98%
921
2 minutes
20
Objective: Although endovascular therapy is often the first-line option for medically refractory intermittent claudication (IC) caused by aortofemoral disease, suprainguinal bypass is often performed. Although this will often be aortofemoral bypass (AoFB), axillofemoral bypass (AxFB) is still sometimes performed despite limited data evaluating its utility in the management of IC. Our goal was to assess the safety and durability of AxFB performed for IC.
Methods: The Vascular Quality Initiative (2009-2019) was queried for suprainguinal bypass performed for IC. Univariable and multivariable analyses were used to compare the perioperative and 1-year outcomes between AxFB and a comparison cohort of AoFB.
Results: We identified 3261 suprainguinal bypasses performed for IC: 436 AxFBs and 2825 AoFBs. The mean age was 61.4 ± 9.1 years, 58.8% of the patients were men, and 59.7% currently smoked. Patients undergoing AxFB, compared with AoFB, were more often older, male, never smokers and ambulated with assistance (P < .001 for all). They had more often had hypertension, diabetes, coronary artery disease, congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and end-stage renal disease and had more often undergone previous outflow peripheral endovascular interventions and previous inflow or outflow bypass. The AxFBs, compared with the AoFBs, were more often unifemoral (P < .05). Patients who had undergone AxFB, compared with AoFB, had had a shorter postoperative length of stay (median, 4 vs 6 days) and fewer perioperative pulmonary (3% vs 7.9%) and renal (5.5% vs 9.9%) complications but had required more perioperative ipsilateral major amputations (0.9% vs 0.04%; P < .05 for all). No significant differences were found in the incidence of perioperative myocardial infarction (2.8% vs 2.7%), stroke (0.7% vs 1.1%), or death (1.8% vs 1.7%). At 1 year, the Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated that the AxFB cohort, compared with the AoFB cohort, had had higher rates of death (7.3% vs 3.6%; P = .002), graft occlusion or death (14.3% vs 7.2%; P = .001), ipsilateral major amputation or death (12.5% vs 5.6%; P < .001), and reintervention, amputation, or death (19% vs 8.6%; P < .001). On multivariable analysis, AxFB was independently associated with an increased risk of 1-year reintervention, amputation, or death (hazard ratio, 1.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-2.4; P = .04).
Conclusions: The results from the present retrospective analysis suggest that long-term complications were more frequent in patients who had undergone AxFB compared with AoFB, although patients treated with AxFB had had a greater risk with more comorbidities. Because AxFB was associated with significant perioperative morbidity, mortality, and long-term complications, serious consideration should be given before its use to treat IC.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2021.12.048 | DOI Listing |
Eye (Lond)
June 2024
Shenzhen Eye Hospital, Jinan University, Shenzhen Eye Institute, Shenzhen, Guangdong, 518040, China.
Objectives: To investigate a comprehensive proteomic profile of the tear fluid in patients with diabetic retinopathy (DR) and further define non-invasive biomarkers.
Methods: A cross-sectional, multicentre study that includes 46 patients with DR, 28 patients with diabetes mellitus (DM), and 30 healthy controls (HC). Tear samples were collected with Schirmer strips.
J Vasc Surg
May 2022
Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Boston Medical Center, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Mass. Electronic address:
Objective: Although endovascular therapy is often the first-line option for medically refractory intermittent claudication (IC) caused by aortofemoral disease, suprainguinal bypass is often performed. Although this will often be aortofemoral bypass (AoFB), axillofemoral bypass (AxFB) is still sometimes performed despite limited data evaluating its utility in the management of IC. Our goal was to assess the safety and durability of AxFB performed for IC.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFAnn Vasc Dis
June 2020
Department of Specialized Surgery, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Tokyo, Japan.
Although aortofemoral bypass (AoFB) is the standard treatment for challenging aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD), less-invasive treatments, such as axillofemoral bypass (AxFB) or endovascular treatment (EVT) have been conducted for patients with severe comorbidities. In this study, we compared the clinical outcomes between AxFB and EVT for AIOD. We retrospectively reviewed 9 patients with AxFB and 10 with EVT for challenging AIOD.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFAnn Thorac Cardiovasc Surg
December 2020
Department of Specialized Surgery, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Tokyo, Japan.
Purpose: We evaluated the clinical outcomes of aortofemoral bypass (AoFB) and axillofemoral bypass (AxFB) surgeries for complex aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD) and compared them from the perspectives of safety and efficacy.
Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 21 patients with AoFB grafting and 9 patients with AxFB grafting. The demographic information of the patients was examined, and the intra-, peri-, and postoperative results as well as long-term outcomes were evaluated.
J Vasc Surg
June 1992
Section of Vascular Surgery, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH 03756.
Aortobifemoral bypass (AoFB) is the preferred method to provide lower extremity inflow. To determine whether axillofemoral bypass (AxFB) is an acceptable alternative for high-risk patients, we reviewed our results with these two operations. Between 1985 and 1990, 29 axillobifemoral and 5 axillounifemoral bypass procedures were performed preferentially because of severe associated medical illness in patients with severe aortoiliac occlusive disease.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF