Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2001 Aug;53(2):129-36.

Comparison of peripheral arterial reconstruction in diabetic and non-diabetic patients: a prospective clinic-based study.

Author information

1
Servicio de Endocrinologia y Nutrición, 1aS Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Martín Lagos s/n, E-28040, Madrid, Spain. acalle@hcsc.insalud.es

Abstract

To assess the efficacy and safety of lower extremity arterial reconstruction in diabetic and non-diabetic subjects during a 3-year period. A prospective clinic-based study between 1994-1999 in Area 7, Madrid, with a population of 569307 and an estimated diabetic population of 37932 (15505 men and 22427 women). The level of arterial reconstruction and associated risk factors were ascertained.

RESULTS:

A total of 588 peripheral revascularization surgical procedures were performed in 481 patients. The diabetic patients (n=174, 36.2%) underwent 222 surgical procedures (including 48 follow-on operations, 21.6%), and 307 non-diabetic subjects underwent 366 surgical procedures (59 follow-on operations, 16.1%). The numbers of surgical procedures per 100000 people at risk and year were 18.8 and 1.8 for non-diabetic men and women, respectively, and 145.1 and 29.0 for men and women with diabetes mellitus (7.7- and 16.2-fold, respectively). Age at reconstruction surgery was 2 and 5 years earlier in non-diabetic than in diabetic men and women, respectively. Diabetic patients had a higher neuropathy score (P<0.05) and were less frequently smokers (P<0.05) than non-diabetic subjects. Diabetic subjects more frequently had distal reconstruction while proximal arterial reconstruction was more often performed in non-diabetic subjects. Between 64.6 and 80.4% of people with diabetes and 82.3 and 88.9% of non-diabetic subjects had no complications during their in-hospital stay. Distal amputation simultaneous to arterial reconstruction was the most frequent morbidity of people with diabetes during the study (P<0.05). Despite a graft occlusion rate after femoropopliteal revascularization significantly higher than in non-diabetic people (P<0.05), diabetic people more often required lower extremity amputations (LEAs) for the same level of bypass (P<0.01). Cumulative limb salvage rates were lower in diabetic patients than in non-diabetic subjects at femoropopliteal (49.2 vs. 89.7%; P<0.001), femorodistal (73.5 vs. 95.2%; P<0.01), and distal reverse (77.9 vs. 87.3%; P<0.05) arterial reconstruction, at the end of the third year, but similar after aorto-iliac reconstruction (93.1 vs. 97.5%). A higher neuropathy score and the presence of foot ulcers were associated to significantly lower limb salvage in diabetic patients (P<0.05), but not in non-diabetic people. Survival rates after 3 years were similar between diabetic and non-diabetic populations after aorto-iliac (93.1 vs. 97.5%), femoropopliteal (97.2 vs. 90.3%), and distal reverse (93.2 vs. 98.1%) revascularization, and slightly lower in diabetic compared to non-diabetic patients after femorodistal revascularization (82.1 vs. 96.3%; P<0.05).

CONCLUSION:

Although limb salvage after arterial reconstruction is lower in diabetic than in non-diabetic subjects, particularly in those with a higher neuropathy score, this surgical approach can be applied in both diabetic and non-diabetic subjects with otherwise similar outcome.

PMID:
11403862
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center