The english version of the website is under development. Wherever text appears in Greek, it means it has not been translated yet.

Δημοσίευση

A systematic review and meta-analysis of GLASS staging system in the endovascular treatment of chronic limb-threatening ischemia.

TitleA systematic review and meta-analysis of GLASS staging system in the endovascular treatment of chronic limb-threatening ischemia.
Publication TypeJournal Article
Year of Publication2023
AuthorsBontinis, V., Bontinis A., Koutsoumpelis A., Giannopoulos A., & Ktenidis K.
JournalJ Vasc Surg
Volume77
Issue3
Pagination957-963.e3
Date Published2023 Mar
ISSN1097-6809
KeywordsCalcium, Chronic Disease, Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia, Endovascular Procedures, Humans, Ischemia, Limb Salvage, Peripheral Arterial Disease, Retrospective Studies, Risk Factors, Treatment Outcome
Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the application of the Global Anatomic Staging System (GLASS) in the endovascular treatment of chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI).
METHODS: We performed systematic research between June 2019 and February 2022, including articles investigating the relationship of GLASS classification with the outcomes of endovascular interventions in the treatment of CLTI. Data from the included studies were pooled and meta-analyzed. The primary endpoints were limb-based patency (LBP) at 1-year follow-up and immediate technical failure (ITF). Secondary endpoints included major amputation. We performed subgroup analysis between studies that reported on calcium modifier inclusion during GLASS classification and studies that did not.
RESULTS: Eleven studies, including 1816 patients (1975 limbs) met the inclusion criteria. The pooled ITF rates for GLASS stages I, II, and III are 5.52% (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.74%-8.07%), 7.39% (95% CI, 5.32%-10.18%), and 21.07% (95% CI, 13.48%-31.39%) respectively. The pooled LBP for GLASS stages I, II, and III are 68.43% (95% CI, 53.44%-80.37%), 41.52% (95% CI, 18.91%-68.37%), and 38.64% (95% CI, 19.83%-61.57%). The relative risk (RR) for ITF regarding composite GLASS I and II stages vs GLASS III is 3.96 (95% CI, 1.96-7.98). The RR for LBP of GLASS I and II versus GLASS stage III is 1.51 (95% CI, 0.86-2.64). Pooled major amputation rates for the composite GLASS I, II and GLASS III stages are 7.62% (95% CI, 5.44%-10.58%) and 15.43% (95% CI, 11.72%-20.05%) respectively, whereas the RR between GLASS I, II, and GLASS III stages is 1.84 (95% CI, 1.18-2.87).
CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrated that patients with CLTI undergoing endovascular interventions classified as GLASS stage III had almost a four-fold risk increase for ITF and 1.84 times the risk of major amputation compared with stages I and II. Additionally, GLASS classification correctly predicted ITF for all three stages, whereas it failed to predict stage I and II LBP outcomes. Safe conclusions regarding LBP cannot be drawn due to the low quality and small number of the included studies, necessitating further research. Furthermore, we displayed the importance of calcium moderator inclusion in the accurate classification of GLASS.

DOI10.1016/j.jvs.2022.07.183
Alternate JournalJ Vasc Surg
PubMed ID35953002

Contact

Secretariat of the School of Medicine
 

Connect

School of Medicine's presence in social networks
Follow Us or Connect with us.