Lower extremity bypass for critical limb ischemia decreases major adverse limb events with equivalent cardiac risk compared with endovascular intervention

Comparing the efficacy and safety of endovascular therapy versus surgical revascularization for critical limb-threatening ischemia: A systematic review and Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Critical limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) is a severe manifestation of peripheral artery disease (PAD) that can lead to limb amputation and significantly reduce quality of life. In addition to guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT), endovascular therapy and surgical revascularization are the two revascularization options for CLTI. In recent years, there has been an ongoing debate about the best approach for CLTI patients. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to examine the current evidence and compare the clinical outcomes of endovascular therapy and surgical revascularization for CLTI.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science) for studies comparing the outcomes of endovascular therapy versus surgery in patients with CLTI. The primary outcomes were major adverse limb events (MALE) and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), while secondary outcomes included risk of bleeding, wound complications, readmission, unplanned reoperation, acute renal failure, and length of hospital stay. Pooled data was analyzed using the fixed-effect model or the random-effect model in Review Manager 5.3. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool were used to assess the bias of included studies.

RESULTS

A total of 16 studies (47,609 patients) were included in this meta-analysis. The overall effect favors surgery over endovascular intervention in terms of MALE [odds ratio (OR) 1.13, 95% CI (1.01-1.28), P = 0.04]. Endovascular therapy is associated with lower MACE rates compared to surgery [OR 0.62, 95% CI (0.51-0.76), P < 0.00001]. Furthermore, the risk of bleeding, wound complications, readmission, unplanned reoperation, acute renal failure as well as the length of hospital stay was lower for endovascular intervention. Finally, there was no statistically significant difference in 30-day mortality between the two groups [OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.79-1.12, P = 0.52; Fig. 3i], and the pooled studies were homogeneous [P = 0.39; I2 = 5%].

CONCLUSION

Surgery may be the preferred treatment option for CLTI patients, as it is associated with a lower risk of MALE than endovascular therapy. However, endovascular therapy may be associated with a lower risk of MACE and lower rates of bleeding, wound complications, readmission, unplanned reoperation, acute renal failure, and shorter hospital stays. There was no statistically significant difference in 30-day mortality between the two groups. Ultimately, the decision to use endovascular therapy or surgery as the primary treatment strategy should be based on a multi-disciplinary team approach with careful consideration of patient characteristics and anatomy.

Objective assessment of physician work in infrainguinal arterial bypass surgery

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is obtain robust objective data from the Vascular Quality Initiative on physician work in infrainguinal artery bypass surgery. Operative time, patient comorbidities, anatomical complexity, consequences of adverse outcomes, and postoperative length of stay all factor into procedure relative value unit assignment and physician reimbursement.

METHODS

Baseline demographics and comorbidities were identified among 74,920 infrainguinal bypass surgeries in Vascular Quality Initiative between 2003 and 2022. Investigation into areas of progressive complexity over time was conducted. Bypasses were divided into 10 cohorts based on inflow and target arteries and conduit type. Mean operative times, lengths of stay, major morbidity rates, and 90-day mortality rates were identified across the various bypasses. Comparison of relative value unit per minute service time during the acute inpatient hospital admission was performed between the most 4 common bypasses and 14 commonly performed highly invasive major surgeries across several subdisciplines.

RESULTS

Patients undergoing infrainguinal arterial bypass have an advanced combination of medical complexities highlighted by diabetes mellitus in 40%, hypertension in 88%, body mass index >30 in 30%, coronary artery disease that has clinically manifested in 31%, renal insufficiency in 19%, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in 27%, and prior lower extremity arterial intervention (endovascular and open combined) in >50%. The need for concomitant endarterectomy at the proximal anastomosis site of infrainguinal bypasses has increased over time (P < .001). The indication for bypass being limb-threatening ischemia as defined by ischemic rest pain, pedal tissue loss, or acute ischemia has also increased over time (P < .001), indicating more advanced extent of arterial occlusion in patients undergoing infrainguinal bypass. Finally, there has been a significant (P < .001) progression in the percentage of patients who have undergone a prior ipsilateral lower extremity endovascular intervention at the time of their bypass (increasing from 9.9% in 2003-2010 to 31.9% in the 2018-2022 eras). Among the 18 procedures investigated, the 4 most commonly performed infrainguinal bypasses were included in the analysis. These ranked 14th, 16th, 17th and 18th as the most poorly compensated per minute service time during the acute operative inpatient stay.

CONCLUSIONS

Infrainguinal arterial bypass surgery has an objectively undervalued physician work relative value unit compared with other highly invasive major surgeries across several subdisciplines. There are elements of progressive complexity in infrainguinal bypass patients over the past 20 years among a patient cohort with a very high comorbidity rate, indicating escalating intensity for infrainguinal bypass.

Editor's Choice - Infra-inguinal Endovascular Revascularisation and Bypass Surgery for Chronic Limb Threatening Ischaemia: a Retrospective European Multicentre Cohort Study with Propensity Score Matching

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the long term efficacy of lower limb bypass with that of endovascular treatment (EVT) in patients with chronic limb threatening ischaemia (CLTI).

METHODS

This retrospective, multicentre study evaluated the outcomes of patients with CLTI who underwent first time infra-inguinal bypass or EVT. The primary outcome was to compare amputation free survival (AFS) rates between the two propensity score matched groups. The secondary outcome was to compare wound healing within the first six months. Major adverse events were compared according to the type of revascularisation.

RESULTS

Overall, 793 patients fulfilled the eligibility criteria, from whom 236 propensity score matched pairs were analysed. The mean follow up was 52 months. The 236 bypass procedures included 190 autogenous bypass grafts (80.5%), 151 (64.0%) of which were infrapopliteal. Among the 236 EVT procedures, the target lesion was the femoropopliteal segment in 81 patients (34.3%), the femoropopliteal and infrapopliteal segments in 101 patients (42.8%), and the infrapopliteal segment in 54 patients (22.9%). AFS was significantly better in the bypass group at five years (60.5 ± 3.6%) compared with the EVT group (35.3 ± 3.6%) (p < .001). Major amputation occurred in 61 patients (25.8%) in the bypass group and 85 patients (36.0%) in the EVT group (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.47 - 0.92; p = .014). The probability of healing was significantly better in the bypass group at six months compared with the EVT group (p = .003). The median length of stay was shorter for the EVT group (4 days) than for the bypass group (8 days) (p = .001). Urgent re-intervention and re-admission rates were high and did not differ significantly between the groups.

