Outcomes of repeat below the knee endovascular therapy: report and WIFI score

Thanks, as always to the original SALSAmigo, Prof. Joseph LR Mills for this find from Kobayashi and coworkers. Does this fit with your experiences?screenshot 2017-08-16 at 7.30.47 AM.JPG


screenshot 2017-08-16 at 7.35.21 AM.JPG

Objectives: We clarified characteristics and clinical outcomes of critical limb ischemia (CLI)
patients who underwent repeat endovascular therapy (EVT) for infrapopliteal lesions.
Background: High restenosis rate after infrapopliteal EVT remains a major concern.
Methods: Patients with CLI who underwent EVT between April 2007 and February 2014, were divided into the following three groups according to how often EVT was repeated: Group A, no repeat of EVT; Group B, EVT repeated once/twice; and Group C, EVT repeated 3 times.
Results: Wound healing rates at 1 year were 93.9% in Group A, 77.1% in Group B, and 27.3% in Group C (P<0.001). Limb salvage rates at 3 years were 93.0, 88.5, and 57.1%, respectively (P50.001). Amputation-free survival rates at 3 years were 60.8, 51.2, and 29.2%, respectively (P50.019). Multivariate analysis revealed that hemodialysis (OR 3.413, 95% CI 1.263–9.225, P 5 0.016), low ejection fraction (OR 7.758, 1.049–57.360, P 5 0.045), and clinical stage assessed by SVS WIfI (OR 2.440, 1.417–4.203, P 5 0.001) were independent predictors of repeat EVT. The rate of requirement for repeat EVT significantly increased as clinical stage became more severe (repeat EVT rate: 0% in CS 1, 28.6% in CS 2, 34.0% in CS 3, and 45.7% in CS 4, P < 0.001).
Conclusions: The clinical outcomes of CLI patients requiring repeat EVT three or more times were poor. The SVS WIfI clinical stage may be useful to predict the necessity of repeat EVT.

One thought on “Outcomes of repeat below the knee endovascular therapy: report and WIFI score

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.