Circulation journal : official journal of the Japanese Circulation Society · 2008
Long-term outcome after percutaneous peripheral intervention vs medical treatment for patients with superficial femoral artery occlusive disease.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
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.
Kamiya Chizuko, Sakamoto Shingo, Tamori Yuiichi, Yoshimuta Tsuyoshi, Higashi Masahiro, Tanaka Ryoichi, Akutsu Koichi, Takeshita Satoshi
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Percutaneous peripheral intervention (PPI) for superficial femoral artery (SFA) stenosis is associated with a high restenosis rate. Whether PPI improves the long-term outcome of patients with SFA occlusive disease remains to be determined.
METHODS AND RESULTS: A review was done of 107 patients with SFA occlusive disease. Fifty-five patients received PPI for SFA (ie, PPI group) and 52 patients received conservative medical therapy (ie, control group). Clinical records were searched for adverse events (eg, death, limb amputation, re-hospitalization, new onset of coronary artery disease and cerebrovascular disease) for an average of 30.6+/-17.7 months. At follow-up, only 5 patients (9.1%) in the PPI group experienced improved limb symptoms compared with baseline, and 6 patients (10.9%) showed ischemic skin ulcer or gangrene. In addition, 2 of these 6 patients were unsuccessful PPI cases complicated with distal embolization and perforation. In the control group, 3 patients (5.8%) presented with improved limb symptoms, and an equal number of patients had worsening of symptoms. Although 2 patients showed ischemic skin ulcers at follow-up, both patients had these lesions at baseline. Adverse events were observed more frequently in the PPI group than the control group (69.1% vs 46.2%, p<0.05). This was mainly due to a higher frequency of re-hospitalization in the PPI group than in controls (52.7% vs 15.4%, p<0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: The current study demonstrates that PPI for patients with SFA occlusive disease does not provide superior long-term benefits compared with conservative medical therapy, and that medical therapy will continue to remain the primary treatment strategy for this group of patients.
METHODS AND RESULTS: A review was done of 107 patients with SFA occlusive disease. Fifty-five patients received PPI for SFA (ie, PPI group) and 52 patients received conservative medical therapy (ie, control group). Clinical records were searched for adverse events (eg, death, limb amputation, re-hospitalization, new onset of coronary artery disease and cerebrovascular disease) for an average of 30.6+/-17.7 months. At follow-up, only 5 patients (9.1%) in the PPI group experienced improved limb symptoms compared with baseline, and 6 patients (10.9%) showed ischemic skin ulcer or gangrene. In addition, 2 of these 6 patients were unsuccessful PPI cases complicated with distal embolization and perforation. In the control group, 3 patients (5.8%) presented with improved limb symptoms, and an equal number of patients had worsening of symptoms. Although 2 patients showed ischemic skin ulcers at follow-up, both patients had these lesions at baseline. Adverse events were observed more frequently in the PPI group than the control group (69.1% vs 46.2%, p<0.05). This was mainly due to a higher frequency of re-hospitalization in the PPI group than in controls (52.7% vs 15.4%, p<0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: The current study demonstrates that PPI for patients with SFA occlusive disease does not provide superior long-term benefits compared with conservative medical therapy, and that medical therapy will continue to remain the primary treatment strategy for this group of patients.