BACKGROUND

Amputations of lower limbs can be conducted as one-stage amputation (OSA) or staged amputation (SA) procedures. The objective of this study was to analyze technical success and mortality rates of both techniques, as well as factors that might influence outcomes in patients with critical limb ischemia (CLI).

METHODS

A retrospective study of 185 consecutive patients with CLI who underwent amputations in the period 2004-2011. Primary end points were rates of technical success (healing without dehiscence or reintervention) and mortality. The influence on outcomes of demographic data, clinical status, and comorbidities was also analyzed by logistic regression.

RESULTS

A total of 101 SA (91 patients) and 106 OSA (94 patients) were analyzed. SA had proportionally higher success rate (SA 77.2% vs. OSA 66.0%, P = 0.0253), lower perioperative mortality rate (SA, 10.9% vs. OSA, 20.7%, P = 0.0247), and lower 30-day mortality rate (SA, 12.2% vs. OSA, 23.8%, P = 0.0220) in spite of more cases with Rutherford classes 5 and 6 (SA, 87.1% vs. OSA, 72.6%, P = 0.0047), diabetes (71.2% vs. 55.6%, P = 0.0076), and infection (44.5% vs. 28.3%, P = 0.0061). Logistic regression demonstrated that in SA, success was more frequent in patients with diabetes who did not use insulin (P = 0.0072), in those with transfemoral amputations (P = 0.0392), with no coronary artery disease (P = 0.0053), and in foot infection (P = 0.0446), while for OSA success was more frequent in nondiabetic patients (P = 0.0077), limbs without infection (P = 0.0298), amputations at foot level (P = 0.0155), or transfemoral amputations (P = 0.0030).

CONCLUSIONS

SA had a higher rate of technical success and lower mortality rates than OSA, even with greater number of patients with diabetes and more severe cases of ischemia and infection. However, prospective studies comparing both techniques are needed for further evidence.