CONCLUSION

This study has shown that lower limb bypass surgery offered a significantly higher probability of AFS and wound healing compared with EVT in patients with CLTI.

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on Sex-Based Disparities in Patients with Chronic Limb Threatening Ischemia Undergoing Revascularization

BACKGROUND

This systematic review and meta-analysis sought to describe the prognostic implications of sex on the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing interventions for chronic limb threatening ischemia (CLTI).

METHODS

Studies were systematically searched across 7 databases from inception to August 25, 2021 and rerun on October 11, 2022. Studies focusing on patients with CLTI undergoing open surgery, endovascular treatment (EVT), or hybrid procedures were included if sex-based differences were associated with a clinical outcome. Two independent reviewers screened studies for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Primary outcomes included inpatient mortality, major adverse limb events (MALE), and amputation-free survival (AFS). Meta-analyses were performed using random effects models and reported pooled odds ratio (pOR) and 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

A total of 57 studies were included in the analysis. A meta-analysis of 6 studies demonstrated that female sex was associated with statistically higher inpatient mortality compared to male sex undergoing open surgery or EVT (pOR, 1.17; 95% CI: 1.11-1.23). Female sex also demonstrated a trend toward increased limb loss in those undergoing EVT (pOR, 1.15; 95% CI: 0.91-1.45) and open surgery (pOR 1.46; 95% CI: 0.84-2.55). Female sex also had a trend toward higher MALE (pOR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.92-1.21) in 6 studies. Finally, female sex had a trend toward worse AFS (pOR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.70-1.03) in 8 studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Female sex was significantly associated with higher inpatient mortality and a trend toward higher MALE following revascularization. Female sex trended toward worse AFS. The reasons for these disparities are likely multifaceted on patient, provider, and systemic levels and should be explored to identify solutions for decreasing these health inequities across this vulnerable patient population.

Endovascular revascularization vs. open surgical revascularization for patients with lower extremity artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Currently, the main treatment for lower extremity artery disease (LEAD) is revascularization, including endovascular revascularization (EVR) and open surgical revascularization (OSR), but the specific revascularization strategy for LEAD is controversial. This review provided the comprehensive and recent evidence for the treatment of LEAD.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched for relevant articles. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies comparing the short-term or long-term outcomes between EVR and OSR of LEAD were identified. Short-term outcomes were 30-day mortality, major amputation, wound complication, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), and length of hospital stay (LOS), while long-term outcomes included overall survival (OS), amputation-free survival (AFS), freedom from re-intervention (FFR), primary patency (PP), and secondary patency (SP).

RESULTS

11 RCTs and 105 cohorts involving 750,134 patients were included in this analysis. For the pooled results of cohort studies, EVR markedly decreased the risk of 30-day mortality, wound complication, MACEs, LOS, but increased the risk of OS, FFR, PP, and SP. For the pooled outcomes of RCTs, EVR was associated with obviously lower 30-day mortality, less wound complication and shorter LOS, but higher risk of PP, and SP. However, both RCTs and cohorts did not show obvious difference in 30-day major amputation and AFS.

CONCLUSIONS

Both the pooled results of cohorts and RCTs indicated that EVR was associated with a lower short-term risk for LEAD, while OSR was accompanied by a substantially lower long-term risk. Therefore, the life expectancy of LEAD should be strictly considered when choosing the revascularization modality. As the current findings mainly based on data of retrospective cohort studies, additional high-quality studies are essential to substantiate these results.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#recordDetails, identifier CRD42022317239.

A systematic review of racial/ethnic disparities in pharmacotherapy and surgical treatment outcomes in peripheral arterial disease among African American/non-Hispanic Black, non-Hispanic White and Hispanic patients

Background

Lower extremity peripheral arterial disease (PAD) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality in racial/ethnic diverse populations. However, limited data exist on treatment outcome disparities in racial/ethnic diverse populations, particularly in AA/NHB populations.

Objective

The aim of this systematic review is to analyze disparities in the outcomes of PAD treatments, particularly pharmacotherapy and surgery, among racial/ethnic groups in the US.

Methods

A comprehensive search of original investigations pertaining to PAD treatments between 2015 and 2021 was performed. Quality assessment of the studies was also completed.

Results

Fourteen studies were included. Thirteen studies reported differences in treatment outcomes for surgical intervention, and one study reported differences for concurrent surgical and pharmacotherapy. NHB and Hispanic/Latinx ethnicities were associated with decreased overall and perioperative mortality in four studies. Six studies noted increased amputation risk among racial/ethnic diverse populations. Only one study noted significant survival benefit by race/ethnicity. Three studies noted increased risk of major adverse limb events and post-operative complications. One study noted increased limb patency after intervention in racial/ethnic cohorts. Overall, all studies reported high methodological quality with adequate assessment of outcomes and follow-up of cohort.

Conclusion

In this analysis, the predominant intervention reported is surgical. Overall, racial/ethnic populations are less likely to experience PAD-associated mortality but are more likely to experience adverse events. Further studies are necessary to include all racial/ethnic diverse populations in assessing PAD therapeutic intervention outcomes. Moreover, targeted public health efforts are necessary to increase PAD educational awareness, community-driven risk modification, and patient-centered care planning.

Major adverse limb events in patients with femoro-popliteal and below-the-knee peripheral arterial disease treated with either sirolimus-coated balloon or standard uncoated balloon angioplasty: a structured protocol summary of the "SirPAD" randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Peripheral arterial disease is a progressive atherosclerotic disease with symptoms ranging from an intermittent claudication to acute critical limb ischemia and amputations. Drug-coated balloons and stents were developed to prevent neo-intimal proliferation and restenosis after percutaneous transluminal angioplasty. Randomized controlled trials showed that drug-coated, notably paclitaxel-coated, devices reduce restenosis, late lumen loss, and the need for target lesion re-vascularization compared with uncoated ones. However, the size of these trials was too small to prove superiority for "hard" clinical outcomes. Moreover, available studies were characterized by too restrictive eligibility criteria. Finally, it remains unclear whether paclitaxel-coated balloons may impair long-term survival. Alternative drug-coated balloons, the so-called limus-based analogs, have been approved for clinical use in patients with peripheral arterial disease. By encapsulating sirolimus in phospholipid drug nanocarriers, they optimize adhesion properties of sirolimus and provide better bioavailability.

