Search

To review and describe the available literature on cost-utility analysis of revascularization and non-revascularization treatment approaches in chronic limb-threatening ischemia.A systematic review was performed on cost-utility analysis studies evaluating revascularization (open surgery or endovascular), major lower extremity amputation, or conservative management in adult chronic limb-threatening ischemia patients. Six bibliographic databases and online registries were searched for English language articles up to August 2021. The outcome for cost-utility analysis was quality-adjusted in life years. Procedures were compared using incremental cost-effectiveness ratios which were converted to 2021 United States dollars. Study reporting quality was assessed using the 2022 Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards statement. The study was registered in International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42021273602).Three trial-based and five model-based studies were included for review. Studies met between 14/28 and 20/28 criteria of the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards CHEERS statement. Only one study was written according to standardized reporting guidelines. Most studies evaluated infrainguinal disease, and adopted a health care provider perspective. There was a large variation in the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios presented across studies. Open surgical revascularization (incremental cost-effectiveness ratios: $3,678, $58,828, and $72,937), endovascular revascularization (incremental cost-effectiveness ratios: $52,036, $125,329, and $149,123), and mixed open or endovascular revascularization (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio: $8,094) maybe more cost-effective than conservative management.The application of cost-utility analyses in chronic limb-threatening ischemia is in its infancy. Revascularization in infrainguinal disease may be favored over major lower extremity amputation or conservative management. However, data is inadequate to support recommendations for a specific treatment. This review identifies short and long-term considerations to address the current state of evidence. Cost-utility analysis is an important tool in healthcare policy and should be encouraged amongst the vascular surgical community.

The aim of this study is to review illness perceptions (IPs) in chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) patients undergoing revascularization (open surgical or endovascular), major lower extremity amputation, or conservative management.MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, WOS, and Scopus databases were searched from inception to August 20, 2021 for studies evaluating IP in CLTI according to Leventhal's common sense model (CSM). Since only 1 study was identified, a post hoc secondary literature search of MEDLINE was performed for reviews of IP in cardiovascular disease and diabetes to identify potential learning points for future research. All studies underwent narrative synthesis guided by tabulated data.One study and 7 reviews were included from the primary and secondary literature searches, respectively. Timeline and controllability were the main aspects of IP that predict prosthetic use in CLTI patients, more so at 6 months than 1 month. Other reviews in cardiovascular disease and diabetes identified important targets for future research: (1) factors that affect IP and whether IP can be used as an outcome measure, (2) relationship between IP and clinician-reported and patient-reported outcomes, and (3) methods to educate and change maladaptive IP. The importance of using valid and reliable measures of IP that encompass all components of Leventhal's' CSM was stressed.Knowledge of IP in CLTI patients is severely limited in contrast to other fields in cardiovascular disease and diabetes. This review helps to close this gap by raising awareness of IP and its importance within the vascular surgical community, and by providing a framework for future studies.