Is the Endovascular Treatment of Mild Iliac Stenoses Worthwhile to Improve Wound Healing in Patients Undergoing Femorotibial Bypass?

Abstract

Background: After an infrapopliteal reconstruction, minor amputations are frequently required, but even in the case of successful revascularization, wound healing is a major concern. We studied the role of iliac artery inflow correction in patients undergoing infrapopliteal vein grafts to improve the heal of midfoot amputation.

Methods: Thirty-eight patients affected with Rutherford grade III category 5 peripheral arterial disease, who underwent successful simultaneous iliac endovascular procedure, infrapopliteal reversed vein bypass graft, and minor amputation, were enrolled in this retrospective study. The population was divided in group 1 (20 patients) with inflow vessels Trans-Atlantic Inter-Society Consensus Document on Management of Peripheral Arterial Disease (TASC) II type B atherosclerotic lesions and group 2 (18 patients) with TASC II type A atherosclerotic lesions determining an invasive pressure drop greater than 15 mm Hg. Fifteen patients (group 3) undergoing infrapopliteal reversed vein bypass graft without associated inflow procedures (TASC II type A and invasive pressure drop greater than 15 mm Hg) were matched with group 2 based on propensity score. Healing was calculated by subtracting the final ulcer area from the initial ulcer area and dividing by the number of follow-up months to obtain the total area healed per month (cm²/month). Stepwise logistic regression analysis adjusted for demographics and medical comorbid conditions was used to test the association between wound healing and treatment modalities.

Results: Forty-three patients were available for further analysis. Ten patients were excluded because of graft occlusion with consequent impairment of wound healing. After midfoot amputations, mean wound diameter was 20 ± 8 cm², and mean healing time was 10 ± 4 months (range 3-20 months; median 9 months). Wounds of groups 1 and 2 healed faster than those of group 3 at 4 and 8 months (P < 0.02 and P < 0.001, respectively; P < 0.04 and P < 0.001, respectively). Multivariate analysis demonstrated the association between wound healing and inflow correction (P < 0.001).

Conclusions: An aggressive treatment is necessary to obtain the heal of the ischemic wounds. The most important predictive factor for nonhealing wounds is the absence of inflow correction. We demonstrated that the inflow should be also corrected in the presence of subclinical lesions.