How multidisciplinary clinics may mitigate socioeconomic barriers to care for chronic limb-threatening ischemia.
Although multidisciplinary clinics improve outcomes in chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI), their role in addressing socioeconomic disparities is unknown. Our institution treats patients with CLTI at both traditional general vascular clinics and a multidisciplinary Limb Preservation Program (LPP). The LPP is in a minority community, providing expedited care at a single facility by a consistent team. We compared outcomes within the LPP with our institution's traditional clinics and explored patients' perspectives on barriers to care to evaluate if the LPP might address them.
All patients undergoing index revascularization for CLTI from 2014 to 2023 at our institution were stratified by clinic type (LPP or traditional). We collected clinical and socioeconomic variables, including Area Deprivation Index (ADI). Patient characteristics were compared using χ2, Student t, or Mood median tests. Outcomes were compared using log-rank and multivariable Cox analysis. We also conducted semi-structured interviews to understand patient-perceived barriers.
From 2014 to 2023, 983 limbs from 871 patients were revascularized; 19.5% of limbs were treated within the LPP. Compared with traditional clinic patients, more LPP patients were non-White (43.75% vs 27.43%; P < .0001), diabetic (82.29% vs 61.19%; P < .0001), dialysis-dependent (29.17% vs 13.40%; P < .0001), had ADI in the most deprived decile (29.38% vs 19.54%; P = .0061), resided closer to clinic (median 6.73 vs 28.84 miles; P = .0120), and had worse Wound, Ischemia, and foot Infection (WIfI) stage (P < .001). There were no differences in freedom from death, major adverse limb event (MALE), or patency loss. Within the most deprived subgroup (ADI >90), traditional clinic patients had earlier patency loss (P = .0108) compared with LPP patients. Multivariable analysis of the entire cohort demonstrated that increasing age, heart failure, dialysis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and increasing WIfI stage were independently associated with earlier death, and male sex was associated with earlier MALE. Ten traditional clinic patients were interviewed via convenience sampling. Emerging themes included difficulty understanding their disease, high visit frequency, transportation barriers, distrust of the health care system, and patient-physician racial discordance.
LPP patients had worse comorbidities and socioeconomic deprivation yet had similar outcomes to healthier, less deprived non-LPP patients. The multidisciplinary clinic's structure addresses several patient-perceived barriers. Its proximity to disadvantaged patients and ability to conduct multiple appointments at a single visit may address transportation and visit frequency barriers, and the consistent team may facilitate patient education and improve trust. Including these elements in a multidisciplinary clinic and locating it in an area of need may mitigate some negative impacts of socioeconomic deprivation on CLTI outcomes.
Campbell DB
,Gutta G
,Sobol CG
,Atway SA
,Haurani MJ
,Chen XP
,Rowe VL
,Stacy MR
,Go MR
... -
《-》
Multilevel thrombotic or embolic burden and its role in sex-related outcomes in acute limb ischemia.
The impact of sex upon outcomes in acute limb ischemia (ALI) remains disputed. We aim to quantify the effect of sex upon amputation-free survival (AFS) after a percutaneous-first approach for ALI.
This was a two-center retrospective review of ALI managed via a percutaneous-first approach. Demographics, comorbidities, and clinical characteristics were analyzed. The Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression were used to estimate AFS, limb salvage, and overall survival.
