Reporting Success Rate at 12 Months After Percutaneous Treatment for Peripheral Arterial Disease: The Impact of Outcome Criteria

Abstract

In patients with a pretreatment ABI measurement at rest of more than 0.90, classifying procedures using a criterion based on improvement in ABI measurements with more than 0.10 is inaccurate and underestimates the actual success rate at 12 months after percutaneous intervention. Furthermore, combining subjective improvement in symptoms and improvement in ABI measurements does not yield more information than reporting these outcome measures separately. Therefore, we suggest that improvement in symptoms and improvement in ABI measurements should be reported separately to indicate the 12-month success rate of percutaneous interventions for peripheral arterial disease.

Additional functional outcomes after endovascular treatment for intermittent claudication

“…Muradin et al. showed a substantially higher 12-month success rate when ABI was combined with clinical evaluation than the ABI outcome measures alone in clinical practice (23). Several factors other than PAD and the EVT may contribute to a longer walking distance at follow-up visits; the patient gets experience in walking on the treadmill in consecutive testing, receives information about the disease, and reassurance that the pain is not harmful, and may have been training between visits.…”