The Influence of Diabetes Mellitus on the Outcome of Superficial Femoral Artery Recanalization is Debatable.

Abstract

Notwithstanding technological improvements in endovascular devices treatment of steno-obstructive lesions of the superficial femoral artery (SFA) remains a challenge for today's vascular surgeon. Current opinion dictates that the diabetic population may have worse outcome after revascularization of the lower extremities. Herein we examine the effects of endovascular treatment on steno-obstructive lesions of the SFA in diabetic and non-diabetic patients.

Methods: A retrospective analysis was carried out on 110 patients who had undergone endovascular treatment of the SFA from 2010 to 2017 comparing outcomes in diabetic (DM) vs non-diabetic patients (nDM).

Results: 56 (50.9%) of the patients were diabetic and 54 were non-diabetic (49.1%). 52.7% (62.7% DM vs 35.2% nDM, p = 0.0003) were patients with critical limb ischemia. SFA occlusion was present in 65.5% (60.7% DM vs 70.4% nDM, p = 0.29) of all patients. All had undergone PTA of the SFA and 40.9% had received adjunctive stenting (44.6% DM vs 37.0% nDM, p = 0.41). A multilevel treatment was executed in 39.1% (51.8% DM vs 25.9% nDM) of the cases whereas an infra-popliteal procedure was associated in 27.3% (37.5% DM vs 16.7% nDM). In both groups the presence of diabetes was significantly associated (p = 0.005 e p = 0.014, respectively). Reintervention rate was 22.7%; 13 in the diabetic group (23.2%) and 12 in the non-diabetic group (22.2%). Of those who had had reintervention (p = 0.77); 9 patients (8.2%) had undergone an open surgical operation, 6 of whom had diabetes (p = 0.32). 5 patients (4.5%) had had major amputation, 4 of whom were diabetic (p = 0.20). Curves assessing freedom from target lesion restenosis were substantially overlapping between the two groups.

Conclusion: No statistical associations between diabetes and reintervention or amputation rates were found. Indication to treat the SFA were not influenced by the presence of diabetes but further investigation is required to verify our hypothesis.