Endovascular Versus Surgical Revascularization for Acute Limb Ischemia

Author:

Kolte Dhaval1,Kennedy Kevin F.2,Shishehbor Mehdi H.3,Mamdani Shafiq T.4,Stangenberg Lars5,Hyder Omar N.4,Soukas Peter4,Aronow Herbert D.4

Affiliation:

1. Division of Cardiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston (D.K.).

2. Statistical Consultant, Lifespan Cardiovascular Institute, Providence, RI (K.F.K.).

3. Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Case Western Reserve University and University Hospitals, Cleveland, OH (M.H.S.).

4. Division of Cardiology, Lifespan Cardiovascular Institute, Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI (S.T.M., O.N.H., P.S., H.D.A.).

5. Division of Vascular Surgery, Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI (L.S.).

Abstract

Background: The optimal revascularization strategy for acute limb ischemia (ALI) remains unclear, and contemporary comparative effectiveness data on endovascular versus surgical revascularization are lacking. Methods: We used the 2010 to 2014 National Inpatient Sample databases to identify hospitalizations with a primary diagnosis of ALI. Patients were propensity-score matched on the likelihood of undergoing endovascular versus surgical revascularization using a logistic regression model. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included myocardial infarction, stroke, composite of death/myocardial infarction/stroke, any amputation, fasciotomy, acute kidney injury, major bleeding, transfusion, vascular complications, length of stay, and hospital costs. Results: Of 10 484 (weighted national estimate=51 914) hospitalizations for ALI, endovascular revascularization was performed in 5008 (47.8%) and surgical revascularization in 5476 (52.2%). In the propensity-score matched cohort (n=7746; 3873 per group), patients who underwent endovascular revascularization had significantly lower in-hospital mortality (2.8% versus 4.0%; P =0.002), myocardial infarction (1.9% versus 2.7%; P =0.022), composite of death/myocardial infarction/stroke (5.2% versus 7.5%; P <0.001), acute kidney injury (10.5% versus 11.9%; P =0.043), fasciotomy (1.9% versus 8.9%; P <0.001), major bleeding (16.7% versus 21.0%; P <0.001), and transfusion (10.3% versus 18.5%; P <0.001), but higher vascular complications (1.4% versus 0.7%; P =0.002), compared with those undergoing surgical revascularization. Rates of any amputation were similar between the 2 groups (4.7% versus 5.1%; P =0.43). Median length of stay was shorter and hospital costs higher with endovascular versus surgical revascularization. Conclusions: In patients with ALI, endovascular revascularization was associated with better in-hospital clinical outcomes compared with surgical revascularization. Contemporary randomized controlled trials are needed to determine the optimal revascularization strategy for ALI.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3