Prosthetic conduits have worse outcomes compared with great saphenous vein conduits in femoropopliteal and infrapopliteal bypass in patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia.

Single segment great saphenous vein (SSGSV) traditionally has been considered the gold standard conduit for infrainguinal bypass. There are data supporting similar outcomes with prosthetic femoral-popliteal bypass. Moreover, some investigators have advocated for prosthetic conduit for femoral tibial bypass when GSV is inadequate or unavailable. We sought to evaluate long-term outcomes of infrainguinal bypass based on conduit type for treating chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI). Data from the Best Endovascular vs Best Surgical Therapy of Patients with CLTI multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled trial, comparing infrainguinal bypass with endovascular therapy in patients with CLTI, were evaluated. In this as-treated analysis, we compared outcomes of infrainguinal bypass using prosthetic, alternative autogenous vein (AAV), and cryopreserved vein (Cryo) with SSGSV bypass. Kaplan-Meier and multivariable analyses were performed to examine the associations of conduit type with major adverse limb events (MALE), reinterventions, above-ankle amputations, and all-cause death rates. In total, 784 bypasses were analyzed (120 prosthetic, 33 AAV, 21 Cryo, AND 610 SSGSV). For prosthetic and SSGSV, the distribution was 357 femoropopliteal (93 prosthetic and 264 GSV) and 373 infrapopliteal (27 prosthetic and 346 GSV). The mean age for the overall cohort was 67.1 years; 27.4% were female, 29.9% were non-White, and 11.5% were of Hispanic ethnicity. Patients undergoing prosthetic bypass were older (69.2 years vs 66.7 years); more likely to have chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (22.5% vs 14.0%), prior coronary artery bypass grafting (88.9% vs 66.5%), and prior stroke (23.3% vs 14%); but less often were of Hispanic ethnicity (5.8% vs 12.6%) and had diabetes (59.2% vs 71.3%) (P < .05 for all). For femoropopliteal bypass, use of prosthetic conduit was associated with increased major reinterventions at 3 years overall (19.0% vs 11.5%; P = .06) and on risk-adjusted analysis (hazard ratio [HR], 2.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09-4.2; P = .028). No significant differences in MALE or death, above-ankle amputation, or death were observed. Outcomes were similar for bypasses to above-knee popliteal targets and below-knee popliteal targets. For infrapopliteal bypass, the use of a prosthetic conduit was associated with increased major reintervention (25.3% vs 10.3%; P = .005), death (68.6% vs 34.8%; P < .001), and MALE or death (90.0% vs 48.1%; P < .001) at 3 years. After risk adjustment, infrapopliteal bypass with prosthetic conduit was associated with higher major reintervention (HR, 4.14; 95% CI, 1.36-12.6; P = .012), above-ankle amputation (HR, 4.64; 95% CI, 1.59-13.5; P = .005), death (HR, 2.96; 95% CI, 1.4-6.2; P = .004), and MALE or death (HR, 3.59; 95% CI, 1.64-7.86; P = .001) compared with bypass with SSGSV. Overall, AAV had similar outcomes at 3 years as SSGSV; however, Cryo had significantly higher above-ankle amputation (50.0% vs 12.8%) (HR, 4.2; 95% CI, 1.68-10.5; P = .002), major reintervention (41.9% vs 10.7%) (HR, 3.12; 95% CI, 1.18-8.22; P = .02), and MALE/death (88.8% vs 37.8%) (HR, 2.96; 95% CI, 1.43-6.14; P = .004). The use of a prosthetic conduit in infrainguinal bypass is associated with inferior outcomes compared with bypass using SSGSV, particularly for bypass to infrapopliteal targets. Cryo grafts were infrequent and also demonstrated inferior outcomes. SSGSV remains the preferred conduit of choice for infrainguinal bypass.

Farber A ，Menard MT ，Conte MS ，Rosenfield K ，Schermerhorn M ，Schanzer A ，Powell RJ ，Chaar CIO ，Hicks CW ，Doros G ，Strong MB ，Leers SA ，Motaganahalli R ，Stangenberg L ，Siracuse JJ ... -  《-》

Surgery or endovascular therapy for patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia requiring infrapopliteal interventions.

The recent publication of randomized trials comparing open bypass surgery to endovascular therapy in patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia, namely, Best Endovascular vs Best Surgical Therapy in Patients with Critical Limb Ischemia (BEST-CLI) and Bypass versus Angioplasty in Severe Ischaemia of the Leg-2 (BASIL-2), has resulted in potentially contradictory findings. The trials differed significantly with respect to anatomical disease patterns and primary end points. We performed an analysis of patients in BEST-CLI with significant infrapopliteal disease undergoing open tibial bypass or endovascular tibial interventions to formulate a relevant comparator with the outcomes reported from BASIL-2. The study population consisted of patients in BEST-CLI with adequate single segment saphenous vein conduit randomized to open bypass or endovascular intervention (cohort 1) who additionally had significant infrapopliteal disease and underwent tibial level intervention. The primary outcome was major adverse limb event (MALE) or all-cause death. MALE included any major limb amputation or major reintervention. Outcomes were evaluated using Cox proportional regression models. The analyzed subgroup included a total of 665 patients with 326 in the open tibial bypass group and 339 in the tibial endovascular intervention group. The primary outcome of MALE or all-cause death at 3 years was significantly lower in the surgical group at 48.5% compared with 56.7% in the endovascular group (P = .0018). Mortality was similar between groups (35.5% open vs 35.8% endovascular; P = .94), whereas MALE events were lower in the surgical group (23.3% vs 35.0%; P<.0001). This difference included a lower rate of major reinterventions in the surgical group (10.9%) compared with the endovascular group (20.2%; P = .0006). Freedom from above ankle amputation or all-cause death was similar between treatment arms at 43.6% in the surgical group compared with 45.3% the endovascular group (P = .30); however, there were fewer above ankle amputations in the surgical group (13.5%) compared with the endovascular group (19.3%; P = .0205). Perioperative (30-day) death rates were similar between treatment groups (2.5% open vs 2.4% endovascular; P = .93), as was 30-day major adverse cardiovascular events (5.3% open vs 2.7% endovascular; P = .12). Among patients with suitable single segment great saphenous vein who underwent infrapopliteal revascularization for chronic limb-threatening ischemia, open bypass surgery was associated with a lower incidence of MALE or death and fewer major amputation compared with endovascular intervention. Amputation-free survival was similar between the groups. Further investigations into differences in comorbidities, anatomical extent, and lesion complexity are needed to explain differences between the BEST-CLI and BASIL-2 reported outcomes.

Giles KA ，Farber A ，Menard MT ，Conte MS ，Nolan BW ，Siracuse JJ ，Strong MB ，Doros G ，Venermo M ，Azene E ，Rosenfield K ，Powell RJ ... -  《-》

Female patients have fewer limb amputations compared to male patients in the BEST-CLI trial.

