Endovascular-first approach is not associated with worse amputation-free survival in appropriately selected patients with critical limb ischemia

Karan Garg, Patrick A. Kaszubski, Rameen Moridzadeh, Caron B. Rockman, Mark A. Adelman, Thomas S. Maldonado, Frank J. Veith, Firas F. Mussa

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

33 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective Endovascular interventions for critical limb ischemia are associated with inferior limb salvage (LS) rates in most randomized trials and large series. This study examined the long-term outcomes of selective use of endovascular-first (endo-first) and open-first strategies in 302 patients from March 2007 to December 2010. Methods Endo-first was selected if (1) the patient had short (5-cm to 7-cm occlusions or stenoses in crural vessels); (2) the disease in the superficial femoral artery was limited to TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus II A, B, or C; and (3) no impending limb loss. Endo-first was performed in 187 (62%), open-first in 105 (35%), and 10 (3%) had hybrid procedures. Results The endo-first group was older, with more diabetes and tissue loss. Bypass was used more to infrapopliteal targets (70% vs 50%, P =.031). The 5-year mortality was similar (open, 48%; endo, 42%; P =.107). Secondary procedures (endo or open) were more common after open-first (open, 71 of 105 [68%] vs endo, 102 of 187 [55%]; P =.029). Compared with open-first, the 5-year LS rate for endo-first was 85% vs 83% (P =.586), and amputation-free survival (AFS) was 45% vs 50% (P =.785). Predictors of death were age >75 years (hazard ratio [HR], 3.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.7-6.6; P =.0007), end-stage renal disease (ESRD) (HR, 3.4; 95% CI, 2.1-5.6; P

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)392-399
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Vascular Surgery
Volume59
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 2014
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Amputation
Limb Salvage
Ischemia
Extremities
Survival
Confidence Intervals
Femoral Artery
Chronic Kidney Failure
Leg
Pathologic Constriction
Mortality

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Surgery

Cite this

Endovascular-first approach is not associated with worse amputation-free survival in appropriately selected patients with critical limb ischemia. / Garg, Karan; Kaszubski, Patrick A.; Moridzadeh, Rameen; Rockman, Caron B.; Adelman, Mark A.; Maldonado, Thomas S.; Veith, Frank J.; Mussa, Firas F.

In: Journal of Vascular Surgery, Vol. 59, No. 2, 02.2014, p. 392-399.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Garg, Karan ; Kaszubski, Patrick A. ; Moridzadeh, Rameen ; Rockman, Caron B. ; Adelman, Mark A. ; Maldonado, Thomas S. ; Veith, Frank J. ; Mussa, Firas F. / Endovascular-first approach is not associated with worse amputation-free survival in appropriately selected patients with critical limb ischemia. In: Journal of Vascular Surgery. 2014 ; Vol. 59, No. 2. pp. 392-399.
@article{d4af4a88ecf048cfa49f6d5f9f68a986,
title = "Endovascular-first approach is not associated with worse amputation-free survival in appropriately selected patients with critical limb ischemia",
abstract = "Objective Endovascular interventions for critical limb ischemia are associated with inferior limb salvage (LS) rates in most randomized trials and large series. This study examined the long-term outcomes of selective use of endovascular-first (endo-first) and open-first strategies in 302 patients from March 2007 to December 2010. Methods Endo-first was selected if (1) the patient had short (5-cm to 7-cm occlusions or stenoses in crural vessels); (2) the disease in the superficial femoral artery was limited to TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus II A, B, or C; and (3) no impending limb loss. Endo-first was performed in 187 (62{\%}), open-first in 105 (35{\%}), and 10 (3{\%}) had hybrid procedures. Results The endo-first group was older, with more diabetes and tissue loss. Bypass was used more to infrapopliteal targets (70{\%} vs 50{\%}, P =.031). The 5-year mortality was similar (open, 48{\%}; endo, 42{\%}; P =.107). Secondary procedures (endo or open) were more common after open-first (open, 71 of 105 [68{\%}] vs endo, 102 of 187 [55{\%}]; P =.029). Compared with open-first, the 5-year LS rate for endo-first was 85{\%} vs 83{\%} (P =.586), and amputation-free survival (AFS) was 45{\%} vs 50{\%} (P =.785). Predictors of death were age >75 years (hazard ratio [HR], 3.3; 95{\%} confidence interval [CI], 1.7-6.6; P =.0007), end-stage renal disease (ESRD) (HR, 3.4; 95{\%} CI, 2.1-5.6; P",
author = "Karan Garg and Kaszubski, {Patrick A.} and Rameen Moridzadeh and Rockman, {Caron B.} and Adelman, {Mark A.} and Maldonado, {Thomas S.} and Veith, {Frank J.} and Mussa, {Firas F.}",
year = "2014",
month = "2",
doi = "10.1016/j.jvs.2013.09.001",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "59",
pages = "392--399",
journal = "Journal of Vascular Surgery",
issn = "0741-5214",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Endovascular-first approach is not associated with worse amputation-free survival in appropriately selected patients with critical limb ischemia

