English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Aim To determine preferable type of treatment in our clinical circumstances by following two groups of patients with critical limb ischemia (CLI), who were treated endovascularly and surgically. Methods Research was carried out in the form of a prospective study of 80 patients with CLI and Trans-Atlantic Inter-Society Consensus (TASC) C or D type of arterial disease, with American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) class III risk, who were randomly divided in two groups as per the treatment they received, surgical and endovascular. Patients were followed during 28 months using clinical examination and Duplex Ultrasound (DUS) in accordance with prescheduled control visits. Results There was a statistical difference between surgical and endovascular group in two years patency (82.5% vs. 55%; p=0.022) but it did not result in the difference in amputation free survival (AFS) (95% vs. 85%; p=0.171) or two-year freedom from major adverse limb events (MALE) (87.5 vs. 77.5; p=0.254). Also, there was no difference in the overall survival of patients (100% vs. 97.5%; p=0.317). Conclusion Initial endovascular treatment is a preferred form of the treatment for selected patient population.

Endovascular or open surgical treatment of high-risk patients with infrainguinal peripheral arterial disease and critical limb ischemia