• P Kauhanen, T Peräkylä, and M Lepäntalo.
• Fourth Department of Surgery, Helsinki University Central Hospital, Finland.
• Ann Chir Gynaecol. 1995 Jan 1;84(4):335-8.

AbstractThe importance of the distinction between acute embolic ischaemia and acute on chronic ischaemia caused by a thrombus superimposed on an arteriosclerotic stenoses has been emphasized during the recent years, as the differentiation should affect the choice of surgical treatment. A retrospective attempt was made to differentiate between acute ischaemia (AI = embolism) and acute on chronic ischaemia (AOCI = thrombosis) of the leg by categorizing the patients according to the clinical characteristics they presented. The material consisted of 194 ischaemic lower limbs of 189 patients who underwent a balloon-catheter thromboembolectomy because of sudden arterial occlusion. The retrospective diagnosis of AI was made in 94 (48%) and AOCI in 69 (36%) cases. The preoperative assessment could not be done in 43 (22%) patients by surgeon working at the emergency room. The retrospective distinction was impossible in 31 (16%) patients. The preoperative diagnosis was in better agreement with the retrospective category when AI, as opposed to AOCI, was the aetiology of occlusion (70% vs 46%). The results of the present study emphasize the difficulties of clinical assessment. These findings suggest a routine angiography as an evaluative tool in the planning of optimal management especially as most of the patients today can be treated simultaneously by thrombolysis.

29 keywords...

hide…