Background: We evaluated whether direct or indirect endovascular revascularization based on the angiosome model affects outcomes in type 2 diabetes and critical limb ischemia. Methods: From 2010 to 2015, 603 patients with type 2 diabetes were admitted for critical limb ischemia and submitted to endovascular revascularization. Among these patients, 314 (52%) underwent direct and 123 (20%) indirect revascularization, depending on whether the flow to the artery directly feeding the site of ulceration, according to the angiosome model, was successfully acquired; 166 patients (28%) were judged unable to be revascularized. Outcomes were healing, major amputation, and mortality rates. Results: An overall healing rate of 62.5% was observed: patients who did not receive percutaneous transluminal angioplasty presented a healing rate of 58.4% (P, .02 versus revascularized patients). A higher healing rate was observed in the direct versus the indirect group (82.4% versus 50.4%; P, .001). The major amputation rate was significantly higher in the indirect versus the direct group (9.2% versus 3.2%; P, .05). The overall mortality rate was 21.6%, and it was higher in the indirect versus the direct group (24% versus 14%; P, .05). Conclusions: These data show that direct revascularization of arteries supplying the diabetic foot ulcer site by means of the angiosome model is associated with a higher healing rate and lower risk of amputation and death compared with the indirect procedure. These results support use of the angiosome model in type 2 diabetes with critical limb ischemia. (J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 111(4): 1-12, 2021).

Effect of direct endovascular revascularization based on the angiosome model on risk of major amputations and life expectancy in type 2 diabetic patients with critical limb ischemia and foot ulceration

Bargellini I.;
2021-01-01

Abstract

Background: We evaluated whether direct or indirect endovascular revascularization based on the angiosome model affects outcomes in type 2 diabetes and critical limb ischemia. Methods: From 2010 to 2015, 603 patients with type 2 diabetes were admitted for critical limb ischemia and submitted to endovascular revascularization. Among these patients, 314 (52%) underwent direct and 123 (20%) indirect revascularization, depending on whether the flow to the artery directly feeding the site of ulceration, according to the angiosome model, was successfully acquired; 166 patients (28%) were judged unable to be revascularized. Outcomes were healing, major amputation, and mortality rates. Results: An overall healing rate of 62.5% was observed: patients who did not receive percutaneous transluminal angioplasty presented a healing rate of 58.4% (P, .02 versus revascularized patients). A higher healing rate was observed in the direct versus the indirect group (82.4% versus 50.4%; P, .001). The major amputation rate was significantly higher in the indirect versus the direct group (9.2% versus 3.2%; P, .05). The overall mortality rate was 21.6%, and it was higher in the indirect versus the direct group (24% versus 14%; P, .05). Conclusions: These data show that direct revascularization of arteries supplying the diabetic foot ulcer site by means of the angiosome model is associated with a higher healing rate and lower risk of amputation and death compared with the indirect procedure. These results support use of the angiosome model in type 2 diabetes with critical limb ischemia. (J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 111(4): 1-12, 2021).
2021
111
4
1
12
Iacopi E.; Coppelli A.; Goretti C.; Bargellini I.; Cicorelli A.; Cioni R.; Piaggesi A.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
83-2021 iacopi.pdf

Accesso riservato

Dimensione 4.79 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
4.79 MB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2318/1965214
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 6
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 5
social impact