| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- Beck, AW, et al.
(författare)
-
Variations in abdominal aortic aneurysm care : a report from the International consortium of vascular registries
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Circulation. - 0009-7322 .- 1524-4539.
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: This project by the ICVR (International Consortium of Vascular Registries), a collaboration of 11 vascular surgical quality registries, was designed to evaluate international variation in the contemporary management of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) with relation to recommended treatment guidelines from the Society for Vascular Surgery and the European Society for Vascular Surgery.Methods: Registry data for open and endovascular AAA repair (EVAR) during 2010 to 2013 were collected from 11 countries. Variations in patient selection and treatment were compared across countries and across centers within countries.Results: Among 51 153 patients, 86% were treated for intact AAA (iAAA) and 14% for ruptured AAA. Women constituted 18% of the entire cohort (range, 12% in Switzerland–21% in the United States; P<0.01). Intact AAAs were repaired at diameters smaller than recommended by guidelines in 31% of men (<5.5 cm; range, 6% in Iceland–41% in Germany; P<0.01) and 12% of women with iAAA (<5 cm; range, 0% in Iceland–16% in the United States; P<0.01). Overall, use of EVAR for iAAA varied from 28% in Hungary to 79% in the United States (P<0.01) and for ruptured AAA from 5% in Denmark to 52% in the United States (P<0.01). In addition to the between-country variations, significant variations were present between centers in each country in terms of EVAR use and rate of small AAA repair. Countries that more frequently treated small AAAs tended to use EVAR more frequently (trend: correlation coefficient, 0.51; P=0.14). Octogenarians made up 23% of all patients, ranging from 12% in Hungary to 29% in Australia (P<0.01). In countries with a fee-for-service reimbursement system (Australia, Germany, Switzerland, and the United States), the proportions of small AAA (33%) and octogenarians undergoing iAAA repair (25%) were higher compared with countries with a population-based reimbursement model (small AAA repair, 16%; octogenarians, 18%; P<0.01). In general, center-level variation within countries in the management of AAA was as important as variation between countries.Conclusions: Despite homogeneous guidelines from professional societies, significant variation exists in the management of AAA, most notably for iAAA diameter at repair, use of EVAR, and the treatment of elderly patients. ICVR provides an opportunity to study treatment variation across countries and to encourage optimal practice by sharing these results.
|
|
| 8. |
- Behrendt, C. A., et al.
(författare)
-
International Variations in Amputation Practice: A VASCUNET Report
- 2018
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery. - : Elsevier BV. - 1078-5884 .- 1532-2165. ; 56:3, s. 391-399
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives: To study international differences in incidence and practice patterns as well as time trends in lower limb amputations related to peripheral arterial disease and/or diabetes mellitus. Methods: Data on lower limb amputations during 2010-2014 were collected from population based administrative data from countries in Europe and Australasia participating in the VASCUNET collaboration. Amputation rates, time trends, in hospital or 30 day mortality and reimbursement systems were analysed. Results: Data from 12 countries covering 259 million inhabitants in 2014 were included. Individuals aged >= 65 years ranged from 12.9% (Slovakia) to 20.7% (Germany) and diabetes prevalence among amputees from 25.7% (Finland) to 74.3% (Slovakia). The mean incidence of major amputation varied between 7.2/100,000 (New Zealand) and 41.4/100,000 (Hungary), with an overall declining time trend with the exception of Slovakia, while minor amputations increased over time. The older age group (>= 65 years) was up to 4.9 times more likely to be amputated compared with those younger than 65 years. Reported mortality rates were lowest in Finland (6.3%) and highest in Hungary (20.3%). Countries with a fee for service reimbursement system had a lower incidence of major amputation compared with countries with a population based reimbursement system (14.3/100,000 versus 18.4/100,000, respectively, p < .001). Conclusions: This international audit showed large geographical differences in major amputation rates, by a factor of almost six, and an overall declining time trend during the 4 year observation of this study. Diabetes prevalence, age distribution, and mortality rates were also found to vary between countries. Despite limitations attributable to registry data, these findings are important, and warrant further research on how to improve limb salvage in different demographic settings. (C) 2018 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
|
|
| 9. |
- Chuter, V., et al.
(författare)
-
Effectiveness of revascularisation for the ulcerated foot in patients with diabetes and peripheral artery disease: A systematic review
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Diabetes-Metabolism Research and Reviews. - 1520-7552.
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Introduction: Peripheral artery disease (PAD) is associated with an increased likelihood of delayed or non-healing of a diabetes-related foot ulcer, gangrene, and amputation. The selection of the most effective surgical technique for revascularisation of the lower limb in this population is challenging and there is a lack of conclusive evidence to support the choice of intervention. This systematic review aimed to determine, in people with diabetes and tissue loss, if direct revascularisation is superior to indirect revascularisation and if endovascular revascularisation is superior to open revascularisation for the outcomes of wound healing, minor or major amputation, and adverse events including mortality. Methods: Title and abstract searches of Medline, Embase, PubMed, and EBSCO were conducted from 1980 to 30th November 2022. Cohort and case-control studies and randomised controlled trials reporting comparative outcomes of direct (angiosome) revascularisation (DR) and indirect revascularisation (IR) or the comparative outcomes of endovascular revascularisation and open or hybrid revascularisation for the outcomes of healing, minor amputation, and major amputation in people with diabetes, PAD and tissue loss (including foot ulcer and/or gangrene) were eligible. Methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials, the ROBINS-I tool for non-randomised studies, and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational and cohort studies where details regarding the allocation to intervention groups were not provided. Results: From a total 7086 abstracts retrieved, 26 studies met the inclusion criteria for the comparison of direct angiosome revascularisation (DR) and indirect revascularisation (IR), and 11 studies met the inclusion criteria for the comparison of endovascular and open revascularisation. One study was included in both comparisons. Of the included studies, 35 were observational (31 retrospective and 4 prospective cohorts) and 1 was a randomised controlled trial. Cohort study quality was variable and generally low, with common sources of bias related to heterogeneous participant populations and interventions and lack of reporting of or adjusting for confounding factors. The randomised controlled trial had a low risk of bias. For studies of DR and IR, results were variable, and it is uncertain if one technique is superior to the other for healing, prevention of minor or major amputation, or mortality. However, the majority of studies reported that a greater proportion of participants receiving DR healed compared with IR, and that IR with collaterals may have similar outcomes to DR for wound healing. For patients with diabetes, infrainguinal PAD, and an adequate great saphenous vein available for use as a bypass conduit who were deemed suitable for either surgical procedure, an open revascularisation first approach was superior to endovascular therapy to prevent a major adverse limb event or death (Hazard Ratio: 0.72; 95% CI 0.61-0.86). For other studies of open and endovascular approaches, there was generally no difference in outcomes between the interventions. Conclusions: The majority of available evidence for the effectiveness of DR and IR and open and endovascular revascularisation for wound healing and prevention of minor and major amputation and adverse events including mortality in people with diabetes, PAD and tissue loss is inconclusive, and the certainty of evidence is very low. Data from one high quality randomised controlled trial supports the use of open over endovascular revascularisation to prevent a major limb event and death in people with diabetes, infrainguinal disease and tissue loss who have an adequate great saphenous vein available and who are deemed suitable for either approach.
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
