Department of Vascular Surgery, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, and Institute of Medicine, Department of Molecular and Clinical Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Health Technology Assessment Centre (HTA-centrum) Region Västra Götaland, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden.
J Vasc Surg. 2020 Dec;72(6):1987-1995. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2020.03.029. Epub 2020 Apr 8.
The optimal strategy for revascularization in chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) is not yet completely known and is still under debate. Endovascular treatment methods predominate despite limited evidence for their advantage. In this concurrent, prospective observational cohort study, we investigated outcomes after open and endovascular revascularization in the femoropopliteal segment for CLTI.
Between March 2011 and January 2015, there were 190 patients presenting with CLTI with the principal target lesion in the superficial femoral or popliteal segment who underwent endovascular intervention (n = 117) or bypass surgery (n = 73) and were observed prospectively. The choice of revascularization technique was based on international and local guidelines. All patients were observed for 2 years. The primary end point was amputation-free survival (AFS) assessed with Kaplan-Meier estimates; secondary end points included CLTI symptom alleviation rates and reintervention rates. A Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to investigate risk factors for amputation and death.
AFS at 2 years was 59% in the endovascular group and 76% in the bypass group (P = .020). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis confirmed a significant difference in AFS, with mortality rate as the main driver for the observed intergroup AFS difference. In sequential multivariable regression analysis, the observed difference in AFS between the groups favored bypass surgery and remained significant after controlling for covariates of known prognostic importance (hazard ratio, 2.38; 95% confidence interval, 1.14-4.96). At 2 years, a higher proportion of patients subjected to bypass surgery remained free from ischemic rest pain, wounds, and gangrene (65% vs 45%; P = .009). The proportions of patients who underwent reintervention within 2 years were similar in the two groups (38% vs 39%; P = .90), but repeated reinterventions were more frequent in the bypass group.
At 2 years, bypass surgery was associated with higher AFS than endovascular intervention, a finding that could not be explained only by differences in case mix. More patients who had bypass surgery were free from CLTI symptoms at both 1 year and 2 years after revascularization. Reinterventions to maintain patency were equally common after bypass and endovascular intervention.
慢性肢体严重缺血(CLTI)的血运重建最佳策略尚不完全清楚,仍存在争议。尽管腔内治疗方法的优势有限,但仍占主导地位。在这项同期前瞻性观察队列研究中,我们调查了 CLTI 股腘段腔内和开放血运重建的结局。
2011 年 3 月至 2015 年 1 月,190 例 CLTI 患者主病变位于股浅或腘段,接受腔内干预(n=117)或旁路手术(n=73),并前瞻性观察。血运重建技术的选择基于国际和当地指南。所有患者均观察 2 年。主要终点是通过 Kaplan-Meier 估计评估的免于截肢的生存率(AFS);次要终点包括 CLTI 症状缓解率和再干预率。采用 Cox 比例风险回归模型探讨截肢和死亡的危险因素。
腔内组 2 年 AFS 为 59%,旁路组为 76%(P=0.020)。Kaplan-Meier 生存分析证实 AFS 存在显著差异,死亡率是观察到的组间 AFS 差异的主要驱动因素。在连续多变量回归分析中,组间 AFS 的观察差异有利于旁路手术,并且在控制已知预后重要性的协变量后仍然显著(风险比,2.38;95%置信区间,1.14-4.96)。2 年时,更多接受旁路手术的患者免于缺血性静息痛、伤口和坏疽(65% vs 45%;P=0.009)。两组患者在 2 年内再干预的比例相似(38% vs 39%;P=0.90),但旁路组再次干预的频率更高。
2 年时,旁路手术的 AFS 高于腔内干预,这一发现不能仅用病例组合的差异来解释。更多接受旁路手术的患者在血管重建后 1 年和 2 年时免于 CLTI 症状。旁路和腔内干预后,维持通畅的再干预同样常见。