Evidence Hub

Trends in Lower Extremity Artery Disease Repair Incidence, Comorbidity, and Mortality: A Danish Nationwide Cohort Study, 1996–2018

A. Møller, Nikolaj Eldrup, Jørn Wetterslev, D. Hellemann, Henning Nielsen, K. Rostgaard, H. Hjalgrim, O. Pedersen

Vascular Health and Risk Management, 2024

41,438 participants · 2 citations

Abstract

Background The prevalence of occlusive lower extremity artery disease (LEAD) is rising worldwide while European epidemiology data are scarce. We report incidence and mortality of LEAD repair in Denmark from 1996 through 2018, stratified on open aorto-iliac, open peripheral, and endovascular repair. Methods A nationwide cohort study of prospective data from population-based Danish registers covering 1996 to 2018. Comorbidity was assessed by Charlson’s Comorbidity Index (CCI). Incidence rate (IR) ratios and mortality rate ratios (MRR) were estimated by multivariable Poisson and Cox regression, respectively. Results We identified 41,438 unique patients undergoing 46,236 incident first-time LEAD repairs by either aorto-iliac- (n=5213), peripheral surgery (n=18,665) or percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA, n=22,358). From 1996 to 2018, the age- and sex-standardized IR for primary revascularization declined from 71.8 to 50.2 per 100,000 person-years (IRR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.66–0.75). Following a 2.5-fold IR increase of PTA from 1996 to 2010, all three repair techniques showed a declining trend after 2010. The declining IR was driven by decreasing LEAD repair due to claudication, and by persons aged below 80 years, while the IR increased in persons aged above 80 years (p interaction<0.001). LEAD repair was more frequent in men (IRRfemale vs male, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.77–0.80), which was consistent over calendar time (p interaction=0.41). Crude mortality decreased following…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 41,438 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free