Percutaneous Angioplasty in Diabetic Patients with Critical Limb Ischemia and Chronic Kidney Disease

Abstract

Introduction: Diabetes and Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) are two strong risk factors for peripheral arterial disease (PAD) and Critical Limb Ischemia (CLI). Further renal insufficiency increases the risk of non healing wounds and major amputation. Primary amputation rates of 22% to 44% have been reported for ischaemic foot lesion in End-Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) patients. In our study we evaluated the outcomes after Percutaneus Transluminal Angioplasty (PTA) in diabetic patient in relation to different CKD classes. Materials and Methods: We studied a group of 456 diabetic patients with PAD complicated by foot lesion who underwent PTA because of a CLI. According to the estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR mL/min/1.73 m2) we divided the patients into five CKD groups: group 1 eGFR > 90, group 2 eGFR 90 - 60 (n = 160), group 3 eGFR 60 - 30 (n = 152), group 4 eGFR 30 -15 (n = 34) and group 5 Results: Alive without major amputation, alive with major amputation and death were respectively: for group 1 (77.8%, 11.1%, 11.1%), for group 2 (74.4%, 12.5%, 13.1%), for group 3 (80.3%, 11.2%, 8.5%), for group 4 (82.3%, 8.8%, 8.8%). They were 60%, 18.3%, 21.7% for group 5 significantly different from the other CKD groups (χ2 = 0.0175). Our analysis did not highlight any relationship between eGFR and outcomes and eGFR did not show any significant difference according to the different outcomes, and were respectively 60.2 ± 1.3, 61.8 ± 3.4, 63.8 ± 3.5 (P = ns). Conclusion: The outcomes were similar for groups 1-4 and therefore, according to our data, they seemed not to be influenced by the decline of GFR. Outcomes worse significantly in group 5, but this group included only patients with ESRD in dialysis treatment. Although the outcomes after PTA in group 5 was significantly worse than the other groups, still a 60% limb salvage rate was obtained with PTA also in these very fragile patients. PTA was much less aggressive than by-pass and PTA was the only method used to treat CLI in our patients. This could explain why we recorded similar outcomes in all groups despite the decline of GFR that, generally speaking, mirrors a worsening of the general clinical conditions. Worse outcomes were recorded only in group 5 and in this group dialysis by itself might be responsible of the different outcomes.