15 research outputs found

    Predictive ability of the Society for Vascular Surgery Wound, Ischemia, and foot Infection (WIfI) classification system after first-time lower extremity revascularizations

    No full text
    markdownabstract__Objective:__ The Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) Wound, Ischemia and foot Infection (WIfI) classification system was proposed to predict 1-year amputation risk and potential benefit from revascularization. Our goal was to evaluate the predictive ability of this scale in a real-world selection of patients undergoing a first-time lower extremity revascularization for chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI). __Methods:__ From 2005 to 2014, 1336 limbs underwent a first-time lower extremity revascularization for CLTI, of which 992 had sufficient data to classify all three WIfI components (wound, ischemia, and foot infection). Limbs were stratified into the SVS WIfI clinical stages (from 1 to 4) for 1-year amputation risk estimation, a novel WIfI composite score from 0 to 9 (that weighs all WIfI variables equally), and a novel WIfI mean score from 0 to 3 (that can incorporate limbs missing any of the three WIfI components). Outcomes included major amputation; revascularization, major amputation, or stenosis (>3.5× step-up by duplex; RAS) events; and death. Predictors were identified using Cox regression models and Kaplan-Meier survival estimates. __Results:__ Of the 1336 first-time procedures performed, 992 limbs were classified in all three WIfI components (524 endovascular and 468 bypass; 26% rest pain and 74% tissue loss). Cox regression demonstrated that a one-unit increase in the WIfI clinical stage increases the risk of major amputation (hazard ratio [HR], 2.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.7-3.2) and RAS events in all limbs (HR, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.1-1.3). Separate models of the entire cohort, a bypass-only cohort, and an endovascular-only cohort showed that a one-unit increase in the WIfI mean score is associated with an increase in the risk of major amputation (all three cohorts: HR, 5.3 [95% CI, 3.6-6.8], 4.1 [2.4-6.9], and 6.6 [3.8-11.6], respectively) and RAS events (all three cohorts: HR, 1.7 [95% CI, 1.4-2.0], 1.9 [1.4-2.6], and 1.4 [1.1-1.9], respectively). The novel WIfI composite and WIfI mean scores were the only consistent predictors of death among the three cohorts, with the WIfI mean score proving most strongly predictive in the entire cohort (HR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.1-1.7), the bypass-only cohort (HR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-1.9), and the endovascular-only cohort (HR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.0-1.8). Although the individual WIfI wound component was able to predict mortality among all patients (HR, 1.1; 95% CI, 1.0-1.2) and bypass-only patients (HR, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.1-1.3), neither the additional individual WIfI components nor the WIfI clinical stage were able to significantly predict mortality among any cohort. __Conclusions:__ This study supports the ability of the SVS WIfI classification system to predict major amputation; however, the novel WIfI mean and WIfI composite scores predict amputation, RAS events, and mortality more consistently than any other current WIfI scoring system. The WIfI mean score allows inclusion of all limbs, and both novel scoring systems are easier to conceptualize, give equal weight to each WIfI component, and may provide clinicians more effective comparisons in outcomes between patients

    Clinical results of single-vessel versus multiple-vessel infrapopliteal intervention

    No full text
    textabstractObjective The effects of concomitant endovascular interventions on multiple infrapopliteal vessels are not well known, and the short-term and long-term sequelae of such procedures have not been reported. Methods From 2004 to 2014, 673 limbs in 528 patients underwent an infrapopliteal endovascular intervention for tissue loss (77%), rest pain (13%), stenosis of a previously treated vessel (5%), acute limb ischemia (3%), or claudication (2%). Outcomes included wound healing, RAS events (reintervention, major amputation, or stenosis [>3.5x step-up by duplex]), and mortality. Patients without an initial indication of critical limb ischemia (CLI) were excluded. Patients were characterized as having undergone either a single-vessel infrapopliteal intervention or a multiple-vessel infrapopliteal intervention. Results Of the 673 limbs, 558 underwent a successful infrapopliteal endovascular intervention for CLI (86% for tissue loss, 14% for rest pain). During a single procedure, 503 limbs (90%) underwent a single-vessel intervention and 55 (10%) underwent a multiple-vessel intervention. Patients undergoing a single-vessel intervention more commonly underwent a prior ipsilateral endovascular procedure (17% vs 6%; P = .03) or a prior ipsilateral bypass procedure (20% vs 9%; P = .04). Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed that a RAS event ≤1 year occurred in 229 limbs (49%), with no significant difference in the 1-year rates of reintervention (22% vs 20%; P = .53), major amputation (16% vs 10%; P = .24), or stenosis (29% vs 21%; P = .25). After adjustment for baseline characteristics, multivariable regression illustrated that neither major amputation rates nor RAS events differed between patients undergoing a single-vessel vs a multiple-vessel intervention (P = .26 and P = .61, respectively). Conclusions Our data suggest that a multiple-vessel intervention does not improve outcomes when compared to a single-vessel intervention following infrapopliteal angioplasty for CLI

