Outcomes of endovascular treatment of patients with intermittent claudication due to femoropopliteal disease
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Objective Our objective was to evaluate the outcomes of endovascular treatment in patients with moderate and severe claudication due to femoropopliteal disease, that is, disease of the superficial femoral and popliteal arteries. Methods A retrospective review of all patients with moderate and severe claudication (Rutherford 2 and 3) undergoing endovascular treatment for FP disease between January 2012 and December 2017 at two university-affiliated hospitals was performed. All procedures were performed by vascular surgeons. Primary outcomes were mortality, freedom from reintervention, major adverse limb events defined as major amputations, open surgical revascularization, or progression to chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) at 30 days, 1 year, 2 years, and last follow-up. Unadjusted odds ratios were calculated to identify variables associated with adverse outcomes, and Kaplan–Meier survival curves were used to determine mortality and freedom from reintervention. Results Eighty-five limbs in 74 patients were identified on review. Mean age was 69.6 ± 9.8 years and 74.3% were males. At a median follow-up of 49.0 ± 25.5 months, all-cause mortality rate was 8.1% (6 patients) with 16.7% being due to cardiovascular causes. Reintervention rates were 1.2%, 16.5%, and 21.2% at 30 days, 1 year, and 2 years, respectively. Major adverse limb events occurred in 3 patients and rates were 0%, 1.2%, and 2.4% at 30 days, 1 year, and 2 years, respectively. Progression to CLTI was 0%, 1.2%, and 1.2% at 30 days, 1 year, and 2 years, respectively. Claudication had improved or resolved in 55.6% ( n = 34 patients), stable in 38.9% ( n = 21 patients), and worse in 5.6% ( n = 3 patients) Age ≥ 70 years (OR = 4.09 (1.14–14.66), p = 0.027), TASCII A lesion (OR = 4.67 (1.14–19.17), p = 0.025), and presence of 3-vessel runoff (OR = 3.70 (1.18–11.59), p = 0.022) predicted symptoms’ improvement. TASCII A lesions were less likely to require reintervention (OR = 0.23 (0.06–0.86), p = 0.020). Reintervention within 1 year (OR = 11.67 (0.98–138.94), p = 0.017), reintervention with a stent (OR = 14.40 (1.19–173.67), p = 0.008) and more than one reintervention (OR = 39.00 (2.89–526.28), p < 0.001) predicted major adverse limb events. Conclusions Careful patient selection is important when planning endovascular treatment in patients with intermittent claudication and FP disease. This could result in symptomatic improvement in more than half of the patients. Adverse outcomes such as major adverse limb events, progression to CLTI, and amputations occur at low rates.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».