From the Journals

Endovascular approach best for below-knee limb-threatening ischemia?


 

FROM THE LANCET

Conflicting results

In an accompanying comment, Ankur Kalra, MD, Franciscan Health, Lafayette, Ind., and Ashish Kumar, MD, Cleveland Clinic Akron (Ohio) General, noted that atherosclerotic lower-extremity peripheral artery disease affects more than 230 million people worldwide, and prevalence is increasing. Chronic limb-threatening ischemia is a severe form of peripheral artery disease that affects 11% of patients with peripheral artery disease and is associated with significant cardiovascular morbidity and death.

Furthermore, amputation rates of 10%-40% during a 6-month follow-up of patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia who were unable to undergo revascularization have been reported, highlighting the severity of atherosclerotic burden and the need for improved treatment strategies.

Dr. Kalra and Dr. Kumar pointed out that two previous randomized clinical trials compared surgical vein graft bypass with endovascular treatment for patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia – the BASIL-1 trial, and the BEST-CLI trial.

In the BASIL-1 trial, vein bypass was associated with improved overall survival and amputation-free survival for patients who survived at least 2 years. The BEST-CLI trial also reported a lower risk of a composite of major adverse limb events or death among patients undergoing a surgery-first strategy, compared with endovascular therapy, mostly in patients with suitable single segment of great saphenous vein.

Dr. Kalra and Dr. Kumar said the findings of the BASIL-2 trial should be put in context with these previous studies, which report a positive or equivocal effect of surgery. The results of the BEST-CLI trial were driven by fewer major reinterventions and above-ankle amputations in the surgical group, whereas the results of the BASIL-2 trial were driven by fewer deaths in the best endovascular treatment group, “which potentially points towards a difference in the characteristics of the patients randomly assigned in the two trials.”

They concluded: “Considering the results of the BASIL-2 trial and the BEST-CLI trial, choice of intervention should be based on shared decision making between interventional cardiology, vascular surgery, and the patient, until more evidence is accrued.”

The BASIL-2 trial was funded by the U.K. National Institute of Health Research.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Pages

Recommended Reading

In CABG, radial artery works best for second key graft: RAPCO at 15 years
MDedge Surgery
Medical school culinary medicine programs grow despite limited funding
MDedge Surgery
New AHA statement on managing ACS in older adults 
MDedge Surgery
Five thoughts on the Damar Hamlin collapse
MDedge Surgery
Longer life after bariatric surgery, but suicide risk in young
MDedge Surgery
Three wild technologies about to change health care
MDedge Surgery
Guidance for PCI without on-site surgical backup updated
MDedge Surgery
In weighing PCI vs. CABG for left main disease, diabetes matters
MDedge Surgery
At 5 years, TAVI valves perform better than surgical ones
MDedge Surgery
BIOVASC: Immediate complete revascularization beneficial in ACS
MDedge Surgery