| 1. |
- Baubeta Fridh, Erik, et al.
(författare)
-
Comparison of Magnetic Resonance Angiography and Digital Subtraction Angiography for the Assessment of Infrapopliteal Arterial Occlusive Lesions, Based on the TASC II Classification Criteria
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Diagnostics (Basel). - : MDPI. - 2075-4418. ; 10:11
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This paper aimed to study the agreement and repeatability, both intra- and interobserver, of infrapopliteal lesion assessment with magnetic resonance angiography (MRA), using the TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus (TASC) II criteria, with perioperative digital subtraction angiography (DSA) as a reference. Sixty-eight patients with an MRA preceding an endovascular infrapopliteal revascularization were included. Preoperative MRAs and perioperative DSAs were evaluated in random order by three independent observers using the TASC II classification. The results were analyzed using visual grading characteristics (VGC) analysis and Krippendorffs alpha. No systematic difference was found between modalities: area under the VGC curve (AUC(VGC)) = 0.48 (p = 0.58) or intraobserver; AUC(VGC) for Observer 1 and 2 respectively, 0.49 (p = 0.85) and 0.53 (p = 0.52) for MRA compared with 0.54 (p = 0.30) and 0.49 (p = 0.81) for DSA. Interobserver differences were seen: AUC(VGC) of 0.63 (p < 0.01) for DSA and 0.80 (p < 0.01) for MRA. These results were confirmed using Krippendorffs alpha for the three observers showing 0.13 (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.07-0.31) for MRA and 0.39 (95% CI 0.23-0.53) for DSA. Poor interobserver agreement was also found in the choice of a target vessel on preoperative MRA: Krippendorffs alpha = 0.19 (95% CI 0.01-0.36). In conclusion, infrapopliteal lesions can be reliably determined on preoperative MRA, but interobserver variability regarding the choice of a target vessel is a major concern that appears to affect the overall TASC II grade.
|
|
| 2. |
- Djerf, Henrik, et al.
(författare)
-
Low Risk of Procedure Related Major Amputation Following Revascularisation for Intermittent Claudication: A Population Based Study.
- 2020
-
Ingår i: European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery : the official journal of the European Society for Vascular Surgery. - : Elsevier BV. - 1532-2165. ; 59:5, s. 817-822
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- To investigate the risk of procedure-related major amputation attributable to revascularization for intermittent claudication (IC) in a population-based observational cohort study.All patients who underwent open or endovascular lower limb revascularisation for IC in Sweden between 12 May 2008 and 31 December 2012 were identified from the Swedish National Quality Registry for Vascular Surgery (Swedvasc) and data on above ankle amputations were extracted from the National Patient Registry. Any uncertainty regarding amputation level and laterality was resolved by reviewing medical charts. For the final analysis, complete medical records of all patients with IC, having ipsilateral amputation after the revascularisation procedure, were reviewed. Patients wrongly classified as having IC were excluded. Ipsilateral amputations within one year of the revascularisation were defined as procedure related.Altogether, 5 860 patients revascularised for IC were identified of whom 109 were registered to have undergone a post-operative ipsilateral lower limb amputation during a median follow up of 3.9 years (standard deviation 1.5y). Seventeen were duplicate registrations and 51 were patients with chronic limb threatening ischaemia, misclassified as IC in the registry. One patient had not undergone any revascularisation, one was revascularised for a popliteal artery aneurysm, one was revascularised for acute limb ischaemia, one had a minor amputation only, and one patient was not amputated at all. Twenty-seven were amputated more than one year after the procedure. Thus, the major amputation rate within one year of revascularisation for IC was 0.2% (n=9/5 860).Revascularisation for IC in a contemporary setting confers a low but existing risk of procedure related major amputation within the first post-procedural year.
|
|
