The Reintervention Index: A New Outcome Measure for Comparative Effectiveness of Lower Extremity Revascularization.

BACKGROUND: Reinterventions after lower extremity revascularization (LER) are common. Current outcome measures assessing durability of revascularization rely on freedom from reintervention but do not account for the frequency of repeated LER. The aim of this study is to compare the reintervention index, defined as the mean number of repeat LER, after open and endovascular revascularization. We hypothesized that endovascular procedures have reduced durability and increased frequency of reinterventions. METHODS: A retrospective review of the charts of consecutive patients undergoing LER for peripheral artery disease (PAD) in 2013-2014 by multiple specialties in a tertiary care center was performed. Patients were divided into open and endovascular groups based on the first LER procedure performed during the study period. Patient characteristics and outcomes were compared between the 2 groups. Multivariable regression was performed to determine factors associated with reintervention. RESULTS: There were 367 patients (Endo = 316, Open = 51). A total of 211 patients underwent 497 reinterventions (reintervention rate = 57.5%, reintervention index = 2.35 ± 2.02 procedures [range 1-11]). Patients in the open group were more likely to be smokers (P = 0.018) and to have prior open LER (P = 0.003), while patients in the endovascular group were older (P < 0.001) and more likely to have cardiovascular comorbidities. On follow-up, there was no difference in overall or ipsilateral reintervention rates or reintervention indices between endovascular and open LER. Major amputation was significantly higher after open LER (19.61% vs. 8.54%, P = 0.013) but there was no difference in survival (P = 0.448). Multivariable analysis did not show a significant relationship between type of procedure and reintervention. CONCLUSIONS: The reintervention index provides a measure to assess the frequency of repeat LER. Patients with PAD, in this study, are afflicted with similar extent of reinterventions after open and endovascular LER.

Variations in the Management of Claudication in a Tertiary Care Center.

BACKGROUND: Multiple societal guidelines recommend medical optimization and exercise therapy for patients with claudication prior to lower extremity revascularization (LER). However, the application of those guidelines in practice remains unknown. Our hypothesis is that vascular surgeons (VS) are more adherent to guidelines compared to non-VS treating claudication. METHODS: The records of patients undergoing LER for claudication in a single center were reviewed, and adherence to guidelines prior to LER was assessed. Patients received conservative therapy if the impact of claudication on quality of life was documented, ankle-brachial index (ABI) was obtained, and patients were treated with at least 3 months of walking exercise and smoking cessation when indicated. RESULTS: There were 187 patients treated for claudication (VS = 65, non-VS = 122). There were 161 patients who underwent endovascular intervention, 19 patients had an open revascularization, and 7 patients had a hybrid procedure. Patients treated by VS were younger and more likely to be African American. Patients treated by non-VS were more likely to have hyperlipidemia, coronary artery disease, smoke, and be on antiplatelet and statin medications. VS was more likely to assess pattern of symptoms with claudication and obtain ABIs compared to non-VS, although the mean ABIs were no different. VS was more likely to use walking exercises and smoking cessation when indicated before LER. Even though 70.8% and 31.1% of patients treated by VS and non-VS respectively were recommended walking exercises, only 33.8% and 18.0% were given a period of 3 months to benefit from it prior to LER. Conservative therapy was significantly higher among VS compared to non-VS but was overall low (VS = 12.3%, non-VS = 3.3%, P = 0.016). After a mean follow-up of 3.1 ± 1.3 years, there was no difference in mortality or major amputation. CONCLUSIONS: Although adherence to guidelines in the medical management of vascular claudication prior to LER was higher among VS compared with non-VS, overall rates of adherence were low. Stricter institutional protocols and oversight across specialties are needed to reinforce the application of the established standards of care.