Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 14, 2025

Predicting Amputation using Local Circulating Mononuclear Progenitor Cells in Angioplasty-treated Patients with Critical Limb Ischemia
Published on: September 22, 2020
Competing risk analysis to estimate amputation incidence and risk in lower-extremity peripheral artery disease
Santiago Callegari1, Kim G Smolderen1,2, Jacob Cleman1
1Vascular Medicine Outcomes (VAMOS) Program, Section of Cardiovascular Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA.
Insights
Standard statistical methods overestimate major amputation risk in peripheral artery disease patients, particularly those with chronic limb-threatening ischemia. Competing risk analysis provides a more accurate assessment of amputation risk in vascular outcomes research.
Area of Science:
- Vascular Surgery
- Biostatistics
- Outcomes Research
Background:
- Peripheral artery disease (PAD) patients have high risks of amputation and mortality.
- Mortality is often not considered a competing risk in standard vascular outcome assessments.
- This study investigates the impact of competing risks on major amputation risk estimation in PAD.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare standard time-to-event analysis with competing risk analysis for major amputation risk in PAD.
- To determine if standard methods overestimate amputation risk, especially in chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI).
- To evaluate the accuracy of amputation risk prediction considering mortality as a competing risk.
Main Methods:
- Utilized data from 7273 CLTI and 5095 non-CLTI patients from the Vascular Quality Initiative registry (2017-2018).
- Obtained mortality and amputation data from Medicare claims.
- Compared 2-year cumulative incidence and risk of major amputation using standard (Kaplan-Meier, Cox regression) and competing risk (Aalen-Johansen, Fine-Gray) models.
Main Results:
- In CLTI patients, standard analysis overestimated 2-year major amputation cumulative incidence by 20.5% (age ≥75) and 13.7% (age <75).
- Standard Cox regression overestimated adjusted 2-year major amputation risk by 7.0% in older CLTI patients.
- Overestimations were also observed in non-CLTI cohorts, though to a lesser extent.
Conclusions:
- Standard time-to-event analysis inflates the incidence and risk of major amputation in PAD patients, particularly those with CLTI.
- Competing risk analysis offers a more precise method for estimating amputation risk in vascular research.
- Accurate risk assessment is crucial for managing PAD patients and improving vascular outcomes.
Abstract:
Background: Patients with peripheral artery disease face high amputation and mortality risk. When assessing vascular outcomes, consideration of mortality as a competing risk is not routine. We hypothesize standard time-to-event methods will overestimate major amputation risk in chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) and non-CLTI. Methods: Patients undergoing peripheral vascular intervention from 2017 to 2018 were abstracted from the Vascular Quality Initiative registry and stratified by mean age (⩾ 75 vs < 75 years). Mortality and amputation data were obtained from Medicare claims. The 2-year cumulative incidence function (CIF) and risk of major amputation from standard time-to-event analysis (1 - Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression) were compared with competing risk analysis (Aalen-Johansen and Fine-Gray model) in CLTI and non-CLTI. Results: A total of 7273 patients with CLTI and 5095 with non-CLTI were included. At 2-year follow up, 13.1% of patients underwent major amputation and 33.4% died without major amputation in the CLTI cohort; 1.3% and 10.7%, respectively, in the non-CLTI cohort. In CLTI, standard time-to-event analysis overestimated the 2-year CIF of major amputation by 20.5% and 13.7%, respectively, in patients ⩾ 75 and < 75 years old compared with competing risk analysis. The standard Cox regression overestimated adjusted 2-year major amputation risk in patients ⩾ 75 versus < 75 years old by 7.0%. In non-CLTI, the CIF was overestimated by 7.1% in patients ⩾ 75 years, and the adjusted risk was overestimated by 5.1% compared with competing risk analysis. Conclusions: Standard time-to-event analysis overestimates the incidence and risk of major amputation, especially in CLTI. Competing risk analyses are alternative approaches to estimate accurately amputation risk in vascular outcomes research.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Pre-Procedural Guidelines for Assessing Blood Pressure
Pulse Assessment Sites

