Browsing by keyword "*Amputation"

Now showing items 1-3 of 3

    • Determinants of survival and major amputation after peripheral endovascular intervention for critical limb ischemia
      Vierthaler, Luke; Callas, Peter W.; Goodney, Philip P.; Schanzer, Andres; Patel, Virendra I.; Cronenwett, Jack L.; Bertges, Daniel J.; Vascular Study Group of New England (2015-09-01)
      OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to analyze periprocedural and 1-year outcomes of peripheral endovascular intervention (PVI) for critical limb ischemia (CLI). METHODS: We reviewed 1244 patients undergoing 1414 PVIs for CLI (rest pain, 29%; tissue loss, 71%) within the Vascular Study Group of New England (VSGNE) from January 2010 to December 2011. Overall survival (OS), amputation-free survival (AFS), and freedom from major amputation at 1 year were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox proportional hazards models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: The number of arteries treated during each procedure were 1 (49%), 2 (35%), 3 (12%), and > /=4 (5%). Target arterial segments and TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus classifications were aortoiliac, 27% (A, 48%; B, 28%; C, 12%; and D, 12%); femoral-popliteal, 48% (A, 29%; B, 34%; C, 20%; and D, 17%); and infrapopliteal, 25% (A, 17%; B, 14%; C, 25%; D, 44%). Technical success was 92%. Complications included access site hematoma (5.0%), occlusion (0.3%), and distal embolization (2.4%). Mortality and major amputation rates were 2.8% and 2.2% at 30 days, respectively. Overall percutaneous or open reintervention rate was 8.0% during the first year. At 1-year, OS, AFS, and freedom from major amputation were 87%, 87%, and 94% for patients with rest pain and 80%, 71%, and 81% for patients with tissue loss. Independent predictors of reduced 1-year OS (C index = .74) included dialysis (HR, 3.8; 95% CI, 2.8-5.1; P < .01), emergency procedure (HR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.0-6.2; P = .05), age > 80 years (HR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.7-2.8; P < .01), not living at home preoperatively (HR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.4-2.8; P < .01), creatinine > 1.8 mg/dL (HR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.3-2.8; P < .01), congestive heart failure (HR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.3-2.2; P < .01), and chronic beta-blocker use (HR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.0-1.9; P = .03), whereas independent preoperative ambulation (HR, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.6-0.9; P = .014) was protective. Independent predictors of major amputation (C index = .69) at 1 year included dialysis (HR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.6-4.5; P < .01), tissue loss (HR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.1-3.7; P = .02), prior major contralateral amputation (HR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.1-3.5; P = .02), non-Caucasian race (HR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.0-2.9; P = .045), and male gender (HR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1-2.6; P = .03), whereas smoking (HR, .60; 95% CI, 0.4-1.0; P = .042) was protective. CONCLUSIONS: Survival and major amputation after PVI for CLI are associated with different patient characteristics. Dialysis dependence is a common predictor that portends especially poor outcomes. These data may facilitate efforts to improve patient selection and, after further validation, enable risk-adjusted outcome reporting for CLI patients undergoing PVI.

    • Factors associated with amputation or graft occlusion one year after lower extremity bypass in northern New England
      Goodney, Philip P.; Nolan, Brian W.; Schanzer, Andres; Eldrup-Jorgensen, Jens; Bertges, Daniel J.; Stanley, Andrew C.; Stone, David H.; Walsh, Daniel B.; Powell, Richard J.; Likosky, Donald S.; et al. (2010-01-15)
      BACKGROUND: Optimal patient selection for lower extremity bypass surgery requires surgeons to predict which patients will have durable functional outcomes following revascularization. Therefore, we examined risk factors that predict amputation or graft occlusion within the first year following lower extremity bypass. METHODS: Using our regional quality-improvement initiative in 11 hospitals in northern New England, we studied 2,306 lower extremity bypass procedures performed in 2,031 patients between January 2003 and December 2007. Sixty surgeons contributed to our database, and over 100 demographic and clinical variables were abstracted by trained researchers. Cox proportional hazards models were used to generate hazard ratios and surrounding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for our combined outcome measure of major amputation (above-knee or below-knee) or permanent graft occlusion (loss of secondary patency) occurring within the first year postoperatively. RESULTS: We found that within our cohort of 2,306 bypass procedures 17% resulted in an amputation or graft occlusion within 1 year of surgery. Of the 143 amputations performed (8% of all limbs undergoing bypasses), 17% occurred in the setting of a patent graft. Similarly, of the 277 graft occlusions (12% of all bypasses), 42% resulted in a major amputation. We identified eight preoperative patient characteristics associated with amputation or graft occlusion in multivariate analysis: age <50, nonambulatory status preoperatively, dialysis dependence, diabetes, critical limb ischemia, need for venovenostomy, tarsal target, and living preoperatively in a nursing home. While patients with no risk factors had 1-year amputation/occlusion rates that were <1%, patients with three or more risk factors had a nearly 30% chance of suffering amputation or graft occlusion by 1 year postoperatively. When we compared risk-adjusted rates of amputation/occlusion across centers, we found that one center in our region performed significantly better than expected (observed/expected ratio 0.7, 95% CI 0.6-0.9, p < 0.04). CONCLUSION: Preoperative risk factors allow surgeons to predict the risk of amputation or graft occlusion following lower extremity bypass and to more precisely inform patients about their operative risk and functional outcomes. Additionally, our model facilitates comparison of risk-adjusted outcomes across our region. We believe quality-improvement measures such as these will allow surgeons to identify best practices and thereby improve outcomes across centers. All rights reserved.