Female patients are less likely to be diagnosed with and treated for peripheral artery disease. When treated, there are also reported sex disparities in short- and long-term outcomes. We designed this study to compare outcomes after open and endovascular revascularization in the Best Endovascular vs best Surgical Therapy in patients with Critical Limb Ischemia (BEST-CLI) trial between females and males, and to examine outcomes of each revascularization type in an all-female cohort. In a secondary analysis of cohorts 1 and 2 of the BEST-CLI Trial, patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) undergoing open surgical bypass (with or without adequate conduit) and endovascular therapy were stratified by sex. In addition, in a female-only cohort, we evaluated differences in outcomes between treatment arm (combined all bypasses from cohorts 1 and 2 and compared with all endovascular treatment in cohorts 1 and 2). Outcomes included major amputation, reintervention, major adverse limb event (MALE, a composite of major amputation and reintervention), all-cause death, and composite outcome of MALE or all-cause death. Univariable and adjusted Cox regressions were used to assess outcome between males and females. Similar methods were used to assess differences in outcomes between treatment arm in females. Among 1830 patients, females were significantly underrepresented, comprising only 28% (n = 519) of the BEST-CLI cohort. Overall, the characteristics of females enrolled in the trial had some differences compared with males: females were more likely to have rest pain alone (72% vs 60%; P < .0001) and when presenting with an ischemic wound, were less likely to have a wound infection (38% vs 47%; P = .01). Females were less likely to have an adequate single-segment greater saphenous vein (SSGSV) available (82% vs 89%; P = .01). Controlled for baseline clinical factors, at 1 year, females had significantly lower rates of major limb amputation compared with males (hazard ratio [HR], 0.70; P = .023), which drove better amputation- and MALE-free survival rates. All-cause death at 1 year was not statistically different between sexes (11.8% vs 11.2%; P = .286). In the all-female cohort, results paralleled the overall trial; open surgical bypass (with any conduit) had significantly better outcomes compared with endovascular therapy. Specifically, among females undergoing endovascular therapy, the rate of major reintervention was particularly high compared with females undergoing open surgical bypass (24.8% vs 10.5%; P < .001). Despite being underrepresented in BEST-CLI, the primary results of the trial, namely, improved MALE-free survival with open surgical bypass with SSGSV, were mirrored in the all-female subset. Female patients enrolled in BEST-CLI had better amputation-free survival at 1 year compared with male patients. These findings suggest that in treating female patients with CLTI considered appropriate for both open and endovascular revascularization, surgical bypass with optimal conduit is the preferred treatment option and can potentially ameliorate poor limb preservation outcomes associated with sex.

McGinigle KL ，Doros G ，Alabi O ，Brooke BS ，Vouyouka A ，Hiramoto J ，Charlton-Ouw K ，Strong MB ，Rosenfield K ，Menard MT ，Farber A ，Giles KA ... -  《-》

Spliced-Vein Conduit Offers Better Patency and Limb Salvage Than Prosthetic Graft for Femoral-Tibial Bypasses in Critical Limb-Threatening Ischemia.

Single-segment great saphenous vein (ssGSV) is the gold standard conduit for femoral-tibial bypasses in patients with critical limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI). In the absence of a good single-segment saphenous vein, alternative options are prosthetic grafts or spliced-vein (SpV) conduits. Although SpV conduits may provide better long-term patency/limb salvage, prosthetic grafts are more often the chosen conduit due to shorter operative and presumably better immediate postoperative outcomes; nevertheless, there are little data supporting this practice. In this study, we compared 30-day outcomes between SpV and prosthetic conduits in CLTI bypass using a national registry. CLTI patients who underwent lower extremity bypass using SpV or prosthetic conduits only were selected from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program targeted database. A 1:5 propensity score matching was conducted between SpV and prosthetic groups to address preoperative differences. Thirty-day outcomes, including primary patency, reintervention, major amputation, mortality, major morbidity, transfusion, and wound complications, were compared between the 2 groups. There were 886 patients who underwent femoral-tibial bypass without ssGSV (104 SpV and 782 prosthetic grafts). All SpV patients were propensity score matched to 445 prosthetic patients. SpV exhibited significantly better 30-day primary patency than prosthetic (87.5% vs 74.38%, P = 0.004). SpV was associated with significantly longer operative time (346 min vs 222 min, P < 0.001) and higher transfusion (43.3% vs 27.87%, P = 0.003), but those did not translate into higher 30-day mortality or major systemic complications. There was no difference in wound complications or 30-day limb loss. SpV conduit affords significantly better 30-day primary patency than prosthetic grafts without increased mortality and morbidities. Therefore, despite greater procedural complexity and longer operative time, SpV conduit should be considered when available. Future prospective studies are needed to investigate the long-term outcomes of these 2 conduits.

Thompson J ，Li R ，Pomy BJ ，Ricotta JJ ，Sidawy AN ，Lala S ，Nguyen BN ... -  《-》

The impact of revascularization strategy on clinical failure, hemodynamic failure, and chronic limb-threatening ischemia symptoms in the BEST-CLI Trial.

Menard MT ，Farber A ，Doros G ，McGinigle KL ，Chisci E ，Clavijo LC ，Kayssi A ，Schneider PA ，Hawkins BM ，Dake MD ，Hamza T ，Strong MB ，Rosenfield K ，Conte MS ... -  《-》