Bypass surgery versus endovascular interventions in severe or critical limb ischemia

Abd Moain Abu Dabrh, Mark W. Steffen, Noor Asi, Chaitanya Undavalli, Zhen Wang, Mohamed B. Elamin, Michael S. Conte, Mohammad H Murad

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

27 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: Critical limb ischemia is associated with a significant morbidity and mortality. We systematically reviewed the evidence to compare bypass surgery with endovascular revascularization in patients with critical limb ischemia. Methods: We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, and Scopus through October 2014 for comparative studies (randomized and nonrandomized). Predefined outcomes of interest were mortality, major amputation, patency, and wound healing. We pooled odds ratios (ORs) of the outcomes of interest using the random-effects model. Results: Nine studies that enrolled 3071 subjects were included. There was no significant difference in mortality (OR, 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.44-1.16) or amputation (OR, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.87-1.65). Bypass surgery was associated with higher primary patency (OR, 2.50; 95% CI, 1.25-4.99) and assisted primary patency (OR, 3.39; 95% CI, 1.53-7.51). The quality of evidence was low for mortality and amputation outcomes and moderate for patency outcomes. Conclusions: Low quality of evidence due to imprecision and heterogeneity suggests that bypass surgery and endovascular approaches may have similar effect on mortality and major amputations. However, better primary and primary assisted patency can be expected with surgery.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalJournal of Vascular Surgery
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Mar 15 2015

Fingerprint

Amputation
Ischemia
Extremities
Odds Ratio
Mortality
Confidence Intervals
MEDLINE
Wound Healing
Morbidity

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Surgery

Cite this

Bypass surgery versus endovascular interventions in severe or critical limb ischemia. / Abu Dabrh, Abd Moain; Steffen, Mark W.; Asi, Noor; Undavalli, Chaitanya; Wang, Zhen; Elamin, Mohamed B.; Conte, Michael S.; Murad, Mohammad H.

In: Journal of Vascular Surgery, 15.03.2015.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abu Dabrh, Abd Moain ; Steffen, Mark W. ; Asi, Noor ; Undavalli, Chaitanya ; Wang, Zhen ; Elamin, Mohamed B. ; Conte, Michael S. ; Murad, Mohammad H. / Bypass surgery versus endovascular interventions in severe or critical limb ischemia. In: Journal of Vascular Surgery. 2015.
@article{40aabaae34ae4e0db2704b7067745a26,
title = "Bypass surgery versus endovascular interventions in severe or critical limb ischemia",
abstract = "Objective: Critical limb ischemia is associated with a significant morbidity and mortality. We systematically reviewed the evidence to compare bypass surgery with endovascular revascularization in patients with critical limb ischemia. Methods: We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, and Scopus through October 2014 for comparative studies (randomized and nonrandomized). Predefined outcomes of interest were mortality, major amputation, patency, and wound healing. We pooled odds ratios (ORs) of the outcomes of interest using the random-effects model. Results: Nine studies that enrolled 3071 subjects were included. There was no significant difference in mortality (OR, 0.72; 95{\%} confidence interval [CI], 0.44-1.16) or amputation (OR, 1.2; 95{\%} CI, 0.87-1.65). Bypass surgery was associated with higher primary patency (OR, 2.50; 95{\%} CI, 1.25-4.99) and assisted primary patency (OR, 3.39; 95{\%} CI, 1.53-7.51). The quality of evidence was low for mortality and amputation outcomes and moderate for patency outcomes. Conclusions: Low quality of evidence due to imprecision and heterogeneity suggests that bypass surgery and endovascular approaches may have similar effect on mortality and major amputations. However, better primary and primary assisted patency can be expected with surgery.",
author = "{Abu Dabrh}, {Abd Moain} and Steffen, {Mark W.} and Noor Asi and Chaitanya Undavalli and Zhen Wang and Elamin, {Mohamed B.} and Conte, {Michael S.} and Murad, {Mohammad H}",
year = "2015",
month = "3",
day = "15",
doi = "10.1016/j.jvs.2015.07.068",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Journal of Vascular Surgery",
issn = "0741-5214",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Bypass surgery versus endovascular interventions in severe or critical limb ischemia

AU - Abu Dabrh, Abd Moain

AU - Steffen, Mark W.

AU - Asi, Noor

AU - Undavalli, Chaitanya

AU - Wang, Zhen

AU - Elamin, Mohamed B.

AU - Conte, Michael S.

AU - Murad, Mohammad H

PY - 2015/3/15

Y1 - 2015/3/15

N2 - Objective: Critical limb ischemia is associated with a significant morbidity and mortality. We systematically reviewed the evidence to compare bypass surgery with endovascular revascularization in patients with critical limb ischemia. Methods: We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, and Scopus through October 2014 for comparative studies (randomized and nonrandomized). Predefined outcomes of interest were mortality, major amputation, patency, and wound healing. We pooled odds ratios (ORs) of the outcomes of interest using the random-effects model. Results: Nine studies that enrolled 3071 subjects were included. There was no significant difference in mortality (OR, 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.44-1.16) or amputation (OR, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.87-1.65). Bypass surgery was associated with higher primary patency (OR, 2.50; 95% CI, 1.25-4.99) and assisted primary patency (OR, 3.39; 95% CI, 1.53-7.51). The quality of evidence was low for mortality and amputation outcomes and moderate for patency outcomes. Conclusions: Low quality of evidence due to imprecision and heterogeneity suggests that bypass surgery and endovascular approaches may have similar effect on mortality and major amputations. However, better primary and primary assisted patency can be expected with surgery.

AB - Objective: Critical limb ischemia is associated with a significant morbidity and mortality. We systematically reviewed the evidence to compare bypass surgery with endovascular revascularization in patients with critical limb ischemia. Methods: We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, and Scopus through October 2014 for comparative studies (randomized and nonrandomized). Predefined outcomes of interest were mortality, major amputation, patency, and wound healing. We pooled odds ratios (ORs) of the outcomes of interest using the random-effects model. Results: Nine studies that enrolled 3071 subjects were included. There was no significant difference in mortality (OR, 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.44-1.16) or amputation (OR, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.87-1.65). Bypass surgery was associated with higher primary patency (OR, 2.50; 95% CI, 1.25-4.99) and assisted primary patency (OR, 3.39; 95% CI, 1.53-7.51). The quality of evidence was low for mortality and amputation outcomes and moderate for patency outcomes. Conclusions: Low quality of evidence due to imprecision and heterogeneity suggests that bypass surgery and endovascular approaches may have similar effect on mortality and major amputations. However, better primary and primary assisted patency can be expected with surgery.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84941662058&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84941662058&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jvs.2015.07.068

DO - 10.1016/j.jvs.2015.07.068

M3 - Article

C2 - 26372187

AN - SCOPUS:84955740258

JO - Journal of Vascular Surgery

JF - Journal of Vascular Surgery

SN - 0741-5214

ER -