Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex.
Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex.
J Vasc Surg. 2015 Jan;61(1):162-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2014.05.101. Epub 2014 Jul 26.
This study was conducted to quantify the effect of multidisciplinary care (MDC) on amputation-free survival (AFS) and wound healing within a chronic critical limb ischemia (CLI) population.
We performed a retrospective, single-center cohort study of consecutive CLI patients presenting to the Vascular Surgery Service. Patients who received initial and follow-up wound care from the MDC were compared with patients who received standard wound care (SWC). The MDC team consisted of vascular, plastic, and podiatric surgeons who jointly managed wound care and directed any other consults or services as deemed necessary. SWC consisted of an inconsistent mix of providers without a defined manager, including nurses, wound care midlevel providers, general surgeons, internists, or the patients themselves. The referring physician determined the allocation of patients. The primary outcome variable was AFS, with a secondary evaluation of wound healing. The effects of baseline demographics, comorbid medical conditions, laboratory values, ischemic lesion severity and location, Rutherford classification, and participation in MDC were assessed. Significant univariate predictors (P < .10) of AFS were entered into a multivariate Cox regression model and assessed at an α = .05.
Between August 2010 and June 2012, 146 CLI patients (91 male [63%]) were evaluated by the Vascular Surgery Service and were followed up for a median of 539 days (interquartile range 314-679 days). Ischemic tissue loss was present in 85 patients (38 at Rutherford category 5, and 47 at Rutherford category 6). Within this cohort, 51 (60%) had MDC, and 34 (40%) had SWC. Fifty-eight patients (68%) underwent revascularization (open in 17, endovascular in 35, and hybrid in 6), 14 (8%) were managed with primary major amputation, and 13 (15%) declined revascularization. AFS was superior for patients in the MDC arm vs the SWC arm (593.3 ± 53.5 days vs 281.0 ± 38.2 days; log-rank, P = .02). Wound-healing times favored the MDC arm over the SWC arm (444.5 ± 33.2 days vs 625.2 ± 126.5 days), although this was not statistically significant (log-rank, P = .74). Multivariate modelling revealed that independent predictors of major amputation or death, or both, were nonrevascularized patients (hazard ratio [HR], 3.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.78-8.02; χ(2), P < .01), treatment by SWC (HR, 2.664; 95% CI, 1.23-5.77; χ(2), P = .012), and baseline nonambulatory status (HR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.17-2.85; χ(2), P < .01).
MDC pathways for the management of a population of CLI patients improved AFS by greater than twofold and should be the standard of care for the CLI population. Baseline nonambulatory status and unrevascularized patients also predict worse AFS. Wound healing remains prolonged regardless of preoperative or postoperative wound care. Future study is required to evaluate the costs and functional outcomes for MDC in the management of CLI.
本研究旨在量化多学科护理(MDC)对慢性严重肢体缺血(CLI)人群中免于截肢的生存(AFS)和伤口愈合的影响。
我们对血管外科服务就诊的连续 CLI 患者进行了回顾性、单中心队列研究。比较了接受 MDC 初始和随访伤口护理的患者与接受标准伤口护理(SWC)的患者。MDC 团队由血管外科、整形和足病外科医生组成,共同管理伤口护理,并根据需要指导任何其他会诊或服务。SWC 由没有明确管理者的混合不固定提供者组成,包括护士、伤口护理中级提供者、普通外科医生、内科医生或患者自己。转诊医生决定患者的分配。主要结局变量是 AFS,次要评估是伤口愈合。评估了基线人口统计学、合并医疗状况、实验室值、缺血性病变严重程度和位置、Rutherford 分类以及参与 MDC 的影响。将显著的单变量预测因素(P<.10)输入多变量 Cox 回归模型,并在α=0.05时进行评估。
2010 年 8 月至 2012 年 6 月期间,血管外科服务评估了 146 名 CLI 患者(91 名男性[63%]),并随访中位数为 539 天(四分位距 314-679 天)。85 名患者存在缺血性组织损失(38 名处于 Rutherford 类别 5,47 名处于 Rutherford 类别 6)。在该队列中,51 名(60%)接受了 MDC,34 名(40%)接受了 SWC。58 名患者(68%)接受了血运重建(17 例开放,35 例血管内,6 例杂交),14 名(8%)接受了初次主要截肢,13 名(15%)拒绝血运重建。MDC 组的 AFS 优于 SWC 组(593.3±53.5 天比 281.0±38.2 天;对数秩检验,P=0.02)。伤口愈合时间有利于 MDC 组优于 SWC 组(444.5±33.2 天比 625.2±126.5 天),尽管这没有统计学意义(对数秩检验,P=0.74)。多变量建模显示,非血运重建患者、SWC 治疗和基线非步行状态是主要截肢或死亡或两者的独立预测因素(危险比[HR],3.76;95%置信区间[CI],1.78-8.02;χ(2),P<.01)、(HR,2.664;95%CI,1.23-5.77;χ(2),P=0.012)和(HR,1.89;95%CI,1.17-2.85;χ(2),P<.01)。
CLI 患者管理的 MDC 途径使 AFS 提高了两倍以上,应成为 CLI 患者的标准治疗方法。基线非步行状态和未血运重建的患者也预测 AFS 较差。无论术前或术后伤口护理,伤口愈合时间仍然延长。未来需要研究 MDC 在 CLI 管理中的成本和功能结果。