الفهرس 
IntroductionOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 156 |  |  |
| | | from | 156 | | |
Abstract
Objectives: Trans-Atlantic intersociety consensus II recommendations provided strong evidence for those patients on the extremity of the disease severity only. A large sector of the patients in between is left for the physician point of view. Our study is designed to provide a stronger evidence for that subgroup. In addition to figure out patients’ characteristics that may recommend or worsen the outcome of either methods of treatment.
Methods: Our study is designed to compare critical limb ischemia patients due to femoropopliteal lesion TASC II C subgroup. 100 consecutive patients of open bypasses are compared with 100 consecutive patients of endovascular interventions. Our 1ry outcome is amputation, mortality or reintervention. The patients were observed for 1 year after the procedure. Significant related events were recorded within that year. Time-dependent outcomes were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test. Cox proportional hazards were performed to determine predictors of failure.
Results: Technical success and ASA use were negatively associated with time to failure for all patients. Thus they are considered protective factors. Hypertensive patient were significantly less likely to have failure in bypass group only. Primary patency, cumulative assisted primary patency and cumulative overall patency for bypass group among ASA user at 12 month is 43%, 64% and 77% respectively. While that of endovascular group is 48%, 55% and 63%. p values: 0.53, 0.20 and 0.042 respectively. Adjusted ASA use and technical success primary patency, cumulative assisted primary patency and cumulative overall patency for bypass group is 45%, 66% and 78% respectively. While that of endovascular group is 52%, 61% and 70%. P values: 0.28, 0.48 and 0.19 respectively.
Conclusion: the field of endovascular intervention is still in the growing phase. Predictors of failure for both groups include technical failure and lack of use of ASA postoperatively. Hypertensive patients are less liable to failure in open surgery. Open surgery expose the patients to risks of complications which are null for endovascular interventions. 1ry patency and cumulative assisted 1ry patency are similar for both groups. However, Bypass surgery provides a better chance to maintain overall patency. However, this advantage of bypass surgery is expected to be lost after growth of the field of endovascular intervention. Strict and close surveillance is needed for all patients especially bypass group Key words: TASC II C, femoropopliteal lesion, CLI, Bypass, endovascular intervention.