Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
2.
J Am Heart Assoc ; 5(7)2016 07 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27402237

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Critical limb ischemia (CLI) is increasing in prevalence, and remains a significant source of mortality and limb loss. The decision to recommend surgical or endovascular revascularization for patients who are candidates for both varies significantly among providers and is driven more by individual preference than scientific evidence. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Best Endovascular Versus Best Surgical Therapy for Patients With Critical Limb Ischemia (BEST-CLI) Trial is a prospective, randomized, multidisciplinary, controlled, superiority trial designed to compare treatment efficacy, functional outcomes, quality of life, and cost in patients undergoing best endovascular or best open surgical revascularization. Approximately 140 clinical sites in the United States and Canada will enroll 2100 patients with CLI who are candidates for both treatment options. A pragmatic trial design requires consensus on patient eligibility by at least 2 investigators, but leaves the choice of specific procedural strategy within the assigned revascularization approach to the individual treating investigator. Patients with suitable single-segment of saphenous vein available for potential bypass will be randomized within Cohort 1 (n=1620), while patients without will be randomized within Cohort 2 (n=480). The primary efficacy end point of the trial is Major Adverse Limb Event-Free Survival. Key secondary end points include Re-intervention and Amputation-Free-Survival and Amputation Free-Survival. CONCLUSIONS: The BEST-CLI trial is the first randomized controlled trial comparing endovascular therapy to open surgical bypass in patients with CLI to be carried out in North America. This landmark comparative effectiveness trial aims to provide Level I data to clarify the appropriate role for both treatment strategies and help define an evidence-based standard of care for this challenging patient population. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/. Unique identifier: NCT02060630.


Subject(s)
Endovascular Procedures/methods , Extremities/blood supply , Ischemia/surgery , Peripheral Arterial Disease/surgery , Vascular Surgical Procedures/methods , Amputation, Surgical/statistics & numerical data , Anastomosis, Surgical , Comparative Effectiveness Research , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Endovascular Procedures/economics , Equivalence Trials as Topic , Humans , Stents , Treatment Outcome , Vascular Surgical Procedures/economics
3.
N Engl J Med ; 370(1): 13-22, 2014 Jan 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24245566

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Atherosclerotic renal-artery stenosis is a common problem in the elderly. Despite two randomized trials that did not show a benefit of renal-artery stenting with respect to kidney function, the usefulness of stenting for the prevention of major adverse renal and cardiovascular events is uncertain. METHODS: We randomly assigned 947 participants who had atherosclerotic renal-artery stenosis and either systolic hypertension while taking two or more antihypertensive drugs or chronic kidney disease to medical therapy plus renal-artery stenting or medical therapy alone. Participants were followed for the occurrence of adverse cardiovascular and renal events (a composite end point of death from cardiovascular or renal causes, myocardial infarction, stroke, hospitalization for congestive heart failure, progressive renal insufficiency, or the need for renal-replacement therapy). RESULTS: Over a median follow-up period of 43 months (interquartile range, 31 to 55), the rate of the primary composite end point did not differ significantly between participants who underwent stenting in addition to receiving medical therapy and those who received medical therapy alone (35.1% and 35.8%, respectively; hazard ratio with stenting, 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76 to 1.17; P=0.58). There were also no significant differences between the treatment groups in the rates of the individual components of the primary end point or in all-cause mortality. During follow-up, there was a consistent modest difference in systolic blood pressure favoring the stent group (-2.3 mm Hg; 95% CI, -4.4 to -0.2; P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Renal-artery stenting did not confer a significant benefit with respect to the prevention of clinical events when added to comprehensive, multifactorial medical therapy in people with atherosclerotic renal-artery stenosis and hypertension or chronic kidney disease. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00081731.).


Subject(s)
Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers/therapeutic use , Renal Artery Obstruction/therapy , Stents , Aged , Amlodipine/therapeutic use , Angioplasty, Balloon , Anticholesteremic Agents/therapeutic use , Antihypertensive Agents/therapeutic use , Cardiovascular Diseases/etiology , Cardiovascular Diseases/mortality , Combined Modality Therapy , Drug Combinations , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Heptanoic Acids/therapeutic use , Humans , Hypertension/complications , Hypertension/drug therapy , Kaplan-Meier Estimate , Male , Middle Aged , Pyrroles/therapeutic use , Renal Artery , Renal Artery Obstruction/complications , Renal Artery Obstruction/drug therapy , Renal Insufficiency, Chronic/complications , Treatment Failure
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...