Anticoagulation in embolic acute limb ischaemia-an observational study.

Abstract

The management of embolic acute limb ischaemia commonly involves determining aetiology and performing emergency invasive procedures. This detailed study aimed to determine the impact of manipulation of anticoagulation in the aetiology of emboli in acute limb ischaemia and determine the efficacy of primary anticoagulation therapy vs. invasive interventions. Material and methods: Data collection was conducted at a single institution on a cohort of patients presenting consecutively with embolic acute limb ischaemia over one year. Two groups were compared, one receiving anticoagulation as primary therapy with those undergoing invasive treatment as the internal comparison group. Results: A likely haematological causation was identified in 22 of 38 presentations, related to interruption of anticoagulation in cardiac conditions, the majority atrial fibrillation (n=12), or hypercoagulable states (n=10). Limb salvage was pursued in 36 patients employing anticoagulation (n=19) or surgical embolectomy (n=17) as the primary therapy in upper and lower limbs (n=17 vs n=19 respectively). Despite delays often well beyond six hours and a range of ischaemic severity in both groups, 35 of 36 patients achieved full or substantive restoration of function with improved perfusion. Regarding anatomical distribution of arterial disease and therapy, three patients with multi-level disease proceeded to embolectomy following anticoagulation. Embolectomy was undertaken most often for proximal emboli and more profound paralysis. Conclusions: Anticoagulation and coagulopathy are commonly implicated in the aetiology of arterial emboli, with omission of effective anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation being associated in almost 1/3 of presentations. Whilst more profound limb paralysis and proximal or multi-level disease tended to be managed surgically, primary anticoagulation therapy alone or with a secondary embolectomy was effective across the spectrum of ischaemia severity and despite significant delays beyond guideline recommendations.