Early Tissue Resection Versus Watchful Waiting After Revascularization for Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia: A Meta-Analysis.

Xu Xu, Qiang Guo
{"title":"Early Tissue Resection Versus Watchful Waiting After Revascularization for Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia: A Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Xu Xu, Qiang Guo","doi":"10.1177/15347346241279517","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>No consensus or guideline has been established regarding the optimal timing of tissue resection after revascularization in patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI). This study aimed to compare early tissue resection and watchful waiting after revascularization regarding the outcomes of patients with CLTI. We searched PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and EMBASE for relevant randomized trials and observational studies published from their inception to May 1, 2024. In total, five articles were analyzed. The results showed that the early tissue resection group had a higher wound healing rate than the watchful waiting group (I<sup>2 </sup>= 26%, odds ratio [OR] = 2.80, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.32 to 5.92, <i>P </i>= 0.007). However, the rate of major amputation was significantly higher in the early tissue resection group than in the watchful waiting group (I<sup>2 </sup>= 5%, OR = 1.48, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.86, <i>P </i>< 0.001), and wound recurrence rate in the early tissue resection group was relatively higher than that in the watchful waiting group (I<sup>2 </sup>= 0%, OR = 2.42, 95% CI: 0.99 to 5.93, <i>P </i>= 0.05). No statistical significance was found in the rate of postoperative mortality (I<sup>2 </sup>= 2%, OR = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.69 to 1.41, <i>P </i>= 0.94) and wound healing time (I<sup>2 </sup>= 97%, standardized mean difference = -105.92, 95% CI -232.96 to 21.13, <i>P </i>= 0.10) between the early tissue resection and watchful waiting groups. For patients without signs of infection, a watchful waiting strategy could reduce the risk of major amputation.</p>","PeriodicalId":94229,"journal":{"name":"The international journal of lower extremity wounds","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The international journal of lower extremity wounds","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15347346241279517","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

No consensus or guideline has been established regarding the optimal timing of tissue resection after revascularization in patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI). This study aimed to compare early tissue resection and watchful waiting after revascularization regarding the outcomes of patients with CLTI. We searched PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and EMBASE for relevant randomized trials and observational studies published from their inception to May 1, 2024. In total, five articles were analyzed. The results showed that the early tissue resection group had a higher wound healing rate than the watchful waiting group (I2 = 26%, odds ratio [OR] = 2.80, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.32 to 5.92, P = 0.007). However, the rate of major amputation was significantly higher in the early tissue resection group than in the watchful waiting group (I2 = 5%, OR = 1.48, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.86, P < 0.001), and wound recurrence rate in the early tissue resection group was relatively higher than that in the watchful waiting group (I2 = 0%, OR = 2.42, 95% CI: 0.99 to 5.93, P = 0.05). No statistical significance was found in the rate of postoperative mortality (I2 = 2%, OR = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.69 to 1.41, P = 0.94) and wound healing time (I2 = 97%, standardized mean difference = -105.92, 95% CI -232.96 to 21.13, P = 0.10) between the early tissue resection and watchful waiting groups. For patients without signs of infection, a watchful waiting strategy could reduce the risk of major amputation.

慢性肢体危重缺血血管重建后早期组织切除与观察等待:一项 Meta 分析。
关于慢性肢体缺血(CLTI)患者血管再通后组织切除的最佳时机,目前尚未达成共识或制定指南。本研究旨在比较早期组织切除术和血管再通后的观察等待对 CLTI 患者的疗效。我们在 PubMed、Cochrane Library 和 EMBASE 中检索了从开始到 2024 年 5 月 1 日发表的相关随机试验和观察性研究。共分析了五篇文章。结果显示,早期组织切除组的伤口愈合率高于观察等待组(I2 = 26%,比值比 [OR] = 2.80,95% 置信区间 [CI] 1.32 至 5.92,P = 0.007)。然而,早期组织切除组的大截肢率明显高于观察等待组(I2 = 5%,OR = 1.48,95% CI 1.18 至 1.86,P 2 = 0%,OR = 2.42,95% CI:0.99 至 5.93,P = 0.05)。早期组织切除组和观察等待组之间的术后死亡率(I2 = 2%,OR = 0.99,95% CI:0.69 至 1.41,P = 0.94)和伤口愈合时间(I2 = 97%,标准化平均差 = -105.92,95% CI -232.96 至 21.13,P = 0.10)无统计学意义。对于没有感染迹象的患者,观察等待策略可降低大截肢的风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信