OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study is to compare the clinical and safety outcomes between two groups of patients with Trans-Atlantic Inter-Society Consensus class D (TASC II D) aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD): those with higher-risk comorbidity who underwent endovascular reconstruction and those with lower-risk comorbidity who underwent surgical bypass.
MATERIALS AND METHODS. Thirty-two consecutive patients with symptomatic TASC II D AOID who underwent surgical bypass or endovascular reconstruction from 2012 to 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. Lesion characteristics, technical approach, survival, limb salvage, patency, and change in clinical symptoms were analyzed.
RESULTS. Nineteen patients with higher comorbidity underwent endovascular reconstruction, whereas 13 patients with lower comorbidity underwent surgical bypass. Patients undergoing endovascular reconstruction had an older median age (67.0 vs 62.0 years; p = 0.007), higher rates of hypertension (94.7% vs 61.5%; p = 0.018) and coronary artery disease (26.3% vs 0%; p = 0.044), and advanced renal impairment (mean [± SD] chronic kidney disease stage, 1.4 ± 1.5 vs 0.7 ± 1.3; p = 0.005). There were no significant differences in Rutherford classification between the groups. During long-term follow-up of 2.76 years, endovascular reconstruction and surgical bypass showed equivalent rates of survival (89.5% vs 84.6%; p = 0.683), limb salvage (100.0% vs 92.3%; p = 0.219), and primary or primary-assisted patency (85% vs 85%; p = 0.98). Groups showed similar clinical improvements in walking distance, rest pain, and tissue loss at 30 days (95% vs 85%; p = 0.158) and at long-term follow-up (74% vs 62%; p = 0.599).
CONCLUSION. For properly selected patients, the clinical outcomes of endovascular reconstruction versus surgical bypass for TASC II D AOID may be equivalent at 2.5 years after the procedure. The decreased operative risk associated with endovascular reconstruction suggests that it is the technique of choice for high-risk patients.