METHODS

In this investigator-initiated all-comer open-label phase III randomized controlled trial, we will evaluate whether sirolimus-coated balloon angioplasty is non-inferior and eventually superior, according to a predefined hierarchical analysis, to uncoated balloon angioplasty in adults with infra-inguinal peripheral arterial disease requiring endovascular angioplasty. Key exclusion criteria are pregnancy or breastfeeding, known intolerance or allergy to sirolimus, and participation in a clinical trial during the previous 3 months. The primary efficacy outcome is the composite of two clinically relevant non-subjective "hard" outcomes: unplanned major amputation of the target limb and endovascular or surgical target lesion re-vascularization for critical limb ischemia occurring within 1 year of randomization. The primary safety outcome includes death from all causes.

DISCUSSION

By focusing on clinically relevant outcomes, this study will provide useful information on the efficacy and safety of sirolimus-coated balloon catheters for infra-inguinal peripheral arterial disease in a representative ("all-comer") population of unselected patients. As regulatory agencies had raised safety concerns in patients exposed to paclitaxel-coated devices (versus uncoated ones), collect mortality data up to 5 years after randomization will be collected.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04238546.

Comparison of femoro-popliteal plain balloon angioplasty for chronic limb threatening ischaemia in the BASIL trial and in a UK contemporary series

BACKGROUND

Since the turn of the millennium there has been a world-wide trend towards an endovascular first where possible revascularisation strategy for chronic limb threatening (CLTI). There is concern that this may be inappropriate and can result in net patient harm. The aim of this study, therefore, is to compare important clinical outcomes following femoro-popliteal plain balloon angioplasty (FP-PBA), with selective use of bare metal stents (BMS), in a contemporary series (CS) of patients treated in our unit between 2009 and 2014 with those observed following FP-PBA +/- BMS in the UK NIHR HTA-funded Bypass versus Angioplasty in Severe Ischaemia of the Leg (BASIL-1, B1) trial (treated 1999-2004).

METHODS

Baseline and clinical outcome data (amputation free survival, AFS; overall survival, OS; limb salvage, LS; freedom from re-intervention, FF-R; freedom from major adverse limb events, FF-MALE) were obtained from prospectively gathered hospital data and B1 trial case record forms.

RESULTS

There were 237 CS and 218 B1 patients. CS patients were older (77 vs 73 years, p=.0002). B1 patients were more likely to be current smokers, less likely to be on best medical therapy, and underwent more extensive endovascular interventions. CS had more hospital admissions (4 vs 2, p<.0001) before they reached their primary endpoint (AFS). Immediate technical success was non-significantly higher in the CS patients (87% vs 83%, p=0.2). BMS were used in 20 (8%) CS and 2 (1%) B1 patients (p=.0002). AFS (HR = 0.64, 95%CI: 0.49 to 0.82, p = .0005) and OS (HR = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.44 to 0.76, p = .0001) were significantly worse in the CS cohort. There was no significant difference in LS, FF-R or FF-MALE.

CONCLUSIONS

CLTI patients managed in our unit (2009-2014) by means of a FP-PBA +/- BMS first where possible revascularisation strategy experience significantly worse AFS and OS than patients treated with FP-PBA +/- BMS in the B1 trial ten years earlier (1999-2004).

A Propensity-Matched Analysis of Endovascular Intervention versus Open Nonautologous Bypass as Initial Therapy in Patients with Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia

OBJECTIVES

Endovascular therapies are increasingly used in patients with complex multilevel disease and chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI). Infrageniculate bypass with autologous vein conduit is considered the gold standard in these patients. However, many patients often lack optimal saphenous vein, leading to the use of nonautologous prosthetic conduit. We compared limb salvage and survival rates for patients with CLTI undergoing first time revascularization with either open nonautologous conduit or endovascular intervention.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed consecutive patients undergoing first time endovascular or open surgical revascularization at our institution between 2009 and 2016. Patients were divided into endovascular intervention or open bypass with nonautologous conduit (NAC) cohorts. Primary endpoints were amputation-free survival (AFS), freedom from reintervention, primary patency, and overall survival. Propensity scoring was used to construct matched cohorts. Outcomes were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier and Cox Proportional Hazards models.

RESULTS

A total of 125 revascularizations were identified. There were 65 endovascular interventions and 60 NAC bypasses. In unmatched analysis, there was an elevated risk of perioperative MI (7% vs. 0%, P = 0.05) and amputation (10% vs. 2%, P = 0.04) for the NAC groups compared to the endovascular group. In matched analysis, endovascular patients had a lower incidence of 30-day amputation (1.5% vs. 10% P = 0.04) and length of stay (median days, 1 vs. 9, P < 0.01) compared to the open cohort. While not statistically significant, the endovascular group trended towards increased rates of two-year AFS (76% vs. 65%, P = 0.07) compared to the NAC group. There was no significant difference in overall survival when the endovascular cohort was compared to NAC (85% vs. 77%, P = 0.29) patients. In matched Cox analysis, nonautologous conduit use was associated with an increased risk of limb loss (HR 2.03, 95% CI 0.94-4.38, P = 0.07) compared to endovascular revascularization.

CONCLUSIONS

An "endovascular first" approach offers favorable perioperative outcomes and comparable AFS compared to NAC and may be preferable when autologous conduit is unavailable.

Contemporary Endovascular 30-Day Outcomes for Critical Limb Threatening Ischemia Relative to Surgical Bypass Grafting

OBJECTIVES

Data from 2011-2014 showed lower extremity bypass(LEB) outperforming infrainguinal endovascular intervention(IEI) regarding major adverse limb events(MALE) but noted no significant difference in major adverse cardiac events(MACE) in propensity matched cohorts. This study aimed to determine if more recent(2015-2018) endovascular outcomes data have improved relative to surgical bypass.

