Article

High mortality risks after major lower extremity amputation in Medicare patients with peripheral artery disease.

Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC
American heart journal (Impact Factor: 4.56). 05/2013; 165(5):809-815.e1. DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2012.12.002
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Little is known regarding the contemporary outcomes of older patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) undergoing major lower extremity (LE) amputation in the United States. We sought to characterize clinical outcomes and factors associated with outcomes after LE amputation in patients with PAD.
Using data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2008, we examined the national patterns of mortality after major LE amputation among patients 65 years or older with PAD. Cox proportional hazards models were used to investigate the association between clinical variables, comorbid conditions, year of index amputation, geographic variation, and major LE amputation.
Among 186,338 older patients with identified PAD who underwent major LE amputation, the mortality rate was 13.5% at 30 days, 48.3% at 1 year, and 70.9% at 3 years. Age per 5-year increase (hazard ratio [HR] 1.29, 95% CI 1.29-1.29), history of heart failure (HR 1.71, 95% CI 1.71-1.72), renal disease (HR 1.84. 95% CI 1.83-1.85), cancer (HR 1.71, 95% CI 1.70-1.72), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (HR 1.33, 95% CI, 1.32-1.33) were all independently associated with death after major LE amputation. Subjects who underwent above knee amputation had a statistically higher hazard of death when compared with subjects who underwent LE amputation at more distal locations (HR with above the knee amputation 1.31, 95% CI 1.25-1.36).
Older patients with PAD undergoing major LE amputation still face a slightly high mortality risk, with almost half of all patients with PAD dying within a year of major LE amputation.

0 Followers
 · 
66 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Peripheral artery disease affects over eight million Americans and is associated with an increased risk of mortality, cardiovascular disease, functional limitation, and limb loss. In its most severe form, critical limb ischemia, patients are often treated with lower extremity (LE) amputation (LEA), although the overall incidence of LEA is declining. In the US, there is significant geographic variation in the performing of major LEA. The rate of death after major LEA in the US is approximately 48% at 1 year and 71% at 3 years. Despite this significant morbidity and mortality, the use of diagnostic testing (both noninvasive and invasive testing) in the year prior to LEA is low and varies based on patient, provider, and regional factors. In this review we discuss the significance of LEA and methods to reduce its occurrence. These methods include improved recognition of the risk factors for LEA by clinicians and patients, strong advocacy for noninvasive and/or invasive imaging prior to LEA, improved endovascular revascularization techniques, and novel therapies.
    Vascular Health and Risk Management 07/2014; 10:417-424. DOI:10.2147/VHRM.S50588
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Patients with critical lower limb ischemia without patent pedal arteries cannot be treated by the conventional arterial reconstruction. Venous arterialization has been suggested to improve limb salvage in this subgroup of patients but has not gained wide acceptance. We report our early experience after implementing deep and superficial venous arterialization of the lower limb. Ten patients with critical ischemia and without crural or pedal arteries available for conventional bypass surgery or angioplasty were treated with distal venous arterialization. Inflow was from the most distal unobstructed segment. Run-off was the dorsal pedal venous arch (n=5), the dorsal pedal venous arch and a concomitant vein of the posterior tibial artery (n=3), or the dorsal pedal venous arch and a concomitant vein of the common plantar artery (n=2) depending on the location of the ischemic lesion. Venous valves were destroyed using antegrade valvulotomes, guide wires, knob needles, or retrograde valvulotomes via an extra incision. Seven of the operated limbs were amputated after 23 (1-256) days (median [range]). The main reasons for amputation were lack of healing of either the original wound, of incisional wounds on the foot, or persisting pain at rest. In three cases, the bypass was open at the time of amputation. Two patients experienced complete wound healing after 231 and 342 days, respectively. By the end of follow-up, the last patient was ambulating with slow wound healing but without pain 309 days after surgery. Venous arterialization may be used as a treatment of otherwise unsalveable limbs. The success rate is, however, limited. Technical optimization of the technique is warranted.
    12/2013; 4. DOI:10.3402/dfa.v4i0.22713
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background In the TRACER trial, vorapaxar, a protease-activated receptor-1 antagonist, plus standard care in non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE ACS) patients did not significantly reduce the primary composite end point but reduced a key secondary end point and significantly increased bleeding. History of peripheral artery disease (PAD) was a risk-enrichment inclusion criterion. We investigated the efficacy and safety of vorapaxar in NSTE ACS patients with documented PAD. Methods TRACER was a double-blind, randomized trial comparing vorapaxar with placebo in 12,944 patients with NSTE ACS. Results In total, 936 (7.2%) patients had a history of PAD. Ischemic events occurred more frequently among patients with PAD (25.3%) versus no PAD (12.2%, P < .001), and Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries moderate/severe bleeding was more common in PAD (9.1%) versus no PAD (5.0%, P = .004). Similar rates of the composite end point (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) occurred in patients with PAD treated with vorapaxar and placebo (21.7% vs 24.8%, P interaction = .787). Patients with PAD treated with vorapaxar, when compared with placebo, also had a numerical reduction in peripheral revascularization procedures (8.1% vs 9.0%, P = .158) and a lower extremity amputation rate (0.9% vs 1.5%, P = .107). Vorapaxar increased Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries moderate/severe bleeding similarly in patients with PAD (hazard ratio 1.47, 95% CI 0.89-2.45) and without (hazard ratio 1.48, 95% CI 1.22-1.79; P interaction = .921). Conclusions Patients with NSTEACS and PAD were at increased risk for ischemic events. Lower rates of ischemic end points, peripheral revascularization, and amputation with vorapaxar did not reach statistical significance but warrant further investigation. Vorapaxar increased bleeding in both patients with and without PAD at a similar magnitude of risk.
    American Heart Journal 10/2014; 168(4):588-596. DOI:10.1016/j.ahj.2014.06.017 · 4.56 Impact Factor