English Abstract
Journal Article
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

[Lower limb critical ischaemia in patients of a pyoseptic surgery unit].

The authors retrospectively analysed therapeutic results of treatment in a total of 749 patients of the Pyoseptic Surgery Unit with signs of lower limb critical ischaemia. Of these, 101 (13.5%) patients were found to have a pronounced septic process (successfully arrested in 88 patients). A further 86 (11.5%) patients were diagnosed with extended trophic alterations making revascularization unpromising. The incidence rate of "major" amputations in this group amounted to 34.2%, with a lethality rate of 5.9%. Severe somatic pathology was revealed in 106 (14.2%) patients, with the incidence of "major" amputation in this group equalling 27.4% and lethality rate - 10.4%. The neuropathic form of diabetic foot syndrome with no evidence of ischaemia was noted observed in 174 (23.2%) patients, "major" amputations in this group were performed in 3 (1.7%) patients, with a lethality rate of 0.6%. Impossibility of revascularization had previously been ascertained in 98 (13.1%) patients; "major" amputations in this group were performed in 38 (38.8%) patients, with a lethality rate of 6.1%. Sixty-nine (9.2%) patients were admitted for further treatment after previously performed reconstructive operations, including unsuccessful ones; the frequency of major amputations and lethality rate in this group amounted to 13.0 and 2.9%, respectively. Of the total number of the analyzed patients, 207 (27.1%) required considering the problem concerning possibility of revascularization. Surgical revascularization was performed later on in 34 (16.7%) patients in this group, and the incidence of "major" amputations amounted to 5.9% remaining at the same level in the remote period of follow up. In patients who were not subjected to revascularization, the incidence of "major" amputations during 3 months amounted to 9.5% reaching 27.2% by 42 months of follow up. The survival rate after 42 months in these groups amounted to 72.7 and 68.0 %, respectively.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app