HEFT Repository

Bypass versus Angioplasty in Severe Ischaemia of the Leg (BASIL) trial: Analysis of amputation free and overall survival by treatment received.

Bradbury, Andrew W and Adam, Donald J and Bell, Jocelyn and Forbes, John F and Fowkes, F Gerry R and Gillespie, Ian and Ruckley, Charles Vaughan and Raab, Gillian M (2010) Bypass versus Angioplasty in Severe Ischaemia of the Leg (BASIL) trial: Analysis of amputation free and overall survival by treatment received. Journal of vascular surgery, 51 (5 Supp). 18S-31S. ISSN 1097-6809. This article is accessible to all HEFT staff and students via NHS Evidence www.evidence.nhs.uk by using their HEFT Athens login Ids

Full text not available from this repository.
Official URL: http://www.jvascsurg.org/article/S0741-5214(10)002...

Abstract

BACKGROUND

An intention-to-treat analysis of randomized Bypass versus Angioplasty in Severe Ischaemia of the Leg (BASIL) trial data showed that initial randomization to a bypass surgery (BSX)-first strategy was associated with improvements in subsequent overall survival (OS) and amputation-free survival (AFS) of about 7 and 6 months, respectively. We describe the nature and timing of first, crossover, and reinterventions and examine AFS and OS by first treatment received. We also compare vein with prosthetic BSX and transluminal with subintimal balloon angioplasty (BAP) and examine outcomes from BSX after failed BAP.

METHODS

We randomly assigned 452 patients with SLI due to infrainguinal disease in 27 United Kingdom hospitals to a BSX first (n = 228) or a BAP first (n = 224) revascularization strategy. All patients have been monitored for 3 years and more than half for >5 years. We prospectively collected data on every procedure, major amputation, and death.

RESULTS

Patients randomized to BAP were more likely to have their assigned treatment first (94% vs 85%, P = .01, chi(2)test). BAP had a higher immediate technical failure rate of 20% vs 2.6% (P = .01, chi(2)test). By 12 weeks after randomization 9 BAP (4%) vs 23 BSX (10%) patients had not undergone revascularization; 3 BAP (1.3%) vs 13 BSX (5.8%) had undergone the opposite treatment first; and 35 BAP (15.6%) and 2 (0.9%) BSX had received the assigned treatment and then undergone the opposite treatment. BSX distal anastomoses were divided approximately equally between the above and below knee popliteal and crural arteries; most originated from the common femoral artery. About 25% of the grafts were prosthetic and >90% of vein BSX used ipsilateral great saphenous vein. Most (80%) BAP patients underwent treatment of the SFA alone (38%) or combined with the popliteal artery (42%) and crural arteries (20%). Outcome of vein BSX was better for AFS (P = 0.003) but not OS (P = 0.38, log-rank tests) than prosthetic BSX. There were no differences in outcome between approximately equal numbers of transluminal and subintimal BAP. AFS (P = 0.006) but not OS (P = 0.06, log rank test) survival was significantly worse after BSX after failed BAP than after BSX as a first revascularization attempt.

CONCLUSIONS

BAP was associated with a significantly higher early failure rate than BSX. Most BAP patients ultimately required surgery. BSX outcomes after failed BAP are significantly worse than for BSX performed as a first revascularization attempt. BSX with vein offers the best long term AFS and OS and, overall, BAP appears superior to prosthetic BSX.

Item Type: Article
Additional Information: This article is accessible to all HEFT staff and students via NHS Evidence www.evidence.nhs.uk by using their HEFT Athens login Ids
Subjects: WG Cardiovascular system. Cardiology
Divisions: Planned IP Care > Vascular
Related URLs:
Depositing User: Mr Philip O'Reilly
Date Deposited: 04 Jul 2014 12:04
Last Modified: 04 Jul 2014 12:04
URI: http://www.repository.heartofengland.nhs.uk/id/eprint/500

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item