ArticleJournal of vascular surgery2025
Wound care-first strategies provide superior amputation-free survival in patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia Wound, Ischemia, and foot Infection clinical stages 1 and 2.
Article in Journal of vascular surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe optimal timing of revascularization in patients with mild-to-moderate chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) remains unclear. We aimed to evaluate long-term outcomes associated with conservative-first vs early revascularization strategies in patients with Wound, Ischemia, and foot Infection (WIfI) stage 1-2 CLTI.
methodsA 10-year, retrospective two-center analysis of patients with WIfI stage 1-2 CLTI was conducted. At both centers, the standard practice is to revascularize patients with toe pressure <30 mm Hg, whereas those with less severe ischemia are typically offered an initial trial of conservative management (wound care and offloading). However, through shared decision-making, some patients with toe pressure >30 mm Hg may still opt for-and be offered-immediate revascularization. Patients were grouped into conservative care only, late revascularization, and early revascularization, defined as intervention <30 days from presentation. Outcomes were wound healing, major limb amputation, amputation-free survival (AFS), and mortality.
resultsDuring the study period, 1404 patients were treated at two limb preservation centers, of whom 512 (36.5%) with WIfI stage 1 or 2 limbs were analyzed (573 limbs; median age 65 years, interquartile range: 57-74 years; 60.7% male; median follow-up 852 days, interquartile range: 346-1415 days). AFS was longest in the late revascularization group (median 3677 days), followed by early revascularization (1756 days), and shortest in the conservative care only group (1513 days) (P < .001). Limb salvage was achieved in 88% of conservative, 89% of early, and 91% of late revascularization patients, with no significant differences (P = .83). Overall survival was 54.2% in the conservative group, 71.9% in the early revascularization group, and 76.4% in the late revascularization group (P = .048). On multivariable analysis, conservative care only (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.41, 95% confidence interval: 0.25-0.66) and WIfI stage 2 (HR: 0.69, 95% confidence interval: 0.48-0.99) were protective, whereas increasing age (HR: 1.02, P = .004), congestive heart failure (HR: 1.73, P < .001), and bypass occlusion (HR: 1.74, P = .025) predicted major amputation/death. In patients with ischemic wounds, survival and AFS remained highest in the late revascularization group, with no significant differences in wound healing or major amputation.
conclusionsIn patients with WIfI clinical stages 1 and 2, early revascularization was not associated with improved AFS or wound healing compared with conservative management with or without delayed revascularization. These findings suggest that a selective, staged approach may be safe and effective in appropriately selected low- to moderate-risk CLTI patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.