ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Iloprost has been proposed as an alternative to amputation in Critical Limb Ischemia (CLI) patients when revascularization was unsuccessful or not possible. Nonetheless, there is limited evidence of its benefit. The main objective was to evaluate the effectiveness of iloprost and the secondary objective was to evaluate its safety. METHODS: In this cohort study including CLI patients from the COPART registry from 2006/10 to 2021/01, patients exposed to iloprost were matched with up to three unexposed patients according to age, sex, and Propensity Score (PS) for exposure to iloprost. The main outcome combined the occurrence of all-cause death and major amputations; survival was assessed over one-year using Kaplan-Meier estimates and Cox model analyses. Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events (MACE) were chosen as the safety outcome; the association with iloprost was estimated using a logistic regression model. RESULTS: Among 1850 CLI patients, 201 were exposed to iloprost (71.6% men; median age: 72 years vs. 72.1%; 75 years for unexposed). In 134 exposed patients matched to 375 unexposed patients, 14 major amputations and 24 deaths occurred in exposed patients (28.4%) vs. 33 and 46 respectively in the unexposed patients (20.9%). The hazard ratio (HR) was of 1.49 (95% Confidence Interval: 1.01-2.20). The association remained in the subgroup of "no option" patients (HR: 1.74; [1.01-2.20]). Regarding safety, 21/201 (10.7%) exposed patients experienced MACE vs. 146/1649 (9.41%) unexposed patients (unadjusted Odds Ratio [OR]: 1.17 [0.72-1.90]; adjusted OR: 1.23 [0.72-2.11]). CONCLUSION: The study did not find any benefit of iloprost in CLI patients and even suggested a deleterious effect.
