Comparison between intermittent claudication versus chronic limb-threatening ischemia in peripheral arterial disease: a retrospective multicenter cohort study.

Abstract

The anatomical distribution, characteristics of lesions, and treatment modalities for peripheral artery disease (PAD) are diverse. Endovascular intervention is popular for symptomatic PAD, for both intermittent claudication (IC) and chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI). We aimed to investigate the endovascular devices used by comparing patients with PAD referred for endovascular revascularization with IC and CLTI. We identified 736 patients with PAD enrolled in the multicenter PAD registry in South Korea from 2019 to 2022. Of these patients, 636 received endovascular treatment at the time of this study. After excluding missing data, we analyzed 506 patients with IC or CLTI. Patients' characteristics, target lesions, and endovascular device data such as type, length, balloon diameter, and stent, were examined. Procedure outcomes of the aortoiliac, femoropopliteal, and below-the-knee lesions were analyzed. Patients with CLTI were more likely to have diabetes mellitus, below-the-knee interventions, and multilevel PAD than the IC group. Patients with IC had more aortoiliac artery lesions and underwent atherectomies than the CLTI group (63.3% and 61.1% vs. 39.7% and 40.6%, respectively; P < 0.001). In patients with femoropopliteal lesions, those with CLTI were more revascularized with stents than the patients with IC, without significant differences (35.3% vs. 29.1%, P = 0.161). Compared to the IC group, the CLTI patients showed significantly worse rates of primary patency, amputation, and mortality (P = 0.029, P < 0.001, and P < 0.001, respectively). Among Korean patients with PAD, there is a significant difference in baseline and lesion characteristics, endovascular strategies, and short-term follow-up outcomes among those with IC and CLTI.