Key result
Peripheral endovascular revascularization is linked to a ~31-point improvement in 1-year quality of life.
Why the study?
Despite the growth of peripheral endovascular revascularization, little information exists quantifying the health status benefits after the procedure.
Does peripheral endovascular revascularization improve health status and quality of life in patients with symptomatic peripheral arterial disease?
Cohort (n=300)
Does peripheral endovascular revascularization improve health status and quality of life in patients with symptomatic peripheral arterial disease?
Peripheral endovascular revascularization provides significant and sustained improvements in symptoms, functioning, and quality of life for most patients with symptomatic peripheral arterial disease.
BACKGROUND: Patients with peripheral arterial disease often undergo peripheral endovascular revascularization (PER) to alleviate symptoms. Despite the growth of PER, little information exists quantifying the health status benefits after the procedure. METHODS AND RESULTS: From February 2001 to August 2004, 477 consecutive patients underwent PER for symptomatic peripheral arterial disease. Of these, 300 consented to participate in a longitudinal follow-up study of their health status. Health status was quantified with the disease-specific Peripheral Artery Questionnaire and the generic Short Form-12 and the EuroQol 5 Dimensions (EQ5D)questionnaire. Scores range from 0 to 100; higher scores represent fewer symptoms and better health status. The average age of the cohort was 68+/-11 years (mean+/-SD); 186 (62%) were male, 288 (96%) were white, and 118 (39%) were diabetic. Clinical follow-up was attained in 99% of patients; health status assessments were made in 86%. Mean Peripheral Artery Questionnaire summary scores improved significantly after revascularization from 31+/-19 to 62+/-27 at 1 year (P<0.0001). Generic health status scores also improved significantly (P<0.001 for all). Despite a technically successful procedure in 98% of patients, 21% of patients did not achieve the minimal clinically important improvement of an 8-point change in Peripheral Artery Questionnaire Summary score after PER (35+/-19 at baseline versus 31+/-16 at 1 year; P=0.09). CONCLUSIONS: For most patients, significant and sustained improvements in symptoms, functioning, and quality of life occur after PER. Identifying and counseling patients less likely to benefit from PER is an important future research direction.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Safley et al. (2007) conducted a cohort in Symptomatic peripheral arterial disease (n=300). Peripheral endovascular revascularization vs. Baseline (pre-procedure) was evaluated on Mean Peripheral Artery Questionnaire summary scores (p=<0.0001). Peripheral endovascular revascularization significantly improved mean Peripheral Artery Questionnaire summary scores from 31 at baseline to 62 at 1 year (P<0.0001).
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: