Article Sidebar

PDF
Date Published: 12/09/2024
Abstract Views: 121
Views PDF: 62
DOI: https://doi.org/10.51298/vmj.v542i1.11007
Issue
Vol. 542 No. 1 (2024)
Section
Các bài báo
How to Cite
Trịnh, V. N., & Lâm, V. N. (2024). FACTORS AFFECTING THE TREATMENT OUTCOMES OF MULTILEVEL CHRONIC LOWER LIMB ARTERY STENOSIS AND OCCLUSION USING ENDOVASCULAR INTERVENTION. Vietnam Medical Journal, 542(1). https://doi.org/10.51298/vmj.v542i1.11007

FACTORS AFFECTING THE TREATMENT OUTCOMES OF MULTILEVEL CHRONIC LOWER LIMB ARTERY STENOSIS AND OCCLUSION USING ENDOVASCULAR INTERVENTION

Vũ Nghĩa Trịnh, Văn Nút Lâm

Main Article Content

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the factors affecting the treatment outcomes of multilevel chronic lower limb artery occlusion (MLCLAO) by endovascular intervention. Methods: Non-controlled before-and-after interventional study on 70 MLCLAO patients treated at Cho Ray Hospital. Results: Complete lesion revascularization led to better hemodynamic improvement. High Neutrophil/Lymphocyte ratio (>3.5) and not using antiplatelet drugs before revascularization increased the perioperative mortality/ amputation rate. Use of open surgical support shortened wound healing time. Non-healing wounds and Rutherford stage 6 symptoms increased the amputation rate. Chronic kidney disease and age over 75 increased the patient's 2-year mortality risk. Conclusion: Endovascular intervention is an effective treatment for MLCLAO. The extent of lesion revascularization, Neutrophil/Lymphocyte ratio, use of antiplatelet drugs, use of open surgical support, wound status, chronic kidney disease, and advanced age are factors that may affect treatment outcomes.

Article Details

References

1. Akamatsu, D., et al., Efficacy of iliac inflow repair in patients with concomitant iliac and superficial femoral artery occlusive disease. Asian J Surg, 2017. 40(6): p. 475-480.
2. Elbadawy, A., H. Ali, and M. Saleh, Midterm Outcomes of Common Femoral Endarterectomy Combined with Inflow and Outflow Endovascular Treatment for Chronic Limb Threatening Ischaemia. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg, 2020. 59(6): p. 947-955.
3. Norgren, L., et al., Inter-Society Consensus for the Management of Peripheral Arterial Disease (TASC II). Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg, 2007. 33 Suppl 1: p. S1-75.
4. Gary, T., et al., Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and its association with critical limb ischemia in PAOD patients. PLoS One, 2013. 8(2): p. e56745.
5. Armstrong, E.J., et al., Multidisciplinary Care for Critical Limb Ischemia: Current Gaps and Opportunities for Improvement. J Endovasc Ther, 2019. 26(2): p. 199-212.
6. Shiraki, T., et al., Predictive scoring model of mortality after surgical or endovascular revascularization in patients with critical limb ischemia. J Vasc Surg, 2014. 60(2): p. 383-9.
7. Schanzer, A., et al., Validation of the PIII CLI risk score for the prediction of amputation-free survival in patients undergoing infrainguinal autogenous vein bypass for critical limb ischemia. J Vasc Surg, 2009. 50(4): p. 769-75; discussion 775.
8. Shiraki, T., et al., Predictors of 2-Year Mortality and Risk Stratification After Surgical or Endovascular Revascularization of Infrainguinal Artery Disease in Hemodialysis Patients With Critical Limb Ischemia. J Endovasc Ther, 2015. 22(5): p. 719-24.