通过竞争风险分析估算下肢外周动脉疾病的截肢发生率和风险。

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE Vascular Medicine Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-09-01 DOI:10.1177/1358863X241268727
Santiago Callegari, Kim G Smolderen, Jacob Cleman, Carlos Mena-Hurtado, Gaëlle Romain
{"title":"通过竞争风险分析估算下肢外周动脉疾病的截肢发生率和风险。","authors":"Santiago Callegari, Kim G Smolderen, Jacob Cleman, Carlos Mena-Hurtado, Gaëlle Romain","doi":"10.1177/1358863X241268727","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Patients with peripheral artery disease face high amputation and mortality risk. When assessing vascular outcomes, consideration of mortality as a competing risk is not routine. We hypothesize standard time-to-event methods will overestimate major amputation risk in chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) and non-CLTI. <b>Methods</b>: Patients undergoing peripheral vascular intervention from 2017 to 2018 were abstracted from the Vascular Quality Initiative registry and stratified by mean age (⩾ 75 vs < 75 years). Mortality and amputation data were obtained from Medicare claims. The 2-year cumulative incidence function (CIF) and risk of major amputation from standard time-to-event analysis (1 - Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression) were compared with competing risk analysis (Aalen-Johansen and Fine-Gray model) in CLTI and non-CLTI. <b>Results</b>: A total of 7273 patients with CLTI and 5095 with non-CLTI were included. At 2-year follow up, 13.1% of patients underwent major amputation and 33.4% died without major amputation in the CLTI cohort; 1.3% and 10.7%, respectively, in the non-CLTI cohort. In CLTI, standard time-to-event analysis overestimated the 2-year CIF of major amputation by 20.5% and 13.7%, respectively, in patients ⩾ 75 and < 75 years old compared with competing risk analysis. The standard Cox regression overestimated adjusted 2-year major amputation risk in patients ⩾ 75 versus < 75 years old by 7.0%. In non-CLTI, the CIF was overestimated by 7.1% in patients ⩾ 75 years, and the adjusted risk was overestimated by 5.1% compared with competing risk analysis. <b>Conclusions</b>: Standard time-to-event analysis overestimates the incidence and risk of major amputation, especially in CLTI. Competing risk analyses are alternative approaches to estimate accurately amputation risk in vascular outcomes research.</p>","PeriodicalId":23604,"journal":{"name":"Vascular Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"496-506"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11575932/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Competing risk analysis to estimate amputation incidence and risk in lower-extremity peripheral artery disease.\",\"authors\":\"Santiago Callegari, Kim G Smolderen, Jacob Cleman, Carlos Mena-Hurtado, Gaëlle Romain\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/1358863X241268727\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Patients with peripheral artery disease face high amputation and mortality risk. When assessing vascular outcomes, consideration of mortality as a competing risk is not routine. We hypothesize standard time-to-event methods will overestimate major amputation risk in chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) and non-CLTI. <b>Methods</b>: Patients undergoing peripheral vascular intervention from 2017 to 2018 were abstracted from the Vascular Quality Initiative registry and stratified by mean age (⩾ 75 vs < 75 years). Mortality and amputation data were obtained from Medicare claims. The 2-year cumulative incidence function (CIF) and risk of major amputation from standard time-to-event analysis (1 - Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression) were compared with competing risk analysis (Aalen-Johansen and Fine-Gray model) in CLTI and non-CLTI. <b>Results</b>: A total of 7273 patients with CLTI and 5095 with non-CLTI were included. At 2-year follow up, 13.1% of patients underwent major amputation and 33.4% died without major amputation in the CLTI cohort; 1.3% and 10.7%, respectively, in the non-CLTI cohort. In CLTI, standard time-to-event analysis overestimated the 2-year CIF of major amputation by 20.5% and 13.7%, respectively, in patients ⩾ 75 and < 75 years old compared with competing risk analysis. The standard Cox regression overestimated adjusted 2-year major amputation risk in patients ⩾ 75 versus < 75 years old by 7.0%. In non-CLTI, the CIF was overestimated by 7.1% in patients ⩾ 75 years, and the adjusted risk was overestimated by 5.1% compared with competing risk analysis. <b>Conclusions</b>: Standard time-to-event analysis overestimates the incidence and risk of major amputation, especially in CLTI. Competing risk analyses are alternative approaches to estimate accurately amputation risk in vascular outcomes research.