Exploring the Relationship Between SVS WIfI and IWGDF Scoring Systems and Reamputation Risk in Patients With Diabetic Foot and Peripheral Artery Disease.

Alkan Bayrak, Mustafa Yalın, Mehmet Utku Çiftçi, Malik Çelik, Vedat Öztürk, Serdar Hakan Basaran
{"title":"Exploring the Relationship Between SVS WIfI and IWGDF Scoring Systems and Reamputation Risk in Patients With Diabetic Foot and Peripheral Artery Disease.","authors":"Alkan Bayrak, Mustafa Yalın, Mehmet Utku Çiftçi, Malik Çelik, Vedat Öztürk, Serdar Hakan Basaran","doi":"10.1177/15347346251333835","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Determining the optimal amputation level in diabetic foot (DF) and peripheral artery disease (PAD) patients is crucial for minimizing reamputation risk while preserving functionality. The Society for Vascular Surgery Wound, Ischemia, and Foot Infection (SVS WIfI) and International Working Group on Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) scoring systems are widely used for risk stratification, but their predictive value for reamputation remains unclear. The current study aimed to evaluate the predictive utility of these scoring systems for reamputation risk in patients undergoing amputations due to DF or PAD. A retrospective cohort study was conducted on 108 patients who underwent unilateral amputations due to DF or PAD between 2016 and 2021. Patients were categorized based on WIfI and IWGDF classifications, and clinical outcomes, including reamputation rates, ICU admissions, and mortality, were analyzed using logistic regression and post hoc analyses. Reamputation occurred in 41 (38%) patients. Higher WIfI (OR: 3.85, 95% CI: 2.10-7.05, <i>P</i> = .001) and severe IWGDF scores (OR: 3.25, 95% CI: 1.80-5.88, <i>P</i> = .008) significantly correlated with increased reamputation risk. Patients with high-risk scores also exhibited higher ICU admission (<i>P</i> = .03) and mortality rates (<i>P</i> = .01). Male gender (OR: 3.47, 95% CI: 1.45-8.31, <i>P</i> = .005), diabetes (OR: 2.32, 95% CI: 1.10-4.90, <i>P</i> = .027), and prolonged hospitalization (OR: 1.04, 95% CI: 1.01-1.08, <i>P</i> = .021) were independent predictors, while above-ankle amputations were protective for reamputation (OR: 0.22, 95% CI: 0.11-0.43, <i>P</i> < .001). Both scoring systems are effective in predicting reamputation risk, with WIfI providing a more comprehensive risk assessment. Combining these tools may enhance decision-making and improve patient outcomes in terms of reamputation prevention, hospital stay, ICU admission, and mortality.</p>","PeriodicalId":94229,"journal":{"name":"The international journal of lower extremity wounds","volume":" ","pages":"15347346251333835"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-10","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/10.1177/15347346251333835","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

Determining the optimal amputation level in diabetic foot (DF) and peripheral artery disease (PAD) patients is crucial for minimizing reamputation risk while preserving functionality. The Society for Vascular Surgery Wound, Ischemia, and Foot Infection (SVS WIfI) and International Working Group on Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) scoring systems are widely used for risk stratification, but their predictive value for reamputation remains unclear. The current study aimed to evaluate the predictive utility of these scoring systems for reamputation risk in patients undergoing amputations due to DF or PAD. A retrospective cohort study was conducted on 108 patients who underwent unilateral amputations due to DF or PAD between 2016 and 2021. Patients were categorized based on WIfI and IWGDF classifications, and clinical outcomes, including reamputation rates, ICU admissions, and mortality, were analyzed using logistic regression and post hoc analyses. Reamputation occurred in 41 (38%) patients. Higher WIfI (OR: 3.85, 95% CI: 2.10-7.05, P = .001) and severe IWGDF scores (OR: 3.25, 95% CI: 1.80-5.88, P = .008) significantly correlated with increased reamputation risk. Patients with high-risk scores also exhibited higher ICU admission (P = .03) and mortality rates (P = .01). Male gender (OR: 3.47, 95% CI: 1.45-8.31, P = .005), diabetes (OR: 2.32, 95% CI: 1.10-4.90, P = .027), and prolonged hospitalization (OR: 1.04, 95% CI: 1.01-1.08, P = .021) were independent predictors, while above-ankle amputations were protective for reamputation (OR: 0.22, 95% CI: 0.11-0.43, P < .001). Both scoring systems are effective in predicting reamputation risk, with WIfI providing a more comprehensive risk assessment. Combining these tools may enhance decision-making and improve patient outcomes in terms of reamputation prevention, hospital stay, ICU admission, and mortality.

探讨SVS WIfI和IWGDF评分系统与糖尿病足和外周动脉疾病患者再截肢风险的关系
确定糖尿病足(DF)和外周动脉疾病(PAD)患者的最佳截肢水平对于在保持功能的同时最小化再截肢风险至关重要。血管外科伤口、缺血和足部感染学会(SVS WIfI)和国际糖尿病足工作组(IWGDF)评分系统被广泛用于风险分层,但其对再截肢的预测价值尚不清楚。目前的研究旨在评估这些评分系统对因DF或PAD进行截肢的患者再截肢风险的预测效用。一项回顾性队列研究对2016年至2021年间因DF或PAD接受单侧截肢的108例患者进行了研究。根据WIfI和IWGDF分类对患者进行分类,并使用logistic回归和事后分析对临床结果进行分析,包括再截肢率、ICU入院率和死亡率。41例(38%)患者发生再截肢。较高的WIfI (OR: 3.85, 95% CI: 2.10-7.05, P = 0.001)和严重的IWGDF评分(OR: 3.25, 95% CI: 1.80-5.88, P = 0.008)与再截肢风险增加显著相关。高危评分患者的ICU住院率(P = 0.03)和死亡率(P = 0.01)也较高。男性(OR: 3.47, 95% CI: 1.45-8.31, P = 0.005)、糖尿病(OR: 2.32, 95% CI: 1.10-4.90, P = 0.027)和住院时间延长(OR: 1.04, 95% CI: 1.01-1.08, P = 0.021)是独立预测因素,而踝部以上截肢对再截肢具有保护作用(OR: 0.22, 95% CI: 0.11-0.43, P = 0.005)
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