METHODS

Patients who underwent intervention for chronic limb threatening ischemia (CLTI) from 2015-2018 were identified using the American College of Surgeons National Quality Improvement Program(NSQIP) Vascular Surgery module. The cohort was categorized as undergoing lower extremity bypass(LEB) or infrainguinal endovascular intervention(IEI). Primary 30-day outcomes included major adverse cardiac events(MACE), major adverse limb events(MALE), and major amputation. Inverse probability weighting was used for multivariable analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 10,783 patients underwent an infrainguinal intervention for CLTI from 2015-2018. Of these, 6,003(55.7%) underwent LEB and 4,780(44.3%) underwent IEI. Forty percent of the cohort was considered "high anatomic risk" by Objective Performance Goals(OPG) standards, and 13.6% were considered "high clinical risk." The IEI cohort vs. the LEB cohort experienced a Myocardial infarction(MI)/Stroke rate of 1.8% vs. 3.6%(p < .001), and had a mortality rate of 2.0% vs. 1.7%(p = .22), which yielded a composite MACE of 3.4% vs. 4.8%(p = .001). The rate of reintervention for IEI vs LEB was 4.4% vs. 5.3%(p = .04), the loss of patency (without re-intervention) rate was 1.8% vs. 1.8%(p = 1.0), and the major amputation rate was 4.1% vs. 3.5%(p = .15), which resulted in a MALE rate of 9.1% vs. 8.8%(p = .50). Following inverse probability weighting, comparing the IEI to the referent LEB, MALE AOR = 1.17, 95% CI[1.01 -1.36], p = .036, MACE AOR = 0.61, 95% CI[0.49-0.74], p < .001, and major amputation AOR = 1.31, 95% CI[1.05 -1.62], p = .016.

CONCLUSION

Endovascular outcomes continue to demonstrate inferiority in major amputation and overall MALE. However, endovascular intervention has a significantly reduced incidence of MACE. Overall, these results demonstrate an improvement in endovascular MACE rates in recent years relative to surgical bypass.

Medical therapy for cardiovascular and limb-related risk reduction in critical limb ischemia

Critical limb ischemia (CLI) constitutes the most advanced form of peripheral artery disease (PAD) and is characterized by ischemic rest pain, tissue loss and/or gangrene. Optimized medical care and risk factor modification in addition to revascularization could reduce the incidence of cardiovascular events and major adverse limb events, improving patients' quality of life and promising higher survival rates. Adequate adherence to cardioprotective medications, including antithrombotic therapy (e.g., antiplatelets, anticoagulants), cholesterol-lowering agents (e.g., statins, proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors), angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), and smoking cessation should be strongly encouraged for patients with CLI. This review examines these guideline-recommended therapies in terms of cardiovascular and limb-related risk reduction in patients with CLI.

Medicare reimbursement of lower extremity bypass does not cover cost of care for most patients with critical limb ischemia

OBJECTIVE

Lower extremity bypass surgery remains an important treatment option for patients with critical limb ischemia (CLI), but is resource intensive. We sought to evaluate the cost and Medicare reimbursement for lower extremity bypass surgery in patients with CLI.

METHODS

Hospital cost accounting systems were queried for total technical and professional costs incurred and reimbursement received for patients with CLI undergoing lower extremity bypass at our center between 2011 and 2017. Patients were identified by assignment to Diagnosis-Related Group (DRG) 252, 253, or 254 (other vascular procedure with major complication/comorbidity, with complication/comorbidity, and without complication/comorbidity, respectively). Additional clinical data were incorporated from the Vascular Quality Initiative clinical registry. For non-Medicare patients, reimbursement was indexed to Medicare rates. Contribution margins (reimbursement minus cost) from technical and professional services were analyzed for each patient and summarized by DRG. We compared technical, professional, and total costs; reimbursement; and contribution margins across DRGs using univariate statistics and evaluated factors associated with total contribution margin using median quantile regression.

RESULTS

We analyzed 68 patients with hemodynamically confirmed CLI (46% rest pain, 54% tissue loss), of whom 25% received a prosthetic graft. Mean age was 66.1 ± 11.6 years, 69% were male, 49% diabetic, 44% current smokers, and 4% on dialysis. In general, total infrainguinal bypass cost was adequately compensated for patients assigned only the most complex DRG 252 (median, $2490; interquartile range [IQR], -$1,621 to $10,080). In the majority of patients with less complex DRG 253 (median, -$3,100; IQR, -$8499 to $109) and DRG 254 (median, -$4902; IQR, -$9259 to $1059), reimbursement did not cover the cost of care. Both technical costs and professional costs varied significantly with the complexity of DRG. Although reimbursement from technical services increased alongside increasing complexity of DRG, there was insignificant variation in professional reimbursement as DRG complexity increased. On multivariable modeling, longer length of stay (-$2547 per additional day) and preoperative dialysis (-$5555) were significantly associated with negative margins.

CONCLUSIONS

For the majority of patients with CLI, current Medicare reimbursement does not adequately cover the cost of providing care after open bypass surgery. As commercial insurers move toward Medicare reimbursement rates, more granular risk stratification profiles are needed to ensure open surgical care for patients with CLI remains financially sustainable.

Outcomes of open and endovascular interventions in patients with chronic limb threatening ischemia

OBJECTIVES

Widespread adoption of endovascular therapy for the treatment of chronic limb-threatening ischemia has transformed the field of vascular surgery. In this modern era, we aimed to define where open surgical interventions are of greatest benefit for limb salvage.

METHODS

Patients who underwent interventions for chronic limb-threatening ischemia were identified in the vascular-targeted lower extremity National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database for open surgical interventions (OPEN) and endovascular surgical interventions (ENDO) from 2011 to 2017. Patients were further stratified based on the criteria of chronic limb-threatening ischemia (rest pain or tissue loss), and the location of the diseased arteries (femoropopliteal or tibioperoneal). The main outcomes measured included 30-day mortality, amputation, and major adverse cardiovascular events.

