A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Endovascular Revascularization and Outcomes of Critical Limb-Threatening Ischemia in Trinidad and Tobago: The EVENT Pilot Study-Challenges in a Limited-Resource, Caribbean Setting. | LitMetric

Introduction: This retrospective study investigated major adverse limb events (MALE) and mortality outcomes in critical limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) patients with tissue loss after an endovascular revascularization-first (EVR-1st) strategy.

Methods: MALE and mortality were assessed in 157 consecutive patients with CLTI and tissue loss from June 2019 to June 2022 at the Eric Williams Medical Sciences Complex, Trinidad and Tobago.

Results: 157 patients underwent the EVR-1st strategy, of whom 20 were pivoted to immediate surgical revascularization (SR). Of the remaining 137 patients, successful EVR was achieved in 112, giving a procedural success of 82% and an all-comer overall success of 71%. The mortality and MALE rates were 2.7% and 8.9% at 2 years, respectively. Males and patients with previous major amputations were at significantly higher risk for MALE (p values of 0.016 and 0.018, respectively). There was a statistically significant difference in successful EVR for both Rutherford-Baker (RB) 5 (minor) and RB 6 (major) classifications: 63 (56%) vs. 5 (20%) and 49 (44%) vs. 20 (80%), both with a p value of 0.01. There were no differences in successful EVR amongst Wound, Ischemia, Foot Infection (WIfI) clinical stages. There were no differences in successful EVR amongst the Trans-Atlantic Inter-Society Consensus (TASC II) classifications.

Conclusions: This study may prove clinically informative and applicable for an EVR-1st management strategy for high-risk patients with CLTI in a limited-resource, Caribbean setting.

Trial Registration Number: NCT05547022 (retrospectively registered).

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10423177PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40119-023-00322-9DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

successful evr
16
outcomes critical
8
critical limb-threatening
8
limb-threatening ischemia
8
limited-resource caribbean
8
male mortality
8
tissue loss
8
patients clti
8
differences successful
8
patients
6

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!