meta-analysis of endovascular versus surgical reconstruction of femoropopliteal arterial disease


A meta-analysis of endovascular versus surgical reconstruction of femoropopliteal arterial disease


Antoniou GA, Chalmers N, Georgiadis GS, et al (Central Manchester Univ Hosps, UK; Democritus Univ of Thrace, Alexandroupolis, Greece; et al) J Vasc Surg 57:242-253, 2013§



M.T. Watkins, MD



Evidence Ranking


A



Expert Rating


3



Abstract





Results


Four randomized controlled trials and six observational studies reporting on a total of 2817 patients (1387 open, 1430 endovascular) were included. Endovascular treatment was accompanied by lower 30-day morbidity (odds ratio [OR], 2.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.34-6.41) and higher technical failure (OR, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.05-0.22) than bypass surgery, whereas no differences in 30-day mortality between the two groups were identified (OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.55-1.51). Higher primary patency in the surgical treatment arm was found at 1 (OR, 2.42; 95% CI, 1.37-4.28), 2 (OR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.20-3.45), and 3 (OR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.12-1.97) years of intervention. Progression to amputation was found to occur more commonly in the endovascular group at the end of the second (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.42-0.86) and third (OR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.39-0.77) year of intervention. Higher amputation-free and overall survival rates were found in the bypass group at 4 years (OR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.07-1.61 and OR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.04-1.61, respectively).

Stay updated, free articles. Join our Telegram channel

Apr 3, 2017 | Posted by in CARDIOLOGY | Comments Off on meta-analysis of endovascular versus surgical reconstruction of femoropopliteal arterial disease

Full access? Get Clinical Tree

Get Clinical Tree app for offline access