DC Field | Value | Language |
dc.contributor.author | Godfree, James | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2024-12-19T12:50:28Z | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2024-12-22T06:37:54Z | |
dc.date.available | 2024-12-19T12:50:28Z | |
dc.date.available | 2024-12-22T06:37:54Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2024 | |
dc.identifier.citation | GODFREE, James. Primary surgical procedures to enhance blood flow and prevent amputation in cases of chronic limb-threatening ischemia in contrast to endovascular techniques and bypass grafting. In: Revista de Ştiinţe ale Sănătăţii din Moldova = Moldovan Journal of Health Sciences. 2024, vol. 11(3), an. 2, p. 523. ISSN 2345-1467. | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 2345-1467 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://cercetare.usmf.md/sites/default/files/inline-files/MJHS_11_3_2024_anexa2__site.pdf | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://repository.usmf.md/handle/20.500.12710/29534 | |
dc.description | Universitatea de Stat de Medicină şi Farmacie „Nicolae Testemiţanu”, Chişinău, Republica Moldova | en_US |
dc.description.abstract | Background. Chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI)
treatment options, particularly endovascular and bypass
grafting methods, have been widely debated, with a focus
on successful outcomes and fewer complications. Objective
of the study. To compare the effectiveness of two surgical
options for treating CLTI concerning follow-up, quality of
life (QoL), hospital stay duration, and patient outcomes.
Material and methods. A search on PubMed for English
clinical trials published from 2014-2024 was conducted using the terms: “Chronic limb-threatening ischemia,” “Endovascular techniques,” “Bypass grafting,” “Allograft bypass,”
“Infrainguinal bypass.” Results. Six clinical trials comparing
bypass grafting and endovascular techniques for CLTI were
analyzed. Initially (months 1-3), bypass surgery requires
more follow-up visits to monitor healing and graft patency,
affecting daily activities and requiring a longer hospital stay
(7 days). This method results in fewer reinterventions and
lower long-term amputation rates but has higher perioperative risk, especially for high-risk patients. Endovascular
techniques allow faster recovery and improved QoL with
reduced initial surgical risk but have a higher chance of
restenosis, possibly necessitating repeat treatments and
increasing long-term amputation risk. Conclusion. Bypass
surgery may be preferred in severe cases with high amputation risk, while endovascular procedures are better suited
for high-risk surgical patients, offering faster recovery with
comparable long-term follow-up requirements. | en_US |
dc.publisher | Universitatea de Stat de Medicină şi Farmacie „Nicolae Testemiţanu” din Republica Moldova | en_US |
dc.relation.ispartof | Revista de Științe ale Sănătății din Moldova = Moldovan Journal of Health Sciences: Conferinţa ştiinţifică anuală "Cercetarea în biomedicină și sănătate: calitate, excelență și performanță", 16-18 octombrie, 2024 | en_US |
dc.subject | Endovascular techniques | en_US |
dc.subject | bypass grafting | en_US |
dc.subject | allograft bypass | en_US |
dc.title | Primary surgical procedures to enhance blood flow and prevent amputation in cases of chronic limb-threatening ischemia in contrast to endovascular techniques and bypass grafting | en_US |
dc.type | Other | en_US |
Appears in Collections: | Revista de Științe ale Sănătății din Moldova : Moldovan Journal of Health Sciences 2024 Vol. 11, Issue 2
|