ExploreFinding
Finding improvement
Bypass-first revascularization was associated with significantly lower 30-day major amputation compared with endovascular-first strategy in CLTI patients with infrageniculate disease (4.3% vs 7.4%; adjusted OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.36-0.98).
Effect sizeOR 0.60
CI95% CI 0.36-0.98
Follow-up30 days
ComparatorEndovascular-first infrageniculate revascularization
Effect summaryimprovement; OR 0.60; CI: 95% CI 0.36-0.98
Effect modifiers[{"modifier": "End-stage renal disease (ESRD)", "interaction_p": "", "direction": "attenuates", "stratum_details": "With ESRD included: OR 0.60 (CI 0.36-0.98). After ESRD exclusion (n=1111): amputation 4.1% bypass vs 6.2% endovascular (P=0.1), no significant association.", "plain_language": "The amputation benefit of bypass surgery disappeared when dialysis patients were excluded from the analysis, suggesting the advantage may be driven by ESRD patients specifically.", "annotation_notes": "No formal interaction test reported. Subgroup analysis after excluding 244 ESRD patients showed no significant association between bypass-first and lower amputation."}]

Connected entities

Interventions
Conditions
Outcomes

Source

PMC8906190
Clinical outcomes of bypass-first versus endovascular-first strategy in patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia due to infrageniculate arterial disease
Read on PMC → · View in graph →