Efficacy and Safety of Alprostadil in Patients with Peripheral Arterial Occlusive Disease Fontaine Stage IV: Results of a Placebo Controlled Randomised Multicentre Trial (ESPECIAL)

التفاصيل البيبلوغرافية
العنوان: Efficacy and Safety of Alprostadil in Patients with Peripheral Arterial Occlusive Disease Fontaine Stage IV: Results of a Placebo Controlled Randomised Multicentre Trial (ESPECIAL)
المؤلفون: A. Pokrovsky, A. Ratushnyuk, G. Hamm, J. W. G. Bentz, O. Randerath, H. Lawall, Frank Grieger, P. Checinski
المصدر: European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery. 53:559-566
بيانات النشر: Elsevier BV, 2017.
سنة النشر: 2017
مصطلحات موضوعية: Male, medicine.medical_specialty, Time Factors, Vasodilator Agents, 030204 cardiovascular system & hematology, Placebo, Placebo group, Amputation, Surgical, Double blind, Peripheral Arterial Disease, 030207 dermatology & venereal diseases, 03 medical and health sciences, 0302 clinical medicine, Double-Blind Method, Peripheral arterial occlusive disease, Humans, Medicine, In patient, Prospective Studies, Alprostadil, Vascular Patency, Aged, Wound Healing, business.industry, Middle Aged, Limb Salvage, Confidence interval, Surgery, Europe, Treatment Outcome, Anesthesia, Cohort, Female, Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine, business, Stage iv
الوصف: Objectives The aim was to assess the efficacy and safety of alprostadil in patients with peripheral arterial occlusive disease (PAOD) Fontaine Stage IV. Methods This was a multinational, prospective, randomised, double blind, placebo controlled, parallel group trial. Patients with Stage IV PAOD were equally randomised to either 4 weeks of alprostadil treatment twice daily or to placebo treatment twice daily. The primary efficacy variables were the rate of complete healing of all necrosis and ulceration 12 weeks after the end of treatment and the frequency of major amputations 24 weeks after the end of treatment. Results A total of 840 patients were randomised between 2004 and 2013. At baseline, no major differences between treatment groups were found. The rate of “complete healing” was 18.4% in patients on alprostadil and 17.2% in patients on placebo. The rates of “major amputations” were 12.6% in patients on alprostadil and 14.6% in patients on placebo. The adjusted difference between alprostadil and placebo including their 95% confidence intervals was 1.1 (−4.0 to 6.3) for “complete healing” and −2.1 (−6.7 to 2.5) for “major amputations.” In the subgroup of diabetic patients the rates of major amputations were numerically lower in the alprostadil than placebo group (10.6% vs. 17.4%). Within the total cohort a non-significant difference in “decrease in ulcer area ≥50%” was reached in 30.2% of patients on alprostadil and in 24.3% of patients on placebo at end of treatment. Conclusions In this study, superiority of alprostadil over placebo could not be shown. Nevertheless, a slight numerical but not clinically relevant advantage for alprostadil emerged from the “area decrease of ulcers by ≥ 50%,” indicating that a healing effect may have started. The results have to be considered in the light of several limitations in study design and conduct.
تدمد: 1078-5884
URL الوصول: https://explore.openaire.eu/search/publication?articleId=doi_dedup___::4a5a5771c481d4284e5cc9ab313e0741
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejvs.2016.12.035
حقوق: OPEN
رقم الأكسشن: edsair.doi.dedup.....4a5a5771c481d4284e5cc9ab313e0741
قاعدة البيانات: OpenAIRE