Long-term outcomes following endovascular and surgical revascularization for peripheral artery disease: a propensity score-matched analysis
Main finding · MALE or mortalityResult — go to the resultHazard ratio 1.13 95% CI 1.09–1.17Authors' conclusion
Although the long-term risk of MALE was comparable for both approaches, enduring advantages of surgical revascularization included lower long-term mortality.
Study context
- Population
- Patients hospitalized with peripheral artery disease (PAD) in Australia and New Zealand undergoing revascularization, 2008–2015 (hybrid interventions excluded)
- Participants
- 75,189 patients · 14,339 matched pairs
- Exposure
- Endovascular vs surgical revascularization
- Endovascularn = 59,950
- Surgeryn = 15,239reference
- Outcome
- Mortality or MALE (acute limb ischaemia, urgent surgical or endovascular reintervention, or major amputation)
- Follow-up
- Up to 8 years post-hospitalization
Methodological detailspropensity-score matched
- Propensity-score matched
Main finding
MALE or mortality
Hazard ratio
1.13
95% CI 1.09–1.17
P < 0.001
Endovascular vs Surgery
HR 1.13 (95% CI 1.09–1.17); P < 0.001
As reported in the abstract
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Further findings
| Outcome | HR (95% CI) | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| MALE | 1.04 (0.99–1.10) | P = 0.15 | |
| All-cause urgent rehospitalizations | 1.01 (0.98–1.04) | P = 0.57 | |
| Mortality | 1.16 (1.11–1.21) | P < 0.001 | |
| 0.512Hazard ratio (log scale) |
Claudication and chronic limb-threatening ischaemia (subgroups)
- Findings consistent for both claudication and chronic limb-threatening ischaemia presentations
Original publication
Long-term outcomes following endovascular and surgical revascularization for peripheral artery disease: a propensity score-matched analysis. Eur Heart J. Published 24 February 2021. doi:10.
Summarised from the published abstract; every number is checked against it