Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 8, 2026

Computerized Dynamic Posturography for Postural Control Assessment in Patients with Intermittent Claudication
Published on: December 11, 2013
Medical comorbidities but not interventions adversely affect survival in patients with intermittent claudication
Marcus R Kret1, Kenneth H Perrone, Amir F Azarbal
1Department of Surgery, Division of Vascular Surgery, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Ore.
Insights
Intervention for intermittent claudication (IC) does not impact survival or limb salvage. While reintervention is common, immediate or delayed intervention for IC is safe and does not increase major amputation risk.
Area of Science:
- Vascular Surgery
- Interventional Cardiology
- Public Health
Background:
- Intermittent claudication (IC) is a prevalent condition linked to reduced survival.
- While progression to critical limb ischemia (CLI) is infrequent, many IC patients opt for intervention.
- The impact of intervention on survival and limb salvage in IC patients remains debated.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare survival and limb salvage rates among IC patients who received no intervention (NI), immediate intervention (II), or delayed intervention (DI).
- To analyze patient demographics and comorbidities in relation to intervention strategies for IC.
- To evaluate the influence of intervention on long-term outcomes in IC patients.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective analysis of 262 IC patients from a university practice (2007-2011).
- Exclusion of patients with prior interventions or CLI.
- Classification into NI, II, and DI groups with analysis of demographics, Charlson comorbidity index, survival, and reintervention rates.
Main Results:
- DI patients were younger and less diabetic; NI patients had higher comorbidity scores.
- Hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and diabetes were associated with decreased survival across all groups.
- Median survival was highest in the DI group (143 months) and lowest in the NI group (92 months).
- Primary patency rates at 1 and 5 years were similar for II and DI groups.
- Reintervention rates were comparable between II and DI groups; no major amputations occurred.
Conclusions:
- Progression to CLI is uncommon in IC patients.
- Intervention for IC does not adversely affect survival or lead to major amputations.
- Reintervention is frequent but similar for immediate and delayed intervention strategies.
Objective:
Intermittent claudication (IC) is common and associated with decreased survival. While patients with IC infrequently progress to critical limb ischemia (CLI), many elect to pursue intervention initially or during follow-up. However, controversy exists as to whether intervention in patients with IC adversely impacts survival or limb salvage. The purpose of this study was to characterize patient demographics and comorbidities with respect to differences in survival and limb salvage among patients who elect no intervention (NI) vs those electing immediate intervention (II) or delayed intervention (DI) for IC.
Methods:
Patients referred to a university practice for limb ischemia were identified via a query of the electronic medical record from 2007 to 2011. Patients with prior lower extremity interventions or CLI were excluded. IC patients were classified according to intervention: NI during follow-up, II, and DI. Patient demographics, Charlson morbidity index, survival, and reintervention rates were analyzed.
Results:
A total of 262 of 1320 patients met inclusion criteria. Thirty patients with possible IC were believed to have nonarterial related symptoms. Study patients included 132 with NI, 62 with II, and 38 with DI. DI patients were younger and less frequently diabetic (median age, 65.5 years, 63.5 years, 58.0 years; P = .002; diabetes, 43.2%, 39.5%, 22.6%; P = .02 for NI, II, and DI, respectively). NI patients had higher Charlson comorbidity scores (P < .05). Hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and diabetes were associated with decreased survival in all groups (P < .05). Median survival was greatest for DI patients and least for NI patients (NI 92 months, II 95 months, DI 143 months; log-rank = .015). Primary patency of interventions at 1 and 5 years were equal for II and DI patients (1 year, II 80% vs DI 79%; 5 years, II 45% vs DI 50%; P = .9). Reintervention was common with rates similar between the II and DI groups (P > .05). Four of 38 DI patients required minor amputation for progression to CLI. There were no major amputations in any group.
Conclusions:
Progression to CLI is uncommon in IC. Survival of claudicants is decreased by diabetes, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia but not by intervention for IC. Reintervention is common in treated IC patients but no different among those undergoing II and DI. Intervention did not lead to major amputation. II or DI in IC patients does not affect survival or major amputation.
Related Concept Videos
Peripheral Artery Disease III: Interprofessional Care
Peripheral Arterial Disease II: Clinical Manifestations and Diagnostic Evaluation
Peripheral Artery Disease IV: Nursing Management
Peripheral Artery Disease V: Postoperative Nursing Management
Peripheral Artery Disease I: Introduction
Atherosclerosis IV: Nursing Management
