MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1161/circinterventions.119.008150

Медицинская библиотека · Circulation. Cardiovascular interventions · 2020

Endovascular Versus Surgical Revascularization for Acute Limb Ischemia: A Propensity-Score Matched Analysis.

Kolte Dhaval, Kennedy Kevin F, Shishehbor Mehdi H, Mamdani Shafiq T, Stangenberg Lars, Hyder Omar N, Soukas Peter, Aronow Herbert D

Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

BACKGROUND

The optimal revascularization strategy for acute limb ischemia (ALI) remains unclear, and contemporary comparative effectiveness data on endovascular versus surgical revascularization are lacking.

METHODS

We used the 2010 to 2014 National Inpatient Sample databases to identify hospitalizations with a primary diagnosis of ALI. Patients were propensity-score matched on the likelihood of undergoing endovascular versus surgical revascularization using a logistic regression model. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included myocardial infarction, stroke, composite of death/myocardial infarction/stroke, any amputation, fasciotomy, acute kidney injury, major bleeding, transfusion, vascular complications, length of stay, and hospital costs.

RESULTS

Of 10 484 (weighted national estimate=51 914) hospitalizations for ALI, endovascular revascularization was performed in 5008 (47.8%) and surgical revascularization in 5476 (52.2%). In the propensity-score matched cohort (n=7746; 3873 per group), patients who underwent endovascular revascularization had significantly lower in-hospital mortality (2.8% versus 4.0%; P=0.002), myocardial infarction (1.9% versus 2.7%; P=0.022), composite of death/myocardial infarction/stroke (5.2% versus 7.5%; P<0.001), acute kidney injury (10.5% versus 11.9%; P=0.043), fasciotomy (1.9% versus 8.9%; P<0.001), major bleeding (16.7% versus 21.0%; P<0.001), and transfusion (10.3% versus 18.5%; P<0.001), but higher vascular complications (1.4% versus 0.7%; P=0.002), compared with those undergoing surgical revascularization. Rates of any amputation were similar between the 2 groups (4.7% versus 5.1%; P=0.43). Median length of stay was shorter and hospital costs higher with endovascular versus surgical revascularization.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with ALI, endovascular revascularization was associated with better in-hospital clinical outcomes compared with surgical revascularization. Contemporary randomized controlled trials are needed to determine the optimal revascularization strategy for ALI.

Для цитирования: Kolte Dhaval, Kennedy Kevin F, Shishehbor Mehdi H, Mamdani Shafiq T, Stangenberg Lars, Hyder Omar N, Soukas Peter, Aronow Herbert D. Endovascular Versus Surgical Revascularization for Acute Limb Ischemia: A Propensity-Score Matched Analysis.. Circulation. Cardiovascular interventions. 2020. DOI: 10.1161/circinterventions.119.008150.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.