Over 9 years, 170 patients (n = 87, 51% males; median age, 67 [interquartile range (IQR), 59-77 years) presented with ALI. Rutherford classification was I in 56 (33%); IIa in 85 (50%); IIb in 20 (12%), and III in 9 (5%). Thirty-day mortality, major amputation rate, and fasciotomy rates were 8% (n = 13); 6.5% (n = 11), and 4.7% (n = 8), respectively. Among revascularized limbs, 92% were patent at 30 days. Length of stay was 7 days (IQR, 3-11 days). Complications included 13 bleeding episodes (8%), four cases of atrial fibrillation (2%), and three re-thrombosis/clot extension events (1.7%). No differences were noted in complication rates when stratified by sex. Females were older than males (median age, 70 [IQR, 62-79] vs 65 [IQR, 56-76 years]; P = .02) and more likely to present with atrial fibrillation (20.5% vs 8%; P = .02) and hyperlipidemia (72% vs 57%; P = .04). Females also more frequently presented with multi-level thrombotic/embolic burden compared with males (56% vs 43%; P = .03) and required both aspiration thrombectomy and thrombolysis (27% vs 14%; P = .02). Kaplan-Meier estimated median AFS, limb salvage, and overall survival were 425 days (IQR, 140-824 days); 314 days (IQR, 72-727 days); and 342 days (IQR, 112-762 days). When stratified by sex, females had worse survival (median, 270 days [IQR, 92-636 days] vs 406 days [IQR, 140-937 days]; P = .005) and limb salvage (median, 241 days [IQR, 88-636 days] vs 363 days [IQR, 49-822 days]; P = .04) compared with males. Univariate Cox regression showed female sex (hazard ratio [HR], 1.46; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-2.05; P = .03), multi-level thrombotic/embolic burden (HR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.17-2.31; P = .004), and Rutherford class (HR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.08-1.73; P = .009) predicted major amputation/death. By multivariable Cox regression, multi-level thrombotic/embolic burden (HR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.09-2.17; P = .01), Rutherford class (HR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.07-1.69; P = .01), and female sex (HR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.03-2.05; P = .03) were each independently predictive of major amputation/death.
A percutaneous-first strategy is safe and efficacious in the overall ALI population. Similar to prior works, female vs male patients with ALI in our cohort have higher rates of mortality and major amputation. In our multivariable model, multi-level thrombotic/embolic burden was independently associated with a greater than 45% increased hazard of major amputation/death at last follow-up. Further prospective analysis is warranted to elucidate the underlying factors contributing to the higher prevalence of multi-level thrombotic/embolic burden in female patients with ALI, and to further define the optimal percutaneous-first approach for ALI in consideration of patient sex and extent of clot burden.
Torres Ruiz I
,Ooi XY
,Harry L
,Koksoy C
,Pallister ZS
,Gilani R
,Mills JL
,Bailey CJ
,Chung J
... -
《-》
Comparison of Two Modern Survival Prediction Tools, SORG-MLA and METSSS, in Patients With Symptomatic Long-bone Metastases Who Underwent Local Treatment With Surgery Followed by Radiotherapy and With Radiotherapy Alone.
Survival estimation for patients with symptomatic skeletal metastases ideally should be made before a type of local treatment has already been determined. Currently available survival prediction tools, however, were generated using data from patients treated either operatively or with local radiation alone, raising concerns about whether they would generalize well to all patients presenting for assessment. The Skeletal Oncology Research Group machine-learning algorithm (SORG-MLA), trained with institution-based data of surgically treated patients, and the Metastases location, Elderly, Tumor primary, Sex, Sickness/comorbidity, and Site of radiotherapy model (METSSS), trained with registry-based data of patients treated with radiotherapy alone, are two of the most recently developed survival prediction models, but they have not been tested on patients whose local treatment strategy is not yet decided.
(1) Which of these two survival prediction models performed better in a mixed cohort made up both of patients who received local treatment with surgery followed by radiotherapy and who had radiation alone for symptomatic bone metastases? (2) Which model performed better among patients whose local treatment consisted of only palliative radiotherapy? (3) Are laboratory values used by SORG-MLA, which are not included in METSSS, independently associated with survival after controlling for predictions made by METSSS?