    • Predicting functional status following amputation after lower extremity bypass
      Suckow, Bjoern D.; Goodney, Philip P.; Cambria, Robert A.; Bertges, Daniel J.; Eldrup-Jorgensen, Jens; Indes, Jeffrey E.; Schanzer, Andres; Stone, David H.; Kraiss, Larry W.; Cronenwett, Jack L. (2012-01-01)
      BACKGROUND: Some patients who undergo lower extremity bypass (LEB) for critical limb ischemia ultimately require amputation. The functional outcome achieved by these patients after amputation is not well known. Therefore, we sought to characterize the functional outcome of patients who undergo amputation after LEB, and to describe the pre- and perioperative factors associated with independent ambulation at home after lower extremity amputation. METHODS: Within a cohort of 3,198 patients who underwent an LEB between January, 2003 and December, 2008, we studied 436 patients who subsequently received an above-knee (AK), below-knee (BK), or minor (forefoot or toe) ipsilateral or contralateral amputation. Our main outcome measure consisted of a "good functional outcome," defined as living at home and ambulating independently. We calculated univariate and multivariate associations among patient characteristics and our main outcome measure, as well as overall survival. RESULTS: Of the 436 patients who underwent amputation within the first year following LEB, 224 of 436 (51.4%) had a minor amputation, 105 of 436 (24.1%) had a BK amputation, and 107 of 436 (24.5%) had an AK amputation. The majority of AK (75 of 107, 72.8%) and BK amputations (72 of 105, 70.6%) occurred in the setting of bypass graft thrombosis, whereas nearly all minor amputations (200 of 224, 89.7%) occurred with a patent bypass graft. By life-table analysis at 1 year, we found that the proportion of surviving patients with a good functional outcome varied by the presence and extent of amputation (proportion surviving with good functional outcome = 88% no amputation, 81% minor amputation, 55% BK amputation, and 45% AK amputation, p = 0.001). Among those analyzed at long-term follow-up, survival was slightly lower for those who had a minor amputation when compared with those who did not receive an amputation after LEB (81 vs. 88%, p = 0.02). Survival among major amputation patients did not significantly differ compared with no amputation (BK amputation 87%, p = 0.14, AK amputation 89%, p = 0.27); however, this part of the analysis was limited by its sample size (n = 212). In multivariable analysis, we found that the patients most likely to remain ambulatory and live independently despite undergoing a lower extremity amputation were those living at home preoperatively (hazard ratio [HR]: 6.8, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.94-49, p = 0.058) and those with preoperative statin use (HR: 1.6, 95% CI: 1.2-2.1, p = 0.003), whereas the presence of several comorbidities identified patients less likely to achieve a good functional outcome: coronary disease (HR: 0.6, 95% CI: 0.5-0.9, p = 0.003), dialysis (HR: 0.5, 95% CI: 0.3-0.9, p = 0.02), and congestive heart failure (HR: 0.5, 95% CI: 0.3-0.8, p = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: A postoperative amputation at any level impacts functional outcomes following LEB surgery, and the extent of amputation is directly related to the effect on functional outcome. It is possible, based on preoperative patient characteristics, to identify patients undergoing LEB who are most or least likely to achieve good functional outcomes even if a major amputation is ultimately required. These findings may assist in patient education and surgical decision making in patients who are poor candidates for lower extremity bypass.