A comparison between combined open bypass revascularization and free tissue transfer versus endovascular revascularization and free tissue transfer for lower limb preservation.

BACKGROUND: Extensive defects of the lower limb as a result of diabetes and peripheral vascular disease require multidisciplinary treatment. Numerous studies with regards combining vascular bypass surgery and free tissue reconstruction of the lower limb had been published. However the trend has evolved toward a combination of endovascular revascularization and free flap reconstruction. The aim of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of this combination of treatment to the traditional combination of bypass surgery and free tissue reconstruction. METHODS: All patients who had undergone vascular bypass surgery and free tissue reconstruction of the lower limb as well as those who had undergone endovascular angioplasty with free tissue transfer for lower limb preservation, over a 10-year period was included in this study. RESULTS: A total of 46 patients that underwent limb preservation were included in this study, 22 patients underwent open bypass revascularization and free flap transfer and 24 patients underwent endovascular revascularization and free tissue transfer. There were no differences between the two methods with regards to age, sex, defect size, TransAtlantic InterSociety Consensus level, Wagner classification, length of hospitalization, limb preservation rate, total flap necrosis rate, and partial flap necrosis rate. More importantly, there was no significant difference in the limb preservation rate (P = 0.14). CONCLUSION: In this study we found that the safety and the success rate of lower limb preservation using a combination of endovascular revascularization and free tissue reconstruction is comparable to using a combination of bypass surgery and free tissue transfer.

Endovascular revascularization and free tissue transfer for lower limb salvage.

Combined bypass surgery with free flap reconstruction is an established method for lower limb salvage. But the success of the combination of endovascular revascularization together with free tissue transfer has so far not been well established. A retrospective review of all patients who had undergone endovascular revascularization and reconstructed with free tissue transfer for lower limb salvage at Tzu Chi Dalin General Hospital between 2008 and 2012 was performed. A total of 26 legs underwent limb salvage in 24 patients. There were 10 male and 14 female patients. Their average age was 71.4 years. The average time interval between endovascular intervention and free tissue transfer was 8 days. There was 100% flap survival but partial flap necrosis was seen in three patients. A high rate of wound infection was seen in eight patients, all requiring further debridement. The total limb salvage rate at 1-year follow-up was 96% and 92% at the 2-year follow-up. In conclusion, the success rate of lower limb salvage using a combination of endovascular revascularization and free tissue reconstruction is comparable to using a combination of bypass surgery and free tissue transfer. It is associated with a high flap success rate and a high limb salvage rate. It provides physicians with a further treatment option in the management of ischemic lower limbs with extended tissue loss.