Between 2010 and 2018, we provided local treatment for 2113 adult patients with skeletal metastases in the extremities at an urban tertiary referral academic medical center using one of two strategies: (1) surgery followed by postoperative radiotherapy or (2) palliative radiotherapy alone. Every patient's survivorship status was ascertained either by their medical records or the national death registry from the Taiwanese National Health Insurance Administration. After applying a priori designated exclusion criteria, 91% (1920) were analyzed here. Among them, 48% (920) of the patients were female, and the median (IQR) age was 62 years (53 to 70 years). Lung was the most common primary tumor site (41% [782]), and 59% (1128) of patients had other skeletal metastases in addition to the treated lesion(s). In general, the indications for surgery were the presence of a complete pathologic fracture or an impending pathologic fracture, defined as having a Mirels score of ≥ 9, in patients with an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification of less than or equal to IV and who were considered fit for surgery. The indications for radiotherapy were relief of pain, local tumor control, prevention of skeletal-related events, and any combination of the above. In all, 84% (1610) of the patients received palliative radiotherapy alone as local treatment for the target lesion(s), and 16% (310) underwent surgery followed by postoperative radiotherapy. Neither METSSS nor SORG-MLA was used at the point of care to aid clinical decision-making during the treatment period. Survival was retrospectively estimated by these two models to test their potential for providing survival probabilities. We first compared SORG to METSSS in the entire population. Then, we repeated the comparison in patients who received local treatment with palliative radiation alone. We assessed model performance by area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), calibration analysis, Brier score, and decision curve analysis (DCA). The AUROC measures discrimination, which is the ability to distinguish patients with the event of interest (such as death at a particular time point) from those without. AUROC typically ranges from 0.5 to 1.0, with 0.5 indicating random guessing and 1.0 a perfect prediction, and in general, an AUROC of ≥ 0.7 indicates adequate discrimination for clinical use. Calibration refers to the agreement between the predicted outcomes (in this case, survival probabilities) and the actual outcomes, with a perfect calibration curve having an intercept of 0 and a slope of 1. A positive intercept indicates that the actual survival is generally underestimated by the prediction model, and a negative intercept suggests the opposite (overestimation). When comparing models, an intercept closer to 0 typically indicates better calibration. Calibration can also be summarized as log(O:E), the logarithm scale of the ratio of observed (O) to expected (E) survivors. A log(O:E) > 0 signals an underestimation (the observed survival is greater than the predicted survival); and a log(O:E) < 0 indicates the opposite (the observed survival is lower than the predicted survival). A model with a log(O:E) closer to 0 is generally considered better calibrated. The Brier score is the mean squared difference between the model predictions and the observed outcomes, and it ranges from 0 (best prediction) to 1 (worst prediction). The Brier score captures both discrimination and calibration, and it is considered a measure of overall model performance. In Brier score analysis, the "null model" assigns a predicted probability equal to the prevalence of the outcome and represents a model that adds no new information. A prediction model should achieve a Brier score at least lower than the null-model Brier score to be considered as useful. The DCA was developed as a method to determine whether using a model to inform treatment decisions would do more good than harm. It plots the net benefit of making decisions based on the model's predictions across all possible risk thresholds (or cost-to-benefit ratios) in relation to the two default strategies of treating all or no patients. The care provider can decide on an acceptable risk threshold for the proposed treatment in an individual and assess the corresponding net benefit to determine whether consulting with the model is superior to adopting the default strategies. Finally, we examined whether laboratory data, which were not included in the METSSS model, would have been independently associated with survival after controlling for the METSSS model's predictions by using the multivariable logistic and Cox proportional hazards regression analyses.
Between the two models, only SORG-MLA achieved adequate discrimination (an AUROC of > 0.7) in the entire cohort (of patients treated operatively or with radiation alone) and in the subgroup of patients treated with palliative radiotherapy alone. SORG-MLA outperformed METSSS by a wide margin on discrimination, calibration, and Brier score analyses in not only the entire cohort but also the subgroup of patients whose local treatment consisted of radiotherapy alone. In both the entire cohort and the subgroup, DCA demonstrated that SORG-MLA provided more net benefit compared with the two default strategies (of treating all or no patients) and compared with METSSS when risk thresholds ranged from 0.2 to 0.9 at both 90 days and 1 year, indicating that using SORG-MLA as a decision-making aid was beneficial when a patient's individualized risk threshold for opting for treatment was 0.2 to 0.9. Higher albumin, lower alkaline phosphatase, lower calcium, higher hemoglobin, lower international normalized ratio, higher lymphocytes, lower neutrophils, lower neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, lower platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio, higher sodium, and lower white blood cells were independently associated with better 1-year and overall survival after adjusting for the predictions made by METSSS.
Based on these discoveries, clinicians might choose to consult SORG-MLA instead of METSSS for survival estimation in patients with long-bone metastases presenting for evaluation of local treatment. Basing a treatment decision on the predictions of SORG-MLA could be beneficial when a patient's individualized risk threshold for opting to undergo a particular treatment strategy ranged from 0.2 to 0.9. Future studies might investigate relevant laboratory items when constructing or refining a survival estimation model because these data demonstrated prognostic value independent of the predictions of the METSSS model, and future studies might also seek to keep these models up to date using data from diverse, contemporary patients undergoing both modern operative and nonoperative treatments.
Level III, diagnostic study.
Lee CC
,Chen CW
,Yen HK
,Lin YP
,Lai CY
,Wang JL
,Groot OQ
,Janssen SJ
,Schwab JH
,Hsu FM
,Lin WH
... -
《-》