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23604,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Vascular Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"496-506\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11575932/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Vascular Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/1358863X241268727\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/9/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vascular Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1358863X241268727","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:外周动脉疾病患者面临截肢和死亡的高风险。在评估血管预后时,将死亡率作为竞争风险考虑并非常规做法。我们假设标准的时间到事件方法会高估慢性肢体缺血(CLTI)和非慢性肢体缺血的主要截肢风险。方法:从血管质量倡议登记处抽取2017年至2018年接受外周血管介入治疗的患者,并按平均年龄(⩾ 75岁 vs < 75岁)进行分层。死亡率和截肢数据来自医疗保险报销单。通过标准时间到事件分析(1 - Kaplan-Meier和Cox回归)和竞争风险分析(Aalen-Johansen和Fine-Gray模型)比较了CLTI和非CLTI的2年累积发病率函数(CIF)和主要截肢风险。结果共纳入 7273 名 CLTI 患者和 5095 名非 CLTI 患者。在 2 年的随访中,CLTI 组群中有 13.1% 的患者接受了大截肢手术,33.4% 的患者在没有接受大截肢手术的情况下死亡;非 CLTI 组群中分别有 1.3% 和 10.7%的患者在没有接受大截肢手术的情况下死亡。在CLTI中,与竞争风险分析相比,标准时间到事件分析将75岁以上和75岁以下患者的2年大截肢CIF分别高估了20.5%和13.7%。标准 Cox 回归将 75 岁以上和 75 岁以下患者的调整后 2 年大截肢风险高估了 7.0%。在非CLTI患者中,与竞争风险分析相比,75岁以上患者的CIF被高估了7.1%,调整后风险被高估了5.1%。结论标准的时间到事件分析高估了大截肢的发生率和风险,尤其是在CLTI中。竞争风险分析是血管预后研究中准确估计截肢风险的替代方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Competing risk analysis to estimate amputation incidence and risk in lower-extremity peripheral artery disease.

Background: Patients with peripheral artery disease face high amputation and mortality risk. When assessing vascular outcomes, consideration of mortality as a competing risk is not routine. We hypothesize standard time-to-event methods will overestimate major amputation risk in chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) and non-CLTI. Methods: Patients undergoing peripheral vascular intervention from 2017 to 2018 were abstracted from the Vascular Quality Initiative registry and stratified by mean age (⩾ 75 vs < 75 years). Mortality and amputation data were obtained from Medicare claims. The 2-year cumulative incidence function (CIF) and risk of major amputation from standard time-to-event analysis (1 - Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression) were compared with competing risk analysis (Aalen-Johansen and Fine-Gray model) in CLTI and non-CLTI. Results: A total of 7273 patients with CLTI and 5095 with non-CLTI were included. At 2-year follow up, 13.1% of patients underwent major amputation and 33.4% died without major amputation in the CLTI cohort; 1.3% and 10.7%, respectively, in the non-CLTI cohort. In CLTI, standard time-to-event analysis overestimated the 2-year CIF of major amputation by 20.5% and 13.7%, respectively, in patients ⩾ 75 and < 75 years old compared with competing risk analysis. The standard Cox regression overestimated adjusted 2-year major amputation risk in patients ⩾ 75 versus < 75 years old by 7.0%. In non-CLTI, the CIF was overestimated by 7.1% in patients ⩾ 75 years, and the adjusted risk was overestimated by 5.1% compared with competing risk analysis. Conclusions: Standard time-to-event analysis overestimates the incidence and risk of major amputation, especially in CLTI. Competing risk analyses are alternative approaches to estimate accurately amputation risk in vascular outcomes research.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Vascular Medicine
Vascular Medicine 医学-外周血管病
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
5.70%
发文量
158
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The premier, ISI-ranked journal of vascular medicine. Integrates the latest research in vascular biology with advancements for the practice of vascular medicine and vascular surgery. It features original research and reviews on vascular biology, epidemiology, diagnosis, medical treatment and interventions for vascular disease. A member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
期刊最新文献
Factors associated with sustained improvement after peripheral vascular intervention in patients with claudication. High prevalence of breast arterial calcification in pseudoxanthoma elasticum (PXE) - A nationwide study in the Netherlands. Predictors of incident stroke among individuals without coronary artery calcification: A pooled cohort analysis from the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis, Jackson Heart Study, and Framingham Heart Study. The ankle-brachial index, gastrocnemius mitochondrial respirometry, and walking performance in people with and without peripheral artery disease. Evaluation of collateral circulation in patients with internal carotid artery occlusion: A clinical and ultrasonographic multicenter study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1