LAUSR

OBJECTIVE According to the angiosome concept ulcer healing and limb salvage should be superior if direct arterial flow to the source vessel of an affected angiosome is established compared to indirect flow where the angiosome is perfused by means of collaterals. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of direct versus indirect revascularization (DR/IR) in endovascular versus bypass surgery on ulcer healing, limb salvage and mortality. Materials and methods: A retrospective analysis of both endovascular and bypass distal (below the knee) lower limb revascularizations for chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) between 1993 and 2014 was performed. Results: The study population consisted of 126 endovascular and 198 bypass procedures. DR and IR was achieved in 57.4% and 42.6% limbs respectively. DR was not superior to IR regarding all three major endpoints when endovascular and bypass procedures were analysed separately. Endovascular and bypass procedures resulted in comparable healing rates. All patients who did not achieve wound healing (HR 7.49; 95% CI 4.25-13.20, p=.0001) or needed to be treated with a bypass (HR 1.79; 95% CI 1.05-3.05, p=.034) were at an increased risk for major amputation. Increased mortality rate was noted after endovascular procedures (HR 1.45; 95% CI 1.04-2.00, p=.026). Conclusion: This retrospective study with comparable results for DR and IR did not support the angiosome concept. Achieving wound healing remains critical in patients with CLTI to reduce major amputation rates. Overall the implications of the angiosome concept seem to be limited due to its feasibility in patients with CLTI.