Is the length of follow-up evaluation in published reports on the treatment of infrainguinal occlusive disease decreasing?

Nicholas J. Gargiulo, David J. O'Connor, Jeffrey E. Indes, Elyssa Feinberg, Evan C. Lipsitz, William D. Suggs

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: There is increasing pressure for the rapid development and implementation of new techniques and procedures. This study examined whether or not there has been a trend toward increasingly short follow-up times for studies evaluating the treatment of lower-extremity occlusive disease. Methods: A search was performed of PubMed using the term "femoropopliteal occlusive disease" from 1976 to 2006. Reports describing the open and/or endovascular treatment of femoropopliteal occlusive disease were classified according to the number of patients, method of treatment, and follow-up time. Results: A total of 103 of the 435 reports met the inclusion criteria. Average follow-up times from 1976 to 1986 were a mean of 43.3 months and a median of 38.8 months, from 1986 to 1996 were a mean of 32.4 months and a median of 16.9 months, from 1996 to 2006 were a mean of 22.6 months and a median of 16.5 months. Conclusions: The number of reports on femoropopliteal occlusive disease treatment has increased. The length of follow-up period was 2- to 3-fold longer for reports on open procedures compared with those on endovascular procedures. Whether length of follow-up evaluation and reporting intervals should be standardized warrants further investigation.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)179-183
Number of pages5
JournalAmerican Journal of Surgery
Volume202
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 2011

Fingerprint

Endovascular Procedures
Time and Motion Studies
Therapeutics
PubMed
Lower Extremity
Pressure

Keywords

  • Femoropopliteal
  • Follow-up period

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Is the length of follow-up evaluation in published reports on the treatment of infrainguinal occlusive disease decreasing? / Gargiulo, Nicholas J.; O'Connor, David J.; Indes, Jeffrey E.; Feinberg, Elyssa; Lipsitz, Evan C.; Suggs, William D.

In: American Journal of Surgery, Vol. 202, No. 2, 08.2011, p. 179-183.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Gargiulo, Nicholas J. ; O'Connor, David J. ; Indes, Jeffrey E. ; Feinberg, Elyssa ; Lipsitz, Evan C. ; Suggs, William D. / Is the length of follow-up evaluation in published reports on the treatment of infrainguinal occlusive disease decreasing?. In: American Journal of Surgery. 2011 ; Vol. 202, No. 2. pp. 179-183.
@article{ec0f38a90dbe4884be8e1b58b32910de,
title = "Is the length of follow-up evaluation in published reports on the treatment of infrainguinal occlusive disease decreasing?",
abstract = "Background: There is increasing pressure for the rapid development and implementation of new techniques and procedures. This study examined whether or not there has been a trend toward increasingly short follow-up times for studies evaluating the treatment of lower-extremity occlusive disease. Methods: A search was performed of PubMed using the term {"}femoropopliteal occlusive disease{"} from 1976 to 2006. Reports describing the open and/or endovascular treatment of femoropopliteal occlusive disease were classified according to the number of patients, method of treatment, and follow-up time. Results: A total of 103 of the 435 reports met the inclusion criteria. Average follow-up times from 1976 to 1986 were a mean of 43.3 months and a median of 38.8 months, from 1986 to 1996 were a mean of 32.4 months and a median of 16.9 months, from 1996 to 2006 were a mean of 22.6 months and a median of 16.5 months. Conclusions: The number of reports on femoropopliteal occlusive disease treatment has increased. The length of follow-up period was 2- to 3-fold longer for reports on open procedures compared with those on endovascular procedures. Whether length of follow-up evaluation and reporting intervals should be standardized warrants further investigation.",
keywords = "Femoropopliteal, Follow-up period",
author = "Gargiulo, {Nicholas J.} and O'Connor, {David J.} and Indes, {Jeffrey E.} and Elyssa Feinberg and Lipsitz, {Evan C.} and Suggs, {William D.}",
year = "2011",
month = "8",
doi = "10.1016/j.amjsurg.2010.06.023",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "202",
pages = "179--183",
journal = "American Journal of Surgery",
issn = "0002-9610",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Is the length of follow-up evaluation in published reports on the treatment of infrainguinal occlusive disease decreasing?

AU - Gargiulo, Nicholas J.

AU - O'Connor, David J.

AU - Indes, Jeffrey E.

AU - Feinberg, Elyssa

AU - Lipsitz, Evan C.

AU - Suggs, William D.

PY - 2011/8

Y1 - 2011/8

N2 - Background: There is increasing pressure for the rapid development and implementation of new techniques and procedures. This study examined whether or not there has been a trend toward increasingly short follow-up times for studies evaluating the treatment of lower-extremity occlusive disease. Methods: A search was performed of PubMed using the term "femoropopliteal occlusive disease" from 1976 to 2006. Reports describing the open and/or endovascular treatment of femoropopliteal occlusive disease were classified according to the number of patients, method of treatment, and follow-up time. Results: A total of 103 of the 435 reports met the inclusion criteria. Average follow-up times from 1976 to 1986 were a mean of 43.3 months and a median of 38.8 months, from 1986 to 1996 were a mean of 32.4 months and a median of 16.9 months, from 1996 to 2006 were a mean of 22.6 months and a median of 16.5 months. Conclusions: The number of reports on femoropopliteal occlusive disease treatment has increased. The length of follow-up period was 2- to 3-fold longer for reports on open procedures compared with those on endovascular procedures. Whether length of follow-up evaluation and reporting intervals should be standardized warrants further investigation.

AB - Background: There is increasing pressure for the rapid development and implementation of new techniques and procedures. This study examined whether or not there has been a trend toward increasingly short follow-up times for studies evaluating the treatment of lower-extremity occlusive disease. Methods: A search was performed of PubMed using the term "femoropopliteal occlusive disease" from 1976 to 2006. Reports describing the open and/or endovascular treatment of femoropopliteal occlusive disease were classified according to the number of patients, method of treatment, and follow-up time. Results: A total of 103 of the 435 reports met the inclusion criteria. Average follow-up times from 1976 to 1986 were a mean of 43.3 months and a median of 38.8 months, from 1986 to 1996 were a mean of 32.4 months and a median of 16.9 months, from 1996 to 2006 were a mean of 22.6 months and a median of 16.5 months. Conclusions: The number of reports on femoropopliteal occlusive disease treatment has increased. The length of follow-up period was 2- to 3-fold longer for reports on open procedures compared with those on endovascular procedures. Whether length of follow-up evaluation and reporting intervals should be standardized warrants further investigation.

KW - Femoropopliteal

KW - Follow-up period

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79960973232&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79960973232&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2010.06.023

DO - 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2010.06.023

M3 - Article

C2 - 21601823

AN - SCOPUS:79960973232

VL - 202

SP - 179

EP - 183

JO - American Journal of Surgery

JF - American Journal of Surgery

SN - 0002-9610

IS - 2

ER -