AU - Garg, Karan

AU - Kaszubski, Patrick A.

AU - Moridzadeh, Rameen

AU - Rockman, Caron B.

AU - Adelman, Mark A.

AU - Maldonado, Thomas S.

AU - Veith, Frank J.

AU - Mussa, Firas F.

PY - 2014/2

Y1 - 2014/2

N2 - Objective Endovascular interventions for critical limb ischemia are associated with inferior limb salvage (LS) rates in most randomized trials and large series. This study examined the long-term outcomes of selective use of endovascular-first (endo-first) and open-first strategies in 302 patients from March 2007 to December 2010. Methods Endo-first was selected if (1) the patient had short (5-cm to 7-cm occlusions or stenoses in crural vessels); (2) the disease in the superficial femoral artery was limited to TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus II A, B, or C; and (3) no impending limb loss. Endo-first was performed in 187 (62%), open-first in 105 (35%), and 10 (3%) had hybrid procedures. Results The endo-first group was older, with more diabetes and tissue loss. Bypass was used more to infrapopliteal targets (70% vs 50%, P =.031). The 5-year mortality was similar (open, 48%; endo, 42%; P =.107). Secondary procedures (endo or open) were more common after open-first (open, 71 of 105 [68%] vs endo, 102 of 187 [55%]; P =.029). Compared with open-first, the 5-year LS rate for endo-first was 85% vs 83% (P =.586), and amputation-free survival (AFS) was 45% vs 50% (P =.785). Predictors of death were age >75 years (hazard ratio [HR], 3.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.7-6.6; P =.0007), end-stage renal disease (ESRD) (HR, 3.4; 95% CI, 2.1-5.6; P

AB - Objective Endovascular interventions for critical limb ischemia are associated with inferior limb salvage (LS) rates in most randomized trials and large series. This study examined the long-term outcomes of selective use of endovascular-first (endo-first) and open-first strategies in 302 patients from March 2007 to December 2010. Methods Endo-first was selected if (1) the patient had short (5-cm to 7-cm occlusions or stenoses in crural vessels); (2) the disease in the superficial femoral artery was limited to TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus II A, B, or C; and (3) no impending limb loss. Endo-first was performed in 187 (62%), open-first in 105 (35%), and 10 (3%) had hybrid procedures. Results The endo-first group was older, with more diabetes and tissue loss. Bypass was used more to infrapopliteal targets (70% vs 50%, P =.031). The 5-year mortality was similar (open, 48%; endo, 42%; P =.107). Secondary procedures (endo or open) were more common after open-first (open, 71 of 105 [68%] vs endo, 102 of 187 [55%]; P =.029). Compared with open-first, the 5-year LS rate for endo-first was 85% vs 83% (P =.586), and amputation-free survival (AFS) was 45% vs 50% (P =.785). Predictors of death were age >75 years (hazard ratio [HR], 3.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.7-6.6; P =.0007), end-stage renal disease (ESRD) (HR, 3.4; 95% CI, 2.1-5.6; P

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84892938354&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84892938354&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jvs.2013.09.001

DO - 10.1016/j.jvs.2013.09.001

M3 - Article

C2 - 24184092

AN - SCOPUS:84892938354

VL - 59

SP - 392

EP - 399

JO - Journal of Vascular Surgery

JF - Journal of Vascular Surgery

SN - 0741-5214

IS - 2

ER -