Suppr超能文献

经侧支间接血管腔内再通:一种新的分类方法,用于预测创面愈合和肢体挽救。

Indirect Endovascular Revascularization via Collaterals: A New Classification to Predict Wound Healing and Limb Salvage.

机构信息

Center for Wound Healing and Hyperbaric Medicine, Department of Plastic Surgery, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC.

Georgetown University School of Medicine; Washington, DC.

出版信息

Ann Vasc Surg. 2021 May;73:264-272. doi: 10.1016/j.avsg.2020.11.031. Epub 2020 Dec 26.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

In the setting of chronic limb ischemia, lower extremity (LE) wounds require revascularization of source arteries for wound healing and limb salvage. Direct revascularization of the source artery is preferred but cannot always be performed. Our objective was to analyze the influence of arterial-arterial connections on clinical outcomes after angiosome-directed endovascular revascularization.

METHODS

Consecutive LE wounds in patients with isolated infra-popliteal disease revascularized endovascularly from 2012 to 2016 within a single center were retrospectively reviewed. Treatment was classified as direct revascularization (DR) if the source artery supplying the wound angiosome was treated, indirect revascularization via collaterals (IR-C) if the source artery angiosome was revascularized by another major artery via arterial connections, or indirect revascularization (IR) if direct revascularization of the source artery angiosome was not possible. Demographics, comorbidities, and patient outcomes were collected.

RESULTS

Of 105 patients with 106 LE wounds, there were 35, 38, and 33 patients in the DR, IR-C, and IR groups, respectively. The mean age was 65.8 years old (standard deviation (SD) 11.9) with 81 males (77.1%) and 24 females (22.9%). Average follow-up was 21.0 months (SD 14.0). Overall wound healing rates were 80.0%, 92.1%, and 63.6% for DR, IR-C, and IR, respectively (P = 0.009). Significant differences were found between all 3 group comparisons, DR versus IR-C (P = 0.010), DR versus IR (P = 0.013), IR-C versus IR (P = 0.008). Overall major amputation-free survival was 85.7%, 89.5%, and 69.7% in DR, IR-C, and IR groups, respectively, with statistically significant differences between the IR-C and IR groups (P = 0.036).

CONCLUSIONS

Treating diseased infra-popliteal arteries and improving blood flow via arterial-arterial connections as per the angiosome model improved wound healing and amputation-free survival in this cohort. Although DR is still the gold standard, revascularization using IR-C may give superior healing results even in highly comorbid patients. This offers an additional avenue for treatment, especially when DR is not possible.

摘要

背景

在慢性肢体缺血的情况下,下肢(LE)伤口需要对源动脉进行血运重建以实现伤口愈合和肢体挽救。直接血运重建源动脉是首选方法,但并非总是可行。我们的目的是分析在血管生成区导向的血管内血运重建后,动脉-动脉连接对临床结果的影响。

方法

回顾性分析 2012 年至 2016 年期间在单一中心接受腔内治疗的孤立性腘下疾病的连续 LE 伤口。如果处理供应伤口血管生成区的源动脉,则将治疗归类为直接血运重建(DR);如果通过动脉连接由另一条主要动脉对源动脉血管生成区进行间接血运重建,则将治疗归类为间接血运重建经侧支循环(IR-C);如果无法直接血运重建源动脉血管生成区,则将治疗归类为间接血运重建(IR)。收集患者的人口统计学、合并症和患者结局数据。

结果

105 例患者的 106 处 LE 伤口中,DR、IR-C 和 IR 组分别有 35、38 和 33 例患者。平均年龄为 65.8 岁(标准差(SD)为 11.9),男性 81 例(77.1%),女性 24 例(22.9%)。平均随访时间为 21.0 个月(SD 为 14.0)。DR、IR-C 和 IR 组的总体伤口愈合率分别为 80.0%、92.1%和 63.6%(P=0.009)。所有 3 组之间的比较均有显著差异,DR 与 IR-C(P=0.010)、DR 与 IR(P=0.013)、IR-C 与 IR(P=0.008)。DR、IR-C 和 IR 组的总体主要免于截肢生存率分别为 85.7%、89.5%和 69.7%,IR-C 组与 IR 组之间有统计学显著差异(P=0.036)。

结论

在该队列中,根据血管生成区模型治疗病变的腘下动脉并改善血流通过动脉-动脉连接,可改善伤口愈合和免于截肢生存率。虽然 DR 仍然是金标准,但通过 IR-C 进行血运重建即使在合并症较多的患者中也可能产生更好的愈合效果。这为治疗提供了另一种途径,特别是在无法进行 DR 时。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验