Contemporary Endovascular Outcomes for Critical Limb Ischemia Are Still Failing to Meet Society for Vascular Surgery Objective Performance Goals

Author:

Latz Christopher A.1ORCID,Wang Linda J.1,Boitano Laura1ORCID,DeCarlo Charles1,Sumpio Brandon1,Schwartz Samuel1,Lee Cheong J.2,Dua Anahita1

Affiliation:

1. Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA

2. Division of Vascular Surgery, NorthShore University Health System, Evanston, IL, USA

Abstract

Objectives: The Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) created Objective Performance Goals (OPGs) for critical limb ischemia (CLI) in 2009. It was previously shown that endovascular therapy for CLI was not meeting these benchmarks. The OPG for all peripheral interventions is <8% for major adverse cardiac events (MACE), <8% for major adverse limb events (MALE), and <3% for major amputation. The goal of this study is to evaluate if outcomes have improved for CLI in recent years, specifically 2015-2018. Methods: The Targeted Vascular Module from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) was queried to identify patients who underwent endovascular intervention for critical limb ischemia from 2011-2018. Cohorts were divided into 2011-2014 and 2015-2018. Primary 30-day outcomes were MACE, MALE, and major amputation. Univariate analyses were performed using the Fisher’s exact test and the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. Multivariate analysis comparing groups was performed using inverse probability weights and trend over time analysis was performed using logistic regression with year of intervention as a continuous variable. Results: From 2011 to 2018, 7,168 patients underwent an endovascular intervention for CLI. 28% were classified as “OPG high anatomic risk,” and 17% were classified as “OPG high clinical risk.” The 2015-2018 cohort vs. the 2011-14 cohort experienced MACE in 3.3% vs. 2.7% (p = .23), MALE in 9.1% vs. 8.9% (p = 0.83), and amputation in 4.0% vs. 4.2% (p = 0.71). When only high anatomic risk patients were considered (n = 1988), MACE was experienced in 2.4% vs. 2.2% (p = 0.87), MALE by 9.5% vs. 10.6% (p = 0.47) and amputation by 5.1% vs. 6.0% (p = 0.40). When only high clinical risk patients were considered (n = 1224), MACE was experienced in 5.2% vs. 3.9% (p = 0.33), MALE by 8.0% vs. 7.4% (p = 0.74) and amputation by 3.9% vs. 3.7% (p = 0.88). Comparing 2015-2018 to the reference 2011-2014, MALE adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 0.99, 95% CI [0.83-1.18], MACE AOR = 1.19 95% CI [0.88-1.60], and major amputation AOR = 0.91 95% CI [0.70-1.17]. There were no decreases in the trend over time for MALE (AOR per year 0.97, CI [.94-1.02], major amputation (AOR per year: 0.97, CI [0.91-1.03], nor for MACE (AOR per year: 1.05, CI [.98-1.13]). Conclusion: Outcomes following endovascular interventions for CLI continue to underperform when compared to OPG benchmarks for MALE and amputations. There is no decrease over time for these target outcomes. Target MACE events remain acceptable despite the increasing clinical complexity of patients being treated.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine,General Medicine,Surgery

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

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