Israel Medical Association Journal

Background: Lower limb critical ischemia is a major problem in dialysed patients.

Objective: To evaluate the results of revascularization procedures, amputations and prosthetic rehabilitation in dialysed amputees.

Methods: Major amputation was carried out in 48 patients (4.5% of the dialysis population), and 24 patients entered the rehabilitation program. Widespread arterial calcification was common and led to falsely elevated ankle-brachial pressure indices in 9 of 14 limbs. Eight patients underwent revascularization. Subsequent major amputation was carried out 4 ± 4.5 months after the revascularization (above knee in 5 patients and below knee in 3). Of the 16 patients who underwent primary amputation, only 2 were above-knee amputees. Seven patients with toe or metatarsal amputation went on to a major amputation 1.8 ± 1.2 months after the distal amputation.

Results: No differences were found between diabetic and non-diabetic patients regarding the number of revascularization operations performed, the level of major amputation, or overall survival. Prosthetic rehabilitation was considered successful in 12 patients, partially successful in 8, and failed in 4 patients. Patient survival time was shortest in those patients with failed rehabilitation. A younger age confirmed favorable rehabilitation results, while long-standing diabetics and bilateral amputees were poor rehabilitation candidates. Patients who underwent primary amputation had more successful rehabilitation. A comparison between 24 dialysed amputees and 138 non-uremic amputees revealed similar rehabilitation results, although hospitalization time was longer in the dialysed patients.

Conclusions: Early definitive therapy is essential when dealing with critical ischemia. After diagnostic angiography, proximal revascularization should be performed where feasible. Primary amputation is indicated in patients with extensive foot infection or gangrene. Prosthetic rehabilitation is warranted in most dialysed amputees.
 

Background: Patients with multivessel coronary artery disease are candidates for either angioplasty and stenting or coronary artery bypass grafting. A prospective randomized study designed to compare the both methods included only a minority of the eligible patients.

Objective: To compare coronary artery bypass grafting to angioplasty plus stenting in patients with multivessel disease who declined randomization to a multicenter study (the ARTS).

Methods: During 1997-98 we prospectively followed 96 consecutive patients who were eligible according to the ARTS criteria but refused randomization. Of these patients, 50 underwent angioplasty + stenting and 46 underwent coronary bypass surgery. We compared the incidence of major adverse cardiac and cerebral events, chest pain recurrence, quality of life and procedural cost during the first 6 months.

Results: All procedures were completed successfully without mortality or cerebral events. The rate of Q-wave myocardial infarction was 2% in the AS[1] group vs. 0% in the CABG[2] group (not significant). Minor complications occurred in 7 patients (14%) in the AS group and in 21 patients (45%) in the CABG group (P < 0.01). At 6 months follow-up the incidence of major cardiac and cerebral events was similar in both groups (11% and 4% in the AS and CABG groups respectively, P=NS). Seventeen patients (36%) in the AS group required repeat revascularization compared to only 3 (7%) in the CABG group (P=0.002). Nevertheless, quality of life was better, hospitalization was shorter and the cost was lower during the first 6 months after angioplasty.

Conclusion: Angioplasty with stenting compared to coronary bypass surgery in patients with multivessel disease resulted in similar short-term major complications. However, 36% of patients undergoing angioplasty may need further revascularization procedures during the first 6 months.