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

32 Scopus citations


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
StateAccepted/In press - Mar 15 2015

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Surgery

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Bypass surgery versus endovascular interventions in severe or critical limb ischemia'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this