Diabetic versus nondiabetic limb-threatening ischemia: outcome of percutaneous iliac intervention.

Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of iliac angioplasty and outcomes in diabetic patients and nondiabetic patients with limb-threatening ischemia.
Materials and Methods: Records of 91 consecutive patients with limb-threatening ischemia (rest pain, nonhealing ulceration, or gangrene) who, during a 6-year period, underwent iliac angioplasty of hemodynamically significant lesions were reviewed. Stents were placed in patients with suboptimal findings at angioplasty. Sixty-eight (75%) of the 91 patients were diabetic. Life table analysis and log-rank significance tests were used to compare rates of primary iliac artery patency, primary and secondary graft patency, limb salvage, and survival in diabetic patients versus nondiabetic patients.
Results: One hundred seven iliac lesions were treated with percutaneous angioplasty. Ten iliac stents were placed because of suboptimal results at angioplasty. The mean time of follow-up was 20 months (range, 2-62 months). Sixty-eight patients (75%) underwent peripheral reconstruction. Outcomes were comparable in both patient groups for primary iliac patencies at 4 years (diabetic patients, 85%; nondiabetic patients, 76%; p = .5), primary and secondary graft patencies at 4 years (diabetic patients, 65% and 73%, respectively; nondiabetic patients, 74% and 100%, respectively; p = .7 and .19, respectively), 4-year limb-salvage rates (diabetic patients, 93%; nondiabetic patients, 79%; p = .07). Major complications of angioplasty occurred in four patients (4.4%).
Conclusion: Outcomes of iliac angioplasty and limb-salvage rates were comparable for diabetic patients and nondiabetic patients who underwent current methods of iliac angioplasty and infrainguinal reconstruction.