A single center's 15-year experience with palliative limb care for chronic limb threatening ischemia in frail patients.

OBJECTIVE: Our institution's multidisciplinary Prevention of Amputation in Veterans Everywhere (PAVE) program allocates veterans with critical limb threatening ischemia (CLTI) to immediate revascularization, conservative care, primary amputation, or palliative limb care according to previously reported criteria. These four groups align with the approaches outlined by the global guidelines for the management of CLTI. In the present study, we have delineated the natural history of the palliative limb care group of patients and quantified the procedural risks and outcomes. METHODS: Veterans prospectively enrolled into the palliative limb cohort of our PAVE program from January 2005 to January 2020 were analyzed. The primary outcome was mortality. The secondary outcomes included overall and limb-related readmissions, limb loss, and wound healing. The clinical frailty scale (CFS) score was calculated, and the 5-year expected mortality was estimated using the Veterans Affairs Quality Enhancement Research Initiative tool. Regression analysis was performed to establish associations among the following variables: mortality, wound, ischemia, and foot infection (WIfI) score, CFS score, overall admissions, and limb-related admissions. RESULTS: The PAVE program enrolled 1158 limbs during 15 years. Of the 1158 limbs, 157 (13.5%) in 145 patients were allocated to the palliative limb care group. The overall mortality of the group was 88.2% (median interval, 3.5 months; range, 0-91 months). Of the 128 patients who had died, 64 (50%) had died within 3 months of enrollment. The predicted 5-year mortality for the group was 66%. The average CFS score for the group was 6.2, denoting persons moderately to severely frail. Using the CFS score, 106 patients were considered frail and 39 were considered not frail. No differences were found in mortality between the frail and nonfrail patients. However, a statistically significant difference was found in early (<3 months) mortality (56.2% vs 37.5%; P = .032). The 30-day limb-related readmission rate was 4.7%. Eventual major amputation was necessary for 18 limbs (11.5%). Wound healing occurred in 30 patients (20.6%). Regression analysis demonstrated no association between the CFS score and mortality (r = 0.55; P = .159) or between the WIfI score and mortality (r = 0.0165; P = .98). However, a significant association was found between the WIfI score and limb-related admissions (r = 0.97; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Frail patients with CLTI had high early mortality and a low risk of limb-related complications. They also had a low incidence of deferred primary amputation or limb-related readmissions. In our cohort, the vast majority of patients had died within a few months of enrollment without requiring an amputation. A comprehensive approach to the treatment of CLTI patients should include a palliative limb care option because a significant proportion of these patients will have limited survival and can potentially avoid unnecessary surgery and major amputation.

Arteriovenous fistula maturation: Physical exam versus flow study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine the utility of routine duplex flow study 4 to 6 weeks after primary AVF creation and to compare physical exam against a duplex flow study in predicting fistula maturation. A surveillance algorithm was established to evaluate the naïve fistula after primary creation. METHODS: This was a single institution retrospective review of 155 veterans with primary autogenous AVF creation from 2016 to 2018. All patients received a duplex flow study evaluation after primary creation. A comparison was made between physical exam (PE) and flow study at 4 to 6 weeks post creation. Sensitivities and specificities of physical exam and duplex flow study were compared head-to-head in predicting unassisted fistula maturation. A mature AVF was defined as a fistula that could be repetitively cannulated and provided adequate flow for dialysis. Failure of maturation was defined as an AVF that was never usable for dialysis. An abnormal duplex included thrombosis, stenosis (> 50% on gray scale imaging), inadequate vein diameter (< 4 mm), inadequate vein length or superficialization, or poor flow (< 500 ml/min). Bivariate comparisons were conducted using Pearson's χ², Fishers exact test, and Wilcoxon test depending on distribution. Significance was defined as P < 0.05. RESULTS: There were 53 patients with radiocephalic (RC) fistulas, 41 patients with brachiocephalic (BC) fistulas, and 6 patients with brachiobasilic (BB) fistulas. Of patients with a confirmed abnormal duplex ultrasound, 53% had an abnormal PE (sensitivity 53%; PPV 96.3%, P < 0.001). Of the patients with a confirmed normal duplex, 98% had a normal PE (specificity 98%; NPV 68.5%, P < 0.001). An abnormal duplex flow study had a 67% sensitivity for predicting AVF failure or need for reintervention while an abnormal physical examination had a 42% sensitivity in predicting AVF failure or need for reintervention (P < 0.001). In total, 48 fistulas needed reintervention, however only 20 (42%) were associated with an abnormal physical examination. Of those 48 reinterventions, 20 (42%) fistulas exhibited primary assisted maturation (P < 0.001). On duplex flow study alone, 32 patients had hemodynamically significant lesions necessitating reintervention, which went on to afford 9 (28%) primary assisted mature fistulas (P = 0.69). CONCLUSION: Abnormal duplex flow studies have a better sensitivity for detecting AVF failure or the need for reintervention compared to physical exam alone. An abnormal duplex correlates more with needing a reintervention to achieve maturation than physical exam. Therefore, we advocate routine use of a postoperative duplex flow study to identify potentially correctable issues and optimize fistula maturation.