Is WIFI score more important than angiosomes in limb salvage and healing?

Thanks to Flowmigo Prime, Joe Mills, for spotting this interesting work from University of Poitiers.

___

WIFI Threatened Limb System

Impact of angiosome- and nonangiosome-targeted peroneal bypass on limb salvage and healing in patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia

Jean-Baptiste Ricco, Mauro Gargiulo, MD, Andrea Stella, MD, Mohammad Abualhin, MD, Enrico Gallitto, MD, Mathieu Desvergnes, MD, Romain Belmonte, MD, Fabrice Schneider, MD, PhD

Abstract

Background

Direct (DIR) or indirect (IND) revascularization of pedal angiosomes in patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) has an unclear impact on limb salvage and healing. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of DIR and IND revascularization in patients with a peroneal bypass and tissue loss.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective study of a prospectively maintained database in two European university centers from 2004 to 2015. We extracted from this database all patients with CLTI and tissue loss who had received a bypass to the peroneal artery. All patients underwent angiography before bypass. Revascularization was considered DIR if the wound was in a peroneal angiosome. Wounds, ischemia, and infection were categorized according to the Wound, Ischemia, and foot Infection (WIfI) classification. Limb salvage and amputation-free survival were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox regression was used to compare the role of patient characteristics, including diabetes, peroneal runoff, pedal arch angiosome, WIfI grade, chronic kidney disease, and diabetes, in amputation-free-survival.

Results

From January 2004 through October 2015, there were 120 peroneal bypasses performed in 120 patients with CLTI and foot tissue loss. Only 55 wounds (46%) could be ascribed to a peroneal angiosome. At 3 years, amputation-free survival in patients with DIR revascularization was 54.9% ± 7.3% compared with 56.5% ± 6.3% in patients with IND revascularization (P = .44), with no significant difference in wound healing. Amputation-free survival at 3 years in patients with two patent peroneal branches was 74.8% ± 6.9% compared with 45.0% ± 6.0% in patients with one patent peroneal branch (P = .003). Amputation-free survival at 3 years in patients with a patent pedal arch (Rutherford 0-1) was 73.0% ± 7.0% vs 45.7% ± 6.0% in patients with incomplete pedal arch (Rutherford 2-3; P = .0002). Amputation-free survival at 3 years in patients with grade 1 or grade 2 WIfI was 87.4% ± 8.3% compared with 48.4% ± 5.3% in patients with grade 3 or grade 4 WIfI (P = .001). Amputation-free survival at 3 years in patients with diabetes was 43.7% ± 6.2% compared with 73.1% ± 6.7% in patients without diabetes (P = .002). Wound healing at 6 months was not significantly improved by its location within or outside a peroneal angiosome. Cox regression analysis demonstrated that diabetes, patency of both peroneal branches, patency of pedal arch, and WIfI stage but not DIR angiosome revascularization were significant predictors of amputation-free survival.

Conclusions

Our results suggest that in patients with CLTI and tissue loss receiving a peroneal bypass, patency of both peroneal branches and pedal arch was associated with a better healing rate and a better amputation-free survival rate irrespective of wound angiosome location.

David G. Armstrong

Dedicated to amputation prevention, wound healing, diabetic foot, biotechnology and the intersection between medical devices and consumer electronics.

Leave a Reply