RESULTS

A total of 17,193 patients were revascularized for chronic limb-threatening ischemia: 10,532 were OPEN and 6661 were ENDO. OPEN had higher 30-day mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events, pulmonary, renal dysfunction, and wound complications. However, OPEN resulted in significantly lower 30-day major amputation (3.8% vs. 5.0%, odds ratio (OR): 0.83 [0.72-0.97], P = .018). Subgroup analysis revealed a higher mortality rate in OPEN was observed only in tibioperoneal intervention for tissue loss. Major adverse cardiovascular event was higher in OPEN for most subgroups. OPEN for patients with tissue loss had significantly lower amputation rate than ENDO in both femoropopliteal and tibioperoneal subgroups (3.7% vs. 5.1%, OR: 0.76 [0.59-0.98], P = .036, and 4.7% vs. 6.6%, OR: 0.74 [0.57-0.96], P = .024, respectively). The benefit of open surgery in reducing the amputation rate was not seen in patients with rest pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Open surgical intervention is associated with significantly better limb salvage than endovascular intervention in patients with tissue loss. Surgical options should be given more emphasis as the first-line option in this cohort of patients unless the cardiopulmonary risk is prohibitive.

Association Between Wearable Device-Based Measures of Physical Frailty and Major Adverse Events Following Lower Extremity Revascularization

IMPORTANCE

Physical frailty is a key risk factor associated with higher rates of major adverse events (MAEs) after surgery. Assessing physical frailty is often challenging among patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) who are often unable to perform gait-based assessments because of the presence of plantar wounds.

OBJECTIVE

To test a frailty meter (FM) that does not rely on gait to determine the risk of occurrence of MAEs after revascularization for patients with CLTI.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cohort study included 184 consecutively recruited patients with CLTI at 2 tertiary care centers. After 32 individuals were excluded, 152 participants were included in the study. Data collection was conducted between May 2018 and June 2019.

EXPOSURES

Physical frailty measurement within 1 week before limb revascularization and incidence of MAEs for as long as 1 month after surgery.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The FM works by quantifying weakness, slowness, rigidity, and exhaustion during a 20-second repetitive elbow flexion-extension exercise using a wrist-worn sensor. The FM generates a frailty index (FI) ranging from 0 to 1; higher values indicate progressively greater severity of physical frailty.

RESULTS

Of 152 eligible participants (mean [SD] age, 67.0 [11.8] years; 59 [38.8%] women), 119 (78.2%) were unable to perform the gait test, while all could perform the FM test. Overall, 53 (34.9%), 58 (38.1%), and 41 (27.0%) were classified as robust (FI <0.20), prefrail (FI ≥0.20 to <0.35), or frail (FI ≥0.35), respectively. Within 30 days after surgery, 24 (15.7%) developed MAEs, either major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE; 8 [5.2%]) or major adverse limb events (MALE; 16 [10.5%]). Baseline demographic characteristics were not significantly different between frailty groups. In contrast, the FI was approximately 30% higher in the group that developed MAEs (mean [SD] score, 0.36 [0.14]) than those who were MAE free (mean [SD] score, 0.26 [0.13]; P = .001), with observed MAE rates of 4 patients (7.5%), 7 patients (12.1%), and 13 patients (31.7%) in the robust, prefrail and frail groups, respectively (P = .004). The FI distinguished individuals who developed MACE and MALE from those who were MAE free (MACE: mean [SD] FI score, 0.38 [0.16]; P = .03; MALE: mean [SD] FI score, 0.35 [0.13]; P = .004) after adjusting by body mass index.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this cohort study, measuring physical frailty using a wrist-worn sensor during a short upper extremity test was a practical method for stratifying the risk of MAEs following revascularization for CLTI when the administration of gait-based tests is often challenging.

Impact of the Timing of Foot Tissue Resection on Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Revascularization for Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia

The objective of this study is to describe utilization of revascularization and tissue resection in patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) and determine whether the timing of resection impacts outcomes. Revascularizations for CLTI were queried (ACS-NSQIP 2011-2015). Outcomes included 30-day major adverse limb events (MALE), major adverse cardiac events (MACE), length of stay (LOS), operative time, 30-day readmissions, and wound infections. Groups included revascularization alone, revascularization/tissue resection during the same procedure (concurrent), or revascularization/delayed tissue resection (delayed). Resections were debridement or transmetatarsal amputations. Multivariate logistic regression determined risk-adjusted effects of tissue resection on outcomes. There was no difference in overall 30-day MACE or MALE between groups (P = .70 and P = .35, respectively). Length of stay (6.1 days revascularization alone vs 7.8 days concurrent vs 8.7 days delayed, P < .0001) was longer in patients who underwent any tissue resection. Highest 30-day readmission and operative time was the concurrent group (P = .02 and P < .0001, respectively). Wound infection was highest in the delayed group (1.4% revascularization alone vs 1.3% concurrent vs 6.2% delayed, P < .0001). After risk adjustment, timing of resection did not impact LOS for concurrent and delayed groups compared to revascularization alone (both P < .0001). Debridement and minor amputations can be done concurrently in patients undergoing revascularization for CLTI.

Asia-Pacific Consensus Statement on the Management of Peripheral Artery Disease: A Report from the Asian Pacific Society of Atherosclerosis and Vascular Disease Asia-Pacific Peripheral Artery Disease Consensus Statement Project Committee

BACKGROUND

Peripheral artery disease (PAD) is the most underdiagnosed, underestimated and undertreated of the atherosclerotic vascular diseases despite its poor prognosis. There may be racial or contextual differences in the Asia-Pacific region as to epidemiology, availability of diagnostic and therapeutic modalities, and even patient treatment response. The Asian Pacific Society of Atherosclerosis and Vascular Diseases (APSAVD) thus coordinated the development of an Asia-Pacific Consensus Statement (APCS) on the Management of PAD.

OBJECTIVES

The APSAVD aimed to accomplish the following: 1) determine the applicability of the 2016 AHA/ACC guidelines on the Management of Patients with Lower Extremity Peripheral Artery Disease to the Asia-Pacific region; 2) review Asia-Pacific literature; and 3) increase the awareness of PAD.

METHODOLOGY

A Steering Committee was organized to oversee development of the APCS, appoint a Technical Working Group (TWG) and Consensus Panel (CP). The TWG appraised the relevance of the 2016 AHA/ACC PAD Guideline and proposed recommendations which were reviewed by the CP using a modified Delphi technique.

