Comparing the results of endovascular interventions and bypass surgery in patients with chronic lower limb ischemia (literature review)
AbstractBackground. Current strategies of treatment for lower limb chronic ischemia continue to be controversial. Previously performed reviews on this subject had no rigorous restrictions in selection of inclusion criteria for patients with the pathology involved.
Objective. The purpose of our study was to compare the results of endovascular interventions and bypass surgery in patients with lower limb chronic ischemia.
Methods. We performed a detailed retrieval in several databases prior to 2019, taking into consideration prospective studies with the duration of not less than 2 years aimed at comparing the results of procedures of revascularization of the infrarenal region in adults with lower limb chronic ischemia. Independent pairs of reviewers selected the articles from which the necessary data were then extracted.
Results. Our meta-analysis included 17 studies comprising a total of 22 369 patients. In the overall population, endovascular treatment decreased the risk of 30-day mortality (HR=0.73, 95% CI 0.59–0.90, p=0.004). Cases of amputation of lower extremity within 30 days after vascular reconstructions were reported in 7 articles, with no statistically significant difference between the results of endovascular and open surgical interventions for this criterion (HR=0.67, 95% CI 0.67–1.10, p=0.113). Early postoperative complications concerning cardiovascular and cerebrovascular systems were described in 9 articles, with infections of postoperative wounds reported in 8 publications. The incidence of postoperative complications was statistically higher in patients after bypass surgery as compared with the group after endovascular interventions. The overall survival rate in the remote postoperative period: combined results of 12 studies demonstrated that patients after endured endovascular interventions had had significantly higher risk of remote death than patients after bypass surgery (HR=0.78, 95% CI 0.67–0.92; p=0.002). It was revealed that the difference of the results after autovenous bypass grafting was more significant (HR=1.01; 95% CI 0.87–1.22, p=0.0001). As to infrapopliteal lesions, endovascular and bypass interventions ensured a comparable survival rate (HR=1.12, 95% CI 0.83–141; p=0.12). Nevertheless, we discovered that endovascular interventions were associated with significantly elevated risk of death or amputation compared with autovenous shunting (HR=1.81; 95% CI 1.35–2.21; p=0.03, I2=59%).
Endovascular interventions were associated with significantly higher risk of impaired patency of the reconstruction zone with moderate heterogeneity (HR=1.30, 95% CI 1.2–1.56; p=0.005, I2=38%). Similar results were also observed in subgroup analysis of autovenous shunting and infrapopliteal lesions (HR=1.42, 95% CI 1.13–1.67; p=0.009, I2=0%; HR=1.40, 95% CI 1.12–1.80; p=0.007, I2=0%, respectively).
Conclusion. Endovascular interventions yield better 30-day results compared with bypass surgery, including decreased risk of the development of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular complications, infections of postoperative wounds, but leading to an elevated risk of all-cause mortality in the remote postoperative period and impaired patency in the reconstruction zone. We suppose that bypass grafting may be regarded as a first-line strategy of revascularization for patients with a good physical functional state and may have long-term benefits, especially in the presence of a venous bed suitable for shunting.
Funding. The study had no sponsor support.
Conflict of interest. The authors declare no conflict of interest.
