Outcomes of Peripheral Vascular Interventions in Select Patients With Lower Extremity Acute Limb Ischemia. Issue 8 (12th April 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Inagaki, Elica; Farber, Alik; Kalish, Jeffrey A.; Eslami, Mohammad H.; Siracuse, Jeffrey J.; Eberhardt, Robert T.; Rybin, Denis V.; Doros, Gheorghe; Hamburg, Naomi M.
• Is Part Of: Journal of the American Heart Association. Volume 7:Issue 8(2018)
• Page Start: n/a
• Page End: n/a
• Publication Date: 2018-04-12
• Subjects: intervention -- peripheral artery disease -- registry; Heart -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Cardiovascular system -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Cerebrovascular disease -- Periodicals; Cardiology -- Periodicals; 616.1
• DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.116.004782
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2047-9980

Abstract

Abstract : Background: Contemporary data on patients presenting with acute limb ischemia (ALI), who are selected for treatment with endovascular peripheral vascular interventions (PVI), are limited. Our study examined outcomes following endovascular PVI in patients with ALI by comparing with patients treated for chronic critical limb ischemia using a regional quality improvement registry. Methods and Results: Of the 11 035 patients in the Vascular Study Group of New England PVI database (2010–2014), we identified 365 patients treated for lower extremity ALI who were 5:1 frequency matched (by procedure year and arterial segments treated) to 1808 patients treated for critical limb ischemia. ALI patients treated with PVI had high burden of atherosclerotic risk factors and were more likely to have had prior ipsilateral revascularizations. ALI patients were less likely to be treated with self‐expanding stents and more likely to undergo thrombolysis than patients with critical limb ischemia. In multivariable analysis, ALI was associated with higher technical failure (odds ratio 1.7, 95% confidence interval, 1.1%–2.5%), increased rate of distal embolization (odds ratio 2.7, 95% confidence interval, 1.5%–4.9%), longer length of stay (means ratio 1.6, 95% confidence interval, 1.4%–1.8%), and higher in‐hospital mortality (odds ratio 2.8, 95% confidence interval, 1.3%–5.9%). ALI was not associated with risk of major amputation or mortality at 1 year. Conclusions: In a multicenter cohort of patients treated with PVI, we found that ALI patients selected for treatment with endovascular techniques experienced greater short‐term adverse events but similar long‐term outcomes as their critical limb ischemia counterparts. Further studies are needed to refine the selection of ALI patients who are best served by PVI.