Vascular access in critical limb ischemia. [Review]

MedStar author(s):
Citation: Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine. 17(3):190-8, 2016 Apr-MayPMID: 27157294Institution: MedStar Heart & Vascular InstituteForm of publication: Journal ArticleMedline article type(s): Journal Article | ReviewSubject headings: *Catheterization, Peripheral/mt [Methods] | *Endovascular Procedures/mt [Methods] | *Femoral Artery | *Ischemia/th [Therapy] | *Peripheral Vascular Diseases/th [Therapy] | Catheterization, Peripheral/ae [Adverse Effects] | Critical Illness | Endovascular Procedures/ae [Adverse Effects] | Femoral Artery/dg [Diagnostic Imaging] | Humans | Ischemia/dg [Diagnostic Imaging] | Ischemia/pp [Physiopathology] | Limb Salvage | Peripheral Vascular Diseases/di [Diagnosis] | Peripheral Vascular Diseases/pp [Physiopathology] | Punctures | Radiography, Interventional | Risk Factors | Time Factors | Treatment Outcome | Vascular PatencyYear: 2016Local holdings: Available in print through MWHC library: 2002 - presentISSN:
  • 1878-0938
Name of journal: Cardiovascular revascularization medicine : including molecular interventionsAbstract: Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.Currently, percutaneous endovascular intervention is considered a first line of therapy for treating patients with critical limb ischemia. As the result of remarkable development of techniques and technologies, percutaneous endovascular intervention has led to rates of limb salvage comparable to those achieved with bypass surgery, with fewer complications, even in the presence of lower rates of long-term patency. Currently, interventionalists have a multiplicity of access routes including smaller arteries, with both antegrade and retrograde approaches. Therefore, the choice of the optimal access site has become an integral part of the success of the percutaneous intervention. By understanding the technical aspects, as well as the advantages and limitations of each approach, the interventionalists can improve clinical outcomes in patients with severe peripheral arterial disease. This article reviews the access routes in critical limb ischemia, their advantages and disadvantages, and the clinical outcomes of each. All authors: Baker NC, Bernardo NL, Campia U, Didier RJ, Escarcega RO, Kang WY, Kiramijyan S, Koifman E, Lipinski MJ, Magalhaes MA, Negi SI, Ota H, Torguson R, Waksman RFiscal year: FY2016Digital Object Identifier: Date added to catalog: 2017-04-10
Holdings
Item type Current library Collection Call number Status Date due Barcode
Journal Article MedStar Authors Catalog Article 27157294 Available 27157294

Available in print through MWHC library: 2002 - present

Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Currently, percutaneous endovascular intervention is considered a first line of therapy for treating patients with critical limb ischemia. As the result of remarkable development of techniques and technologies, percutaneous endovascular intervention has led to rates of limb salvage comparable to those achieved with bypass surgery, with fewer complications, even in the presence of lower rates of long-term patency. Currently, interventionalists have a multiplicity of access routes including smaller arteries, with both antegrade and retrograde approaches. Therefore, the choice of the optimal access site has become an integral part of the success of the percutaneous intervention. By understanding the technical aspects, as well as the advantages and limitations of each approach, the interventionalists can improve clinical outcomes in patients with severe peripheral arterial disease. This article reviews the access routes in critical limb ischemia, their advantages and disadvantages, and the clinical outcomes of each.

English

Powered by Koha