Author

Year

Period

Type of study

Vascular Technique

Type of patients: Diabetics (D),

All pathologies

Ischemic stage

Treated limbs

Follow-up (months)

Clinical benefit of DR versus

IR (p)

- Healing (H)

- Limb Salvage (LS)

Attinger

2006

-

Retrospective

Surgery

D.

Diabetic wounds Rutherford 5, 6.

56

6

p = 0.0095 (H)

p = 0.016 (LS)

Neville

2009

-

Retrospective

Surgery

All pathologies

TP < 50,

ischemic wounds

52

24

p = 0.03 (LS)

Varela

2010

2005-2008

Retrospective

Surgery + Endovascular

All pathologies

TP< 50,

ischemic wounds

76

24

p = 0.008 (H)

p = 0.02 (LS)

Iida

2012

2004-2010

Retrospective

Endovascular

All pathologies

TP < 50,

ischemic wounds

326

48

p = 0.002 (H)

p = 0.03 (LS)

Blanes

2011

-

Retrospective

Endovascular

All pathologies

Rutherford 5, 6.

34

21

P > 0.05

P > 0.05

Alexandrescu

2011

2001-2010

Retrospective

Endovascular

D.

Diabetic wounds Rutherford 5, 6.

232

54

p = 0.018 (H)

p = 0.030 (LS)

Azuma

2012

2003-2009

Retrospective

Surgery

All pathologies

Rutherford 5, 6.

96

24

p = 0.185 (H)

Lejay

2013

2003-2009

Retrospective

Surgery

D.

Diabetic wounds Rutherford 5, 6

58

12

p = 0.01 (H)

p = 0.003 (LS)

Kabra

2013

2007-2008

Prospective

Surgery + Endovascular

All pathologies

Rutherford 4-6.

64

6

p = 0.021 (H)

p = 0.06

Söderström

2013

2007-2011

Retrospective

Endovascular

D.

Diabetic wounds Rutherford 5, 6.

168

12

p = 0.001 (H)

Jeon

2016

2011-2013

Retrospective

Surgery

D.

Diabetic wounds Rutherford 5, 6.

82

13

P < 0.05 (H)

Elbadawi

2018

2014-2016

Prospective

Endovascular

All pathologies

Rutherford 5, 6.

212

12

p = 0.02 (H)

p = 0.148 (LS)