For citation: Gavrilenko A.V., Al-Yusef N.N., Khaozhan E., Bulatova L.R., Sarkhanidze Ya.M. Comparing the results of endovascular interventions and bypass surgery in patients with chronic lower limb ischemia (literature review). Angiology and Vascular Surgery. 2022; 28 (1): 154–62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33029/1027-6661-2022-28-1-154-162 (in Russian)
Keywords: atherosclerosis; revascularization of lower limbs; chronic limb ischemia; bypass surgery; endovascular treatment
References
1. Varu VN, Hogg ME, Kibbe MR. Critical limb ischemia. J Vasc Surg. 2010; 51 (1): 230–241. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2009.08.073
2. Suckow BD, Goodney PP, Nolan BW, et al. Domains that determine quality of life in vascular amputees. Ann Vasc Surg. 2015; 29 (4): 722–730. doi: 10.1016/j.avsg.2014.12.005
3. Norgren L, Hiatt WR, Dormandy JA, et al. Inter-society consensus for the management of peripheral arterial disease (TASC II). Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2007; 33 (Suppl 1): 1–75. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2006.12.037
4. Adam DJ, Beard JD, Cleveland T, et al. Bypass versus angioplasty in severe ischaemia of the leg (BASIL): multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2005; 366 (9501): 1925–1934. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67704-5
5. Siracuse JJ, Menard MT, Eslami MH, et al. Comparison of open and endovascular treatment of patients with critical limb ischemia in the vascular quality initiative. J Vasc Surg. 2016; 63 (4): 958–965. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2015.09.063
6. Menard MT, Farber A, Assmann SF, et al. Design and rationale of the Best Endovascular versus best Surgical Therapy for patients with Critical Limb Ischemia (BEST-CLI) trial. J Am Heart Assoc. 2016; 5 (7): 3219. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.116.003219
7. Abu Dabrh AM, Steffen MW, Asi N, et al. Bypass surgery versus endovascular interventions in severe or critical limb ischemia. J Vasc Surg. 2016; 63 (1): 244–253. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2015.07.068
8. Ownby RL, Crocco E, Acevedo A, et al. Depression and risk for alzheimer disease: systematic review, meta-analysis. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2006; 63 (5): 530–538. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.63.5.530
9. Der Simonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials Control Clin Trials. 1986; 7 (3): 177–188 doi: 10.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-2
10. Egger M, Smith GD. Misleading meta-analysis. Br Med J. 1995; 310 (6982): 752–754. doi: 10.1136/bmj.310.6982.752
11. Faglia E, Clerici G, Clerissi J, et al. Early and five-year amputation and survival rate of diabetic patients with critical limb ischemia: data of a cohort study of 564 patients. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2006; 32 (5): 484–490. doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2006.03.006
12. Ah Chong AK, Tan CB, Wong MW, et al. Bypass surgery or percutaneous transluminal angioplasty to treat critical lower limb ischaemia due to infrainguinal arterial occlusive disease? Hong Kong Med J. 2009; 15 (4): 249–254.
13. Scali ST, Rzucidlo EM, Bjerke AA, et al. Long-term results of open and endovascular revascularization of superficial femoral artery occlusive disease. J Vasc Surg. 2011; 54 (3): 714–721. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2011.03.216
14. Soderstrom MI, Arvela EM, Korhonen M, et al. Infrapopliteal percutaneous transluminal angioplasty versus bypass surgery as first-line strategies in critical leg ischemia: a propensity score analysis. Ann Surg. 2010; 252 (5): 765–773. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181fc3c73
15. Tsai TT, Rehring TF, Rogers RK, et al. The contemporary safety and effectiveness of lower extremity bypass surgery and peripheral endovascular interventions in the treatment of symptomatic peripheral arterial disease. Circulation. 2015; 132 (21): 1999–2011. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.114.013440.
16. Dosluoglu HH, Lall P, Harris LM, et al. Long-term limb salvage and survival after endovascular and open revascularization for critical limb ischemia after adoption of endovascular-first approach by vascular surgeons. J Vasc Surg. 2012; 56 (2): 361–371. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2012.01.054
17. Zhan LX, Bharara M, White M, et al. Comparison of initial hemodynamic response after endovascular therapy and open surgical bypass in patients with diabetes mellitus and critical limb ischemia. J Vasc Surg. 2012; 56 (2): 380–386. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2012.01.050
18. Masaki H, Tabuchi A, Yunoki Y, et al. Bypass vs. endovascular therapy of infrapopliteal lesions for critical limb ischemia. Ann Vasc Dis. 2014; 7 (3): 227–331. doi: 10.3400/avd.oa.14-00070
19. Soga Y, Mii S, Iida O, et al. Propensity score analysis of clinical outcome after bypass surgery vs. endovascular therapy for infrainguinal artery disease in patients with critical limb ischemia. J Endovasc Ther. 2014; 21 (2): 243–253. doi: 10.1583/13-4510MR.1