    Predictive ability of the Society for Vascular Surgery Wound, Ischemia, and foot Infection (WIfI) classification system following infrapopliteal endovascular interventions for critical limb ischemia

    No full text
    Objective The Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) Lower Extremity Guidelines Committee has composed a new threatened lower extremity classification system that reflects the three major factors that impact amputation risk and clinical management: Wound, Ischemia, and foot Infection (WIfI). Our goal was to evaluate the predictive ability of this scale following any infrapopliteal endovascular intervention for critical limb ischemia (CLI). Methods From 2004 to 2014, a single institution, retrospective chart review was performed at the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center for all patients undergoing an infrapopliteal angioplasty for CLI. Throughout these years, 673 limbs underwent an infrapopliteal endovascular intervention for tissue loss (77%), rest pain (13%), stenosis of a previously treated vessel (5%), acute limb ischemia (3%), or claudication (2%). Limbs missing a grade in any WIfI component were excluded. Limbs were stratified into clinical stages 1 to 4 based on the SVS WIfI classification for 1-year amputation risk, as well as a novel WIfI composite score from 0 to 9. Outcomes included patient functional capacity, living status, wound healing, major amputation, major adverse limb events, reintervention, major amputation, or stenosis (RAS) events (> ×3.5 step-up by duplex), amputation-free survival, and mortality. Predictors were identified using Kaplan-Meier survival estimates and Cox regression models. Results Of the 596 limbs with CLI, 551 were classified in all three WIfI domains on a scale of 0 (least severe) to 3 (most severe). Of these 551, 84% were treated for tissue loss and 16% for rest pain. A Cox regression model illustrated that an increase in clinical stage increases the rate of major amputation (hazard ratio [HR], 1.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-2.3). Separate regression models showed that a one-unit increase in the WIfI composite score is associated with a decrease in wound healing (HR, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.1-1.4) and an increase in the rate of RAS events (HR, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.1-1.4) and major amputations (HR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.2-1.8). Conclusions This study supports the ability of the SVS WIfI classification system to predict 1-year amputation, RAS events, and wound healing in patients with CLI undergoing endovascular infrapopliteal revascularization procedures

    Predicting mortality of individual patients with COVID-19: a multicentre Dutch cohort

    No full text
    Objective Develop and validate models that predict mortality of patients diagnosed with COVID-19 admitted to the hospital. Design Retrospective cohort study. Setting A multicentre cohort across 10 Dutch hospitals including patients from 27 February to 8 June 2020. Participants SARS-CoV-2 positive patients (age >= 18) admitted to the hospital. Main outcome measures 21-day all-cause mortality evaluated by the area under the receiver operator curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value. The predictive value of age was explored by comparison with age-based rules used in practice and by excluding age from the analysis. Results 2273 patients were included, of whom 516 had died or discharged to palliative care within 21 days after admission. Five feature sets, including premorbid, clinical presentation and laboratory and radiology values, were derived from 80 features. Additionally, an Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)-based data-driven feature selection selected the 10 features with the highest F values: age, number of home medications, urea nitrogen, lactate dehydrogenase, albumin, oxygen saturation (%), oxygen saturation is measured on room air, oxygen saturation is measured on oxygen therapy, blood gas pH and history of chronic cardiac disease. A linear logistic regression and non-linear tree-based gradient boosting algorithm fitted the data with an AUC of 0.81 (95% CI 0.77 to 0.85) and 0.82 (0.79 to 0.85), respectively, using the 10 selected features. Both models outperformed age-based decision rules used in practice (AUC of 0.69, 0.65 to 0.74 for age >70). Furthermore, performance remained stable when excluding age as predictor (AUC of 0.78, 0.75 to 0.81). Conclusion Both models showed good performance and had better test characteristics than age-based decision rules, using 10 admission features readily available in Dutch hospitals. The models hold promise to aid decision-making during a hospital bed shortage
    corecore