Surgical treatment versus thrombolysis in acute arterial occlusion: A randomised controlled study

Early outcomes following alternative treatment strategies in the management of the acutely ischemic limb

“…Subsequently, a large number of retrospective trials appeared in the literature, but it was not until the 1990 s that prospective randomized trials were organized. There are five randomized trials reported of note; There was one in Sweden with only 20 patients [14], There was University of Rochester trial comparing the primary endpoints of amputation and mortality in 114 patients [15]. These authors concluded that while thrombolysis resulted in a reduction in inpatient cardiopulmonary complications and hence inpatient mortality, the difference in the 30-day requirement for amputation and the 30-day mortality rate did not attain statistical significance.…”

Limb Ischemia: Cardiovascular Diagnosis and Management from Head to Toe

“…A 1998 survey study by Campbell et al conducted in Great Britain indicated that 41 % of admissions for ALI were due to native thrombosis, while 38 % were due to embolism, 15 % due to occlusion of a bypass graft or angioplasty site, 3 % due to thrombosis of a popliteal aneurysm, and 2 % due to trauma and iatrogenesis each. Few other epidemiologic data exist regarding the etiologies of acute limb ischemia; however, analysis of the handful of clinical trials in ALI reveals significant variation in the etiology of ALI, in part related to the variations within the enrolled patient populations [54][55][56].…”

Regional thrombolysis in lower limb ischemia: new pharmacological and nonpharmacological aspects

“…A few studies randomized patients to thrombolysis or to surgical intervention [4][5][6][7][8]; they were recently meta-analyzed [9]. No significant difference was found between thrombolysis in terms of mortality and major amputation.…”