End-stage renal disease and limb salvage

Bypass surgery versus endovascular intervention for lower extremity revascularization in patients with chronic renal disease or end-stage renal disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Endovascular revascularization (ER) and open revascularization (OR) are recognized treatment modalities for peripheral artery disease, but whether one technique provides better outcomes than the other is unclear, especially in patients with chronic or end-stage renal disease.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature search on the PubMed, Scopus, and Google scholar databases. We considered randomized-controlled trials, and retrospective record-based and prospective studies for inclusion. All included studies compared patient outcomes between the two management modalities and reported adjusted effect sizes.

RESULTS

We found the risks of in-hospital mortality (OR 0.52; 95% CI 0.30-0.92) and 30-day mortality (OR 0.63; 95% CI 0.49-0.80) during the post-operative period to be significantly lower in patients undergoing ER than in those undergoing OR. The pooled odds of amputation within 30 days of the post-operative period suggested a significantly higher risk of amputation in patients undergoing ER (OR 1.51; 95% CI 1.32-1.73) than in the others. Compared to patients undergoing OR, those undergoing ER had higher odds of being discharged to home (OR 2.30; 95% CI 1.58-3.36), lower odds of wound complications within 24 months of the post-operative period (OR 0.34; 95% CI 0.15-0.79), and a reduced length of hospital stay (WMD - 5.9; 95% CI - 10.8 to - 1.00).

CONCLUSIONS

For elderly patients with ESRD and chronic limb ischemia, ER may be the best choice due to its lower risk of mortality, lower odds of wound complications, reduced length of hospital stay, and reduced risk of re-intervention requirement when compared to OR. However, OR should be considered as an option when limb salvage is preferred.

In-hospital versus postdischarge major adverse events within 30 days following lower extremity revascularization

OBJECTIVE

Studies using hospital discharge data likely underestimate postoperative morbidity and mortality after lower extremity revascularization because they fail to capture postdischarge events. However, the degree of underestimation and the timing of postdischarge complications are not well-characterized.

METHODS

We used the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program procedure-targeted vascular databases from 2011 to 2015 to tabulate 30-day adverse events (in hospital and after discharge) for lower extremity bypass (LEB) and percutaneous vascular interventions (PVIs) performed for claudication and chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI).

RESULTS

A total of 14,125 patients underwent lower extremity revascularization, 8909 patients (63%) with LEB and 5216 (37%) with PVI. For CLTI, total 30-day mortality was similar between PVI and LEB (2.3% vs 2.1%; P = .61), but in-hospital deaths only accounted for 43% of PVI mortality and only 65% of LEB mortality (P ≤ .001). Major adverse cardiac events occurred in 2.9% of PVI patients and 4.6% of LEB patients (P < .001), with postdischarge events accounting for 37% of PVI events and 18% of LEB (P ≤ .001). Although the 30-day reoperation rates were 14% for PVI and 18% for LEB (P < .001), almost one-half occurred after discharge (PVI 46% vs LEB 44%; P = .55). Any postoperative major adverse events (MAEs) occurred in 22% of patients after PVI and 31% after LEB, with more than one-half occurring after discharge (PVI 56% vs LEB 53%; P = .17). For claudicants, total 30-day mortality was 0.4% for PVI and 0.7% for LEB (P = .32), with the vast majority of events occurring after discharge (PVI 90% vs LEB 50%; P = .049). The 30-day reoperation rates were 5.2% for PVI and 8.0% for LEB (P < .001), with more than one-half occurring after discharge (PVI 63% vs LEB 53%; P = .09). Any MAEs occurred in 7.0% of patients after PVI and 17% after bypass, with the majority occurring after discharge (PVI 65% vs LEB 63%; P = .66).

CONCLUSIONS

Most MAEs occur less frequently after PVI than LEB. However, a significant number of major of adverse events after lower extremity revascularization occur after leaving the hospital, especially after PVI, which may overestimate its benefits compared with LEB if only in-hospital data are evaluated. These data demonstrate the importance of reporting 30-day rather than in-hospital outcomes when evaluating postoperative adverse events.

Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery in End-Stage Renal Disease Patients

The number of patients requiring hemodialysis is continuously increasing around the world. Hemodialysis affects patient quality of life and it is also associated with a higher risk for cardiovascular events. In addition to traditional risk factors for cardiovascular events such as hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and diabetes, hemodialysis is associated with hyperphosphatemia, chronic inflammation, vascular calcification, and anemia which accelerate atherosclerosis, vascular stiffness, and cardiac ischemia. Treatment strategy for coronary revascularization in this progressive disease remains controversial. However, a systematic treatment including medical therapy and complete revascularization through a less invasive strategy should be considered in addressing this problem. This review discusses the epidemiology, vascular pathology and current treatment options in patients with end-stage renal disease requiring coronary revascularization.