RESULTS

A total of 91 recommendations were generated covering history and physical examination, diagnosis, and treatment of PAD-3 new recommendations, 31 adaptations and 57 adopted statements. This Asia-Pacific Consensus Statement on the Management of PAD constitutes the first for the Asia-Pacific Region. It is intended for use by health practitioners involved in preventing, diagnosing and treating patients with PAD and ultimately the patients and their families themselves.

Socioeconomically Distressed Communities Index independently predicts major adverse limb events after infrainguinal bypass in a national cohort

BACKGROUND

Socioeconomic status is a major determinant of not only quality of life, but also mortality and health care-related outcomes. We hypothesized that patients coming from distressed communities would have worse short- and long-term limb related outcomes after infrainguinal bypass.

METHODS

The infrainguinal bypass national Vascular Quality Initiative datasets for 2003 to 2018 were used. Clinical data were paired with the Distressed Communities Index (DCI) score before extraction. The DCI accounts for unemployment, education level, poverty rate, median income, business growth, and housing vacancies at the zip code level, with a range of 0 (no distress) to 100 (severe distress). Severely distressed communities were defined as DCI greater than 75 for univariate analysis. Hierarchical multivariable modeling adjusted for baseline and operative risk factors, and clustering at the hospital level.

RESULTS

The 9711 patients who underwent infrainguinal bypass from severely distressed communities (out of 40,109 total) were younger, more likely to smoke, disproportionately African American, with more comorbid disease (all P < .05). Patients from less distressed communities had lower rates of critical limb ischemia (56% DCI ≤ 75 vs 60% DCI > 75; P < .0001) and prior amputation (4.7 vs 6.3%; P < .0001). There was no difference in in-hospital mortality (1.3% vs 1.3%; P = .906) or major adverse cardiovascular events (4.1% vs 3.7%; P = .097). However, patients from distressed communities had higher rates of major adverse limb events (MALE; 11.7% vs 14.4%; P < .0001), and the components amputation, thrombectomy, and revision. After risk adjustment, DCI remained an independent predictor of in-hospital MALE (odds ratio, 1.05 per 25 DCI points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-1.08; P = .001) and long-term MALE (hazard ration [HR] 1.02; 95% CI, 1.00-1.04; P = .045). DCI is predictive of long-term graft occlusion (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.00-1.07; P = .028) and amputation (HR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.06-1.12; P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

The DCI is an independent predictor of MALE after infrainguinal bypass. Patients from distressed communities are at an increased risk of long-term graft occlusion, which is disproportionately treated with amputation instead of surgical limb-saving alternatives. Socioeconomic factors impact vascular disease and surgical outcomes with disparities that warrant further investigation.

Amputation-free survival, limb symptom alleviation, and reintervention rates after open and endovascular revascularization of femoropopliteal lesions in patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia

BACKGROUND

The optimal strategy for revascularization in chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) is not yet completely known and is still under debate. Endovascular treatment methods predominate despite limited evidence for their advantage. In this concurrent, prospective observational cohort study, we investigated outcomes after open and endovascular revascularization in the femoropopliteal segment for CLTI.

METHODS

Between March 2011 and January 2015, there were 190 patients presenting with CLTI with the principal target lesion in the superficial femoral or popliteal segment who underwent endovascular intervention (n = 117) or bypass surgery (n = 73) and were observed prospectively. The choice of revascularization technique was based on international and local guidelines. All patients were observed for 2 years. The primary end point was amputation-free survival (AFS) assessed with Kaplan-Meier estimates; secondary end points included CLTI symptom alleviation rates and reintervention rates. A Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to investigate risk factors for amputation and death.

RESULTS

AFS at 2 years was 59% in the endovascular group and 76% in the bypass group (P = .020). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis confirmed a significant difference in AFS, with mortality rate as the main driver for the observed intergroup AFS difference. In sequential multivariable regression analysis, the observed difference in AFS between the groups favored bypass surgery and remained significant after controlling for covariates of known prognostic importance (hazard ratio, 2.38; 95% confidence interval, 1.14-4.96). At 2 years, a higher proportion of patients subjected to bypass surgery remained free from ischemic rest pain, wounds, and gangrene (65% vs 45%; P = .009). The proportions of patients who underwent reintervention within 2 years were similar in the two groups (38% vs 39%; P = .90), but repeated reinterventions were more frequent in the bypass group.

CONCLUSIONS

At 2 years, bypass surgery was associated with higher AFS than endovascular intervention, a finding that could not be explained only by differences in case mix. More patients who had bypass surgery were free from CLTI symptoms at both 1 year and 2 years after revascularization. Reinterventions to maintain patency were equally common after bypass and endovascular intervention.

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.

Statin therapy for reduction of cardiovascular and limb-related events in critical limb ischemia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

High-intensity statins are recommended for patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD). Critical limb ischemia (CLI) is the most advanced presentation of PAD. The benefit of statins in the CLI population is unclear based on the existent studies. Our objective was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis regarding the efficacy of statin therapy in patients with CLI. PRISMA guidelines were followed. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases were reviewed up to April 30, 2019. The primary outcomes included amputation rates and all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included primary patency rates, amputation-free survival and major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events (MACCE). Risk of bias was assessed with the Robins-I tool for observational studies. A random-effects model meta-analysis was performed. Heterogeneity was assessed with I2. Funnel plots and Egger’s test were used to assess publication bias. Nineteen studies including 26,985 patients with CLI were included in this systematic review. Among patients with known data on statin status, 12,292 (49.6%) were on statins versus 12,513 (50.4%) not on statins. Patients treated with statins were 25% less likely to undergo amputation (HR 0.75; 95% CI: 0.59–0.95; I2 = 79%) and 38% less likely to have a fatal event (HR 0.62; 95% CI: 0.52–0.75; I2 = 41.2%). Statin therapy was also associated with increased overall patency rates and lower incidence of MACCE. There was substantial heterogeneity in the analysis for amputation and amputation-free survival (I2 > 70%). In conclusion, statins are associated with decreased risk for amputation, mortality, and MACCE, as well as increased overall patency rates among patients with CLI. Future studies should assess whether other lipid-lowering medications in addition to high-intensity statins can further improve outcomes among patients with CLI. (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42019134160)

Perioperative Outcomes of Lower Extremity Revascularization for Rest Pain and Tissue Loss

BACKGROUND

Critical limb ischemia (CLI) is the clinical manifestation of severe peripheral artery disease presenting as rest pain (RP) and tissue loss (TL). Most studies compare CLI as a homogenous group with claudication with limited database studies specifically studying these differences. We hypothesize that CLI should be stratified into RP and TL because of significant differences in disease severity, comorbidities, and outcomes.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database from 2012 to 2016 was reviewed. All patients with a postoperative diagnosis of CLI undergoing femoral to popliteal bypass (FPB) with vein or graft were identified. Patients were stratified into cohorts based on International Classification of Disease (ICD)-9 or ICD-10 codes for RP or TL (gangrene or ulcer). Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to examine 30-day mortality, morbidity, major amputation, and readmission adjusting for demographics, comorbidities, and procedural details.

RESULTS

There were 5,304 patients. Compared to RP, patients with TL were older (P < 0.0001) and more likely to be dependent (P < 0.0001). TL patients were also more likely to have diabetes (P < 0.0001), congestive heart failure (P < 0.0001), renal failure (P = 0.004), dialysis (P < 0.0001), history of wound infection (P < 0.0001), and sepsis (P < 0.0001). TL patients had higher American Society of Anesthesiologists class (P < 0.0001), were less likely to be transferred from home (P < 0.0001), and more likely to receive an FPB with vein (P = 0.03). Patients with TL had worse perioperative outcomes compared with RP in terms of pneumonia (P = 0.004), unplanned intubation (P = 0.009), cardiac arrest requiring cardiopulmonary resuscitation (P = 0.003), bleeding requiring transfusions (P < 0.0001), sepsis (P < 0.0001), septic shock (P = 0.02), and reoperation (P < 0.0001). TL was associated with significantly higher 30-day morbidity (P < 0.0001), 30-day mortality (P < 0.0001), major amputation (P = 0.0004), and readmission rates (P = 0.005). Patients with TL compared with those with RP also had longer hospital stays (P < 0.0001) and days between operation to discharge (P < 0.0001). TL was independently associated with increased 30-day morbidity (OR: 1.16 [1.00-1.35]) and major amputation (OR: 2.48 [1.29-4.76]) compared with RP.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with RP and TL have drastic differences that impact perioperative mortality and readmissions. TL is an independent predictor of 30-day morbidity and major amputation. The stratification of CLI into RP and TL can provide insight into variations in outcomes and provide a means to quantify the risks associated with the 2 manifestations of the disease.

Cardiovascular Outcomes After Lower Extremity Endovascular or Surgical Revascularization: The EUCLID Trial

BACKGROUND

Lower extremity revascularization (LER) is a common treatment in patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD), but long-term outcomes are poorly defined.

OBJECTIVES

The aim was to analyze LER in the EUCLID (Examining Use of tiCagreLor In paD) trial to determine predictors and cardiovascular outcomes.

METHODS

Patients were grouped according to whether they received a post-randomization LER (n = 1,738) or not (n = 12,147). All variables were assessed for significance in univariable and parsimonious multivariable models. The primary endpoint was myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, or cardiovascular death; major adverse limb events (MALE) included acute limb ischemia or major amputation.

RESULTS

A post-randomization LER occurred in 12.5% of patients and was an endovascular LER in 74.7%. Endovascular LERs were performed more often in North America, whereas surgical procedures occurred more frequently in Europe. Independent factors predicting LER were prior and type of prior LER, geographic region, limb symptoms, diabetes, and smoking. A post-randomization LER was associated with an increased risk for the primary endpoint (hazard ratio: 1.60; 95% confidence interval: 1.35 to 1.90; p < 0.0001) and MALE (hazard ratio: 12.0; 95% confidence interval: 9.47 to 15.30; p < 0.0001). Event rates for the primary endpoint after LER were numerically higher in the surgical subgroup, but MALE were similar between surgical and endovascular LER.

CONCLUSIONS

In the EUCLID trial, LER was most often endovascular. Following LER, there was an increased hazard for the primary endpoint (with higher event rates in the surgical group) and a markedly increased risk for MALE events (with similar event rates between surgical and endovascular LER procedures). (A Study Comparing Cardiovascular Effects of Ticagrelor and Clopidogrel in Patients With Peripheral Artery Disease [EUCLID]; NCT01732822).

Socioeconomic Distressed Communities Index associated with worse limb-related outcomes after infrainguinal bypass

OBJECTIVE

Several studies have demonstrated that socioeconomic factors may affect surgical outcomes. Analyses in vascular surgery have been limited by the availability of individual or community-level socioeconomic data. We sought to determine whether the Distressed Communities Index (DCI), a composite socioeconomic ranking by ZIP code, could predict short- and long-term outcomes for patients with peripheral artery disease.

METHODS

All Virginia Quality Initiative patients (n = 2578) undergoing infrainguinal bypass (2011-2017) within a region of 17 centers were assigned a composite DCI score. The score was developed by the Economic Innovation Group and is normally distributed from 0 (no distress) to 100 (severe distress) based on measures of community unemployment, education level, poverty rate, median income, business growth, and housing vacancies. Severely distressed communities were defined as the top quartile DCI (>75). Hierarchical regression assessed short-term outcomes, and time-to-event analyses assessed long-term results.

RESULTS

Infrainguinal bypass patients in this study came from disproportionately distressed communities, with 29% of patients living within the highest distress DCI quartile (P < .0001), with high variability by hospital (DCI range, 12-67). These patients from severely distressed areas were younger, more likely to smoke, and disproportionately African American and had higher rates of medical comorbidities (all P < .05). Whereas patients from severely distressed communities had an equivalent rate of 30-day major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (5% vs 4%; P = .86), they had increased rates of major adverse limb events (MALEs) at 13% vs 10% (P = .03). This trend persisted in the long term, with higher 1-year estimates of MALEs (21% vs 17%; P = .01) as well as the components of amputation (17% vs 12%; P = .006) and thrombectomy (11% vs 6%; P = .002). Patients with high socioeconomic distress also had higher rates of occlusion (17% vs 11%; P = .003).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, patients from severely distressed communities were found to have increased rates of MALEs, an association that persisted long term. Mitigating risk associated with socioeconomic determinants of health has the potential to improve outcomes for patients with peripheral artery disease.

