follow-up was 20 months (range, 1-40 months). Retrograde pedal access was used in 65.2% of patients. The overall AMP rate was 2.7% (OPGR = 4.7%, nOPGR = 0%, P = 0.225, vs. SVS OPG<3%), MALE was 4.1% (OPGR = 7.1%, nOPGR = 0%, P = 0.135, vs. SVS OPG<8%), and MACE was 6.9% (OPGR = 2.3%, nOPGR = 13.3%, P = 0.071, vs. SVS OPG<8%). The limb salvage was 90.3% (OPGR = 88%, nOPGR = 93.3%, P = 0.46, vs. SVS OPG>84%), MALE + POD was 76.4% (OPGR = 78.6%, nOPGR = 73.4%, P = 0.606, vs. SVS OPG>71%), and survival was 77.7% (OPGR = 83.3%, nOPGR = 70%, P = 0.18, vs. SVS OPG>80%).

CONCLUSIONS

The SVS OPGs set appropriate safety and efficacy standards as a bar for new technologies. In this series, endovascular therapy in all-comers exceeded the safety and efficacy endpoints proposed by the limited risk OPG panel.

Pre-operative predictors of poor outcomes in patients undergoing surgical lower extremity revascularisation - Retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Surgical lower extremity revascularisation (LER) can lead to poor outcomes that include delayed hospital discharge, in-hospital mortality, major amputations and readmissions. The aim of this study was to identify pre-operative predictors associated with these poor clinical outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All patients (n = 635; mean age 69; male 67.4%) who underwent surgical LER over a 5 year period in a single tertiary vascular institution were identified. Patients considered to have suffered a poor outcome (Group A) included all in-hospital mortality and major amputations, delayed discharges with a length of stay (LOS) over one standard deviation above the mean or any readmission under any specialty within 12 months. Group A included 247 patients (38.9%) and the good outcome group included the remaining 388 patients (61.1%) from which a sample of 99 patients were selected as controls (Group B).

RESULTS

Mean LOS for the entire study group was 14.4 ± 17.5 days, 12 month readmission rate was 29.1% and in-hospital mortality and major amputation rate was 2.7% and 1.4%, respectively. Pre-admission residence other than own home (OR 9.0; 95% CI 1.2-70.1; P = 0.036), atherosclerotic disease burden (OR 2.2; 95% CI 1.3-3.8; P = 0.003) and tissue loss (OR 3.0; 95% CI 1.6-5.3; P < 0.001) were identified as independent, statistically significant pre-operative predictors of poor outcome. Following discharge, group B patients had a significantly higher rate of amputation free survival and graft infection free survival (P < 0.001) compared to group A.

CONCLUSION

Recognition of pre-operative predictors of poor outcome should inform case selection and identify high risk patients requiring intensive perioperative optimisation and post discharge follow up.