Early Versus Delayed Endovascular Revascularization: Implications for Limb Salvage and Survival After Transmetatarsal Amputation

Background Healing after transmetatarsal amputation (TMA) depends on adequate tissue perfusion. Revascularization prior to minor amputation improves amputation-free survival, limb preservation, and wound healing in patients with ischemic wounds. However, the optimal interval between revascularization and amputation remains unclear. Methods The TriNetX real-world clinical data platform was used to identify patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) who underwent endovascular revascularization followed by TMA. Patients were categorized into Early TMA (≤7 days after revascularization) and Late TMA (8-30 days). Propensity score matching was performed using demographics, comorbidities, laboratory values, and concurrent therapies. Major amputation and all-cause mortality at 6 months and 1 year were evaluated using Cox proportional hazards models. Kaplan–Meier curves and log-rank tests were used for time-to-event analyses. Results Among 700 patients with CLTI treated with revascularization before TMA, 508 underwent Early TMA and 192 underwent Late TMA. After matching, 185 patients remained in each group (96.3% match rate). The mean age was 66.9 ± 10.9 years, 78.1% were male, and mean follow-up was 237.2 days. At 6 months, major amputation (hazard ratio [HR], 0.87; 95% CI, 0.51-1.46; P =.597) and all-cause mortality (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.45-1.20; P = .220) did not differ between groups. At 1-year, major amputation (HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.52-1.45; P = .599) and mortality (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.46-1.14; P = .164) also remained similar. A composite endpoint of major amputation or all-cause mortality was also similar between groups (HR, 0.995; 95% CI, 0.694-1.425; P = .978). Conclusion Among patients with CLTI undergoing endovascular therapy and subsequent TMA, early (≤7 days) vs late (8-30 days) amputation timing did not significantly affect major amputation or survival outcomes.