Back to Journals » Clinical Interventions in Aging » Volume 9

Comparison of hybrid procedure and open surgical revascularization for multilevel infrainguinal arterial occlusive disease

Authors Zhou M, Huang D, Liu C, Liu Z, Zhang M, Qiao T, Liu C

Received 26 April 2014

Accepted for publication 18 July 2014

Published 22 September 2014 Volume 2014:9 Pages 1595—1603


Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single anonymous peer review

Peer reviewer comments 2

Min Zhou, Dian Huang, Chen Liu, Zhao Liu, Min Zhang, Tong Qiao, Chang-Jian Liu

Department of Vascular Surgery, Affiliated Drum Tower Hospital of Nanjing University Medical School, Nanjing, People’s Republic of China

Objective: To compare outcomes of hybrid (combined surgical and endovascular) procedures (HYBRID) with open surgical reconstructions (OPEN) in patients with multilevel infrainguinal artery occlusive diseases.
Design: Case series study with retrospective analysis of prospectively collected nonrandomized data.
Methods: Between 2008 and 2012, 64 patients underwent OPEN and 43 underwent HYBRID. Patient characteristics, technique success, clinical improvement, and procedure-related morbidity were reviewed and compared. Patency rates and limb salvages were analyzed and compared using Kaplan–Meier life tables. Cox regression analyses were used to assess the influence of various risk factors on primary patency.
Results: HYBRID patients were older and presented with worse New York Heart Association function compared with OPEN patients. The increase in the ankle-brachial index and improvement of Ruthford category after procedures were equivalent between two groups, but HYBRID patients had shorter hospital length of stay (7.6±12.0 versus 15.5±17.3; P= 0.018) and less overall perioperative morbidity (12% versus 28%; P=0.042) compared with OPEN patients. No statistically significant difference in 36-month primary (47.1%±7.1% versus 50.1%±9.4%; P=0.418), assisted primary (57.0%±7.9% versus 62.4%±9.2%; P=0.517), or secondary (82.0%±6.8% versus 83.1%±7.3%; P=0.445) patency was seen between the two groups. Limb salvage rates of HYBRID vs OPEN at 3 years were similar (76.3%±9.3% versus 80.4%±8.2%; P=0.579). Critical limb ischemia was a negative predictor of long-term patency of patients in both the HYBRID and OPEN groups (P=0.012 and P<0.001, respectively), and the presence of diabetes and renal insufficiency were another two independent predictors of decreased primary patency for HYBRID (P=0.017 and P=0.019, respectively).
Conclusion: Multilevel infrainguinal artery occlusive diseases could be treated by hybrid procedure, with shorter hospitalization, less perioperative morbidity, and similar early- and long-term efficacy compared with open revascularization. A hybrid procedure should be considered for patients with high surgical risk, but critical limb ischemia, diabetes, and renal insufficiency could compromise its long-term patency.

Keywords: hybrid procedure, atherosclerotic occlusive disease, endovascular treatment

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]  View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]