One-Year Readmission after Open and Endovascular Revascularization for Critical Limb Ischemia

Background: Lower extremity revascularization for critical limb ischemia (CLI) remains a subject of clinical equipoise. Readmissions and repeat lower extremity revascularization increase the cost of care and decrease the value of initial treatment. This study examines readmissions and repeat inpatient revascularization and major amputation up to 1 year after initial open and endovascular lower extremity revascularization. Methods: The 2014 Nationwide Readmissions Database (NRD) was reviewed. The NRD provides all subsequent readmissions of any hospitalization for the calendar year. A cohort of patients undergoing lower extremity revascularization in January only was selected based on International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes. Patients were divided into open and endovascular groups. Readmissions for repeat lower extremity revascularization (RFR) were identified based on procedural codes. Open and endovascular lower extremity revascularization were compared in terms of patient characteristics as well as readmissions, RFR, major amputation, and inpatient mortality at 1 year. Risk-adjusted outcomes accounting for differences in age, gender, income, and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) were derived using regression analysis. Results: There were 1,668 open and 1,410 endovascular lower extremity revascularizations. Patients in the endovascular group were significantly older (P < 0.01), more likely to be women (P < 0.01), and had higher CCI (P < 0.01). Patients undergoing endovascular lower extremity revascularization had significantly higher readmission rate (49 vs. 33.7, P < 0.01) and higher mortality (10.4 vs. 5.3, P < 0.01). Readmitted patients after endovascular lower extremity revascularization had significantly higher mean number of repeat readmissions compared to open lower extremity revascularization (2.49 +/- 0.12 vs. 2.13 +/- 0.08, P = 0.01). There was no difference in RFR (P = 0.82) or major amputation (P = 0.19). Open revascularization was independently associated with decreased readmission (odds ratio = 0.55 [0.43-0.71]) compared to endovascular. However, there was no significant association between the type of lower extremity revascularization and major amputation or RFR. Conclusions: Endovascular lower extremity revascularization for CLI is performed on older and sicker patients and seems to be associated with increased readmission at 1 year compared to open lower extremity revascularization. Regardless of the initial modality of treatment, patients are likely to undergo at least 1 revascularization during readmissions.