20. Bisdas T, Borowski M, Torsello G, et al. Current practice of first-line treatment strategies in patients with critical limb ischemia. J Vasc Surg. 2015; 62 (4): 965–973. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2015.04.441
21. Gentile F, Lundberg G, Hultgren R. Outcome for endovascular and open procedures in infrapopliteal lesions for critical limb ischemia: registry-based single center study. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2016; 52 (5): 643–649. doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2016.07.013
22. Lejay A, Delay C, Georg Y, et al. Endovascular surgery, open surgery, and primary amputation in nonagenarians presenting with critical limb ischemia. Ann Vasc Surg. 2016; 32: 25–33. doi: 10.1016/j.avsg.2015.11.009
23. Shiraki T, Iida O, Takahara M, et al. Comparison of clinical outcomes after surgical and endovascular revascularization in hemodialysis patients with critical limb ischemia. J Atheroscler Thromb. 2017; 24 (6): 621–629. doi: 10.5551/jat.35915
24. Patel SD, Biasi L, Paraskevopoulos I, et al. Comparison of angioplasty and bypass surgery for critical limb ischaemia in patients with infrapopliteal peripheral artery disease. Br J Surg. 2016; 103 (13): 1815–1822. doi: 10.1002/bjs.10292
25. Robinson WP, Mehaffey JH. Lower extremity bypass and endovascular intervention for critical limb ischemia fail to meet Society for Vascular Surgery’s objective performance goals for limb-related outcomes in a contemporary national cohort. J Vasc Surg. 2018; 68 (5): 1445–1446. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2018.03.413
26. Altreuther M, Mattsson E. Long-term limb salvage and amputation-free survival after femoropopliteal bypass and femoropopliteal PTA for critical ischemia in a clinical cohort. Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2019; 53 (2): 112–117. doi: 10.1177/1538574418813741
27. Jiarong W, Chi S, Zhoupeng W. Percutaneous vascular interventions versus bypass surgeries in patients with critical limb ischemia. Ann Surg. 2018; 267 (5): 846–857. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002344
28. Conte MS, Bradbury AW, Kolh P, et al. Global vascular guidelines on the management of chronic limb-threatening ischemia. J Vasc Surg. 2019; 69 (6 Suppl): 3–125. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2019.02.016
29. Aboyans V, Ricco JB, Bartelink MLEL, et al. 2017 ESC Guidelines on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Peripheral Arterial Diseases, in collaboration with the European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS). Eur Heart J. 2017; 39 (9): 763–816. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehx095
30. Smilowitz NR, Gupta N, Ramakrishna H, et al. Perioperative major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events associated with noncardiac surgery. JAMA Cardiol. 2017; 2 (2): 181–187. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2016.4792
31. Bradbury AW, Adam DJ, Bell J, et al. Bypass versus Angioplasty in Severe Ischaemia of the Leg (BASIL) trial: a survival prediction model to facilitate clinical decision making. J Vasc Surg. 2010; 51 (5 Suppl): 52–68. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2010.01.077
32. Гавриленко А.В., Котов А.Э., Крайник В.М. и др. Выбор метода повторной артериальной реконструкции у пациентов с критической ишемией нижних конечностей. Анналы хирургии. 2019; 24 (3): 198–201. [Gavrilenko AV, Kotov AE, Krajnik VM, et al. Methods of repeat arterial reconstruction in patients with сritical limb ischemia. Russ Ann Surg. 2019; 24 (3): 198–201. (In Russ.)] doi: 10.24022/1560-9502-2019-24-3-198-201
33. Nolan BW, De Martino RR, Stone DH, et al. Prior failed ipsilateral percutaneous endovascular intervention in patients with critical limb ischemia predicts poor outcome after lower extremity bypass. J Vasc Surg. 2011; 54 (3): 730–735. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2011.03.236
34. Jones DW, Schanzer A, Zhao Y, et al. Growing impact of restenosis on the surgical treatment of peripheral arterial disease. J Am Heart Assoc. 2013; 2 (6): 345. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.113.000345
35. Гавриленко А.В., Кравченко А.А., Шаталова Д.В. Повторные реконструкции после эндоваскулярного вмешательства у больной с критической ишемией нижних конечностей. Ангиология и сосудистая хирургия. 2017; 23 (4): 118–121. [Gavrilenko AV, Kravchenko AA, Shatalova DV. Secondary reconstructions after endovascular treatment of a woman with critical lower limb ischaemia. Angio Vasc Surg. 2017; 23 (4): 118–121. (In Russ.)]
36. Shishehbor MH, White CJ, Gray BH, et al. Critical limb ischemia: an expert statement. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016; 68 (18): 2002–2015. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2016.04.071
All articles in our journal are distributed under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 (Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International)
п?? GEOTAR-Media Publishing Group. The use of textual and illustrative content from this publication for the training of any artificial intelligence systems п?? including machine learning models and neural networks п?? is strictly prohibited without the prior written consent of the copyright holder.