Major adverse limb events and major adverse cardiac events after contemporary lower extremity bypass and infrainguinal endovascular intervention in patients with claudication

OBJECTIVE

Major adverse limb events (MALEs) and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) at 30 days provide standardized metrics for comparison and have been adopted by the Society for Vascular Surgery's objective performance goals for critical limb ischemia. However, MALEs and MACEs have not been widely adopted within the claudication population, and the comparative outcomes after lower extremity bypass (LEB) and infrainguinal endovascular intervention (IEI) remain unclear. The purpose of this study was to compare MALEs and MACEs after LEB and IEI in a contemporary national cohort and to determine predictors of MALEs and MACEs after revascularization for claudication.

METHODS

A national data set of LEB and IEI performed for claudication was obtained using National Surgical Quality Improvement Program vascular targeted Participant Use Data Files from 2011 to 2014. Patients were stratified by LEB vs IEI and compared by appropriate univariate analysis. The primary outcomes were MALE (defined as untreated loss of patency, reintervention on the index arterial segment, or amputation of the index limb) and MACE (defined as stroke, myocardial infarction, or death). Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors of MALEs and MACEs.

RESULTS

A total of 3925 infrainguinal revascularization procedures (2155 LEB and 1770 IEI) were performed for claudication. There was no difference in 30-day MALEs between LEB and IEI (4.0% vs 3.2%; P = .17). On multivariable logistic regression, predictors of 30-day MALEs included tibial revascularization (odds ratio [OR], 2.2; P < .0001) and prior LEB on the same arterial segment (OR, 1.8; P = .004). LEB had significantly higher 30-day MACEs (2.0% vs 1.0%; P = .01) but similar mortality (0.5% vs 0.4%; P = .6). Predictors of MACEs included LEB vs IEI (OR, 2.1; P = .01), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR, 2.2; P = .01), dialysis dependence (OR, 4.4; P = .003), and diabetes (OR, 1.9; P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

In this large national cohort, LEB and IEI for claudication are associated with similar 30-day MALEs. Tibial revascularization and revascularization after prior failed bypass predict MALEs in claudicants and should therefore be undertaken with caution. LEB was associated with more 30-day MACEs but comparable 30-day mortality compared with IEI. Patients with end-stage renal disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and diabetes are at high risk for MACEs. The risk of 30-day MACEs after LEB should be weighed against the longer term outcomes of LEB vs IEI and conservative management, particularly in these higher risk patients. This analysis helps define contemporary 30-day outcomes after infrainguinal revascularization performed for claudication and serves as a baseline with which the short-term outcomes of future treatments can be compared.

Preoperative beta blockade is associated with increased rates of 30-day major adverse cardiac events in critical limb ischemia patients undergoing infrainguinal revascularization

OBJECTIVE

The association between beta blockers and cardiovascular or limb-related outcomes after revascularization for critical limb ischemia (CLI) remains unclear. The objective of this study was to assess the impact of preoperative beta blockade on 30-day major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) and major adverse limb events (MALEs) in patients undergoing infrainguinal revascularization for CLI. We hypothesized that rates of MALEs and MACEs will be higher in patients not receiving preoperative beta blockade.

METHODS

The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program vascular targeted file for 2011 to 2014 identified patients receiving beta blockade and undergoing infrainguinal endovascular intervention and open bypass for CLI. Primary outcomes including 30-day MACE (stroke, myocardial infarction [MI], or death) and MALE (untreated loss of patency, reintervention, or amputation) were compared between patients taking and not taking preoperative beta blockers. Multivariate logistic regression identified independent predictors of MACEs and MALEs.

RESULTS

A total of 11,785 revascularizations were performed for CLI during the study period (7408 bypasses vs 4377 endovascular interventions). Preoperative beta blockers were used by 7365 patients, including 4541 (61.7%) in the open bypass cohort and 2824 (64.5%) in the endovascular group (P < .01). MACEs and MI were significantly higher in patients with preoperative beta blockers (MACEs, 5.8% vs 3.4% [P < .0001]; MI, 3.1% vs 1.8% [P < .0001]). After controlling for cardiac risk factors, beta blockers independently predicted MACEs (odds ratio [OR], 1.27; P = .03) and MI (OR, 1.36; P = .03) but not stroke (OR, 1.17; P = .58) or 30-day mortality (OR, 1.22; P = .19). Beta-blocker use did not have an effect on MALEs (OR, 0.99; P = .88).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with CLI, preoperative beta blockade was an independent predictor of 30-day MI and MACEs after controlling for other cardiovascular risk factors. Beta blockers did not have an impact on short-term limb-related outcomes. The association between beta blockade and revascularization for CLI deserves further investigation.

A Comparison of Outcomes After Lower Extremity Bypass and Repeat Endovascular Intervention Following Failed Previous Endovascular Intervention for Critical Limb Ischemia

The optimal approach for repeat revascularization after failed endovascular intervention for critical limb ischemia (CLI) is unclear. This study compared major adverse limb events (MALEs) and major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) between lower extremity bypass (LEB) and repeat endovascular intervention (REI) in patients with prior failed ipsilateral endovascular intervention. American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database identified patients undergoing LEB and endovascular intervention for CLI from 2011 to 2014. We compared REI to LEB with single-segment saphenous vein (LEB-SV) and LEB alternative conduit (LEB-alt). Primary outcomes were 30-day MALE and MACE. Multivariate analysis identified independent predictors of MALE and MACE. A total of 1567 revascularizations were performed after failed ipsilateral endovascular intervention (REI: 683 [43.5%], LEB-SV: 570 [36.4%], LEB-alt: 314 [20.0%]). There were 994 and 573 suprageniculate and infrageniculate revascularizations, respectively. Major adverse cardiac events were significantly lower after REI compared to LEB (REI: 15 [2.2%], LEB-SV: 33 [5.8%], LEB-alt: 21 [6.7%], P < .001). Major adverse limb event were not different between groups ( P = .99). In patients with CLI presenting after failed endovascular intervention, REI is associated with lower MACE without an increased risk of MALE compared to LEB. When the anatomy is amenable, REI should be considered a less morbid first option.