[Effectiveness of prostanoids in patients with critical leg ischemia]

Prostanoids for critical limb ischaemia

BACKGROUND

Peripheral arterial occlusive disease (PAOD) is a common cause of morbidity and mortality due to cardiovascular disease in the general population. Although numerous treatments have been adopted for patients at different disease stages, no option other than amputation is available for patients presenting with critical limb ischaemia (CLI) unsuitable for rescue or reconstructive intervention. In this regard, prostanoids have been proposed as a therapeutic alternative, with the aim of increasing blood supply to the limb with occluded arteries through their vasodilatory, antithrombotic, and anti-inflammatory effects. This is an update of a review first published in 2010.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness and safety of prostanoids in patients with CLI unsuitable for rescue or reconstructive intervention.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, the Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Specialised Register (January 2017) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 1). In addition, we searched trials registries (January 2017) and contacted pharmaceutical manufacturers, in our efforts to identify unpublished data and ongoing trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials describing the efficacy and safety of prostanoids compared with placebo or other pharmacological control treatments for patients presenting with CLI without chance of rescue or reconstructive intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials, assessed trials for eligibility and methodological quality, and extracted data. We resolved disagreements by consensus or by consultation with a third review author.

MAIN RESULTS

For this update, 15 additional studies fulfilled selection criteria. We included in this review 33 randomised controlled trials with 4477 participants; 21 compared different prostanoids versus placebo, seven compared prostanoids versus other agents, and five conducted head-to-head comparisons using two different prostanoids.We found low-quality evidence that suggests no clear difference in the incidence of cardiovascular mortality between patients receiving prostanoids and those given placebo (risk ratio (RR) 0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.41 to 1.58). We found high-quality evidence showing that prostanoids have no effect on the incidence of total amputations when compared with placebo (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.09). Adverse events were more frequent with prostanoids than with placebo (RR 2.11, 95% CI 1.79 to 2.50; moderate-quality evidence). The most commonly reported adverse events were headache, nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea, flushing, and hypotension. We found moderate-quality evidence showing that prostanoids reduced rest-pain (RR 1.30, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.59) and promoted ulcer healing (RR 1.24, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.48) when compared with placebo, although these small beneficial effects were diluted when we performed a sensitivity analysis that excluded studies at high risk of bias. Additionally, we found evidence of low to very low quality suggesting the effects of prostanoids versus other active agents or versus other prostanoids because studies conducting these comparisons were few and we judged them to be at high risk of bias. None of the included studies assessed quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found high-quality evidence showing that prostanoids have no effect on the incidence of total amputations when compared against placebo. Moderate-quality evidence showed small beneficial effects of prostanoids for rest-pain relief and ulcer healing when compared with placebo. Additionally, moderate-quality evidence showed a greater incidence of adverse effects with the use of prostanoids, and low-quality evidence suggests that prostanoids have no effect on cardiovascular mortality when compared with placebo. None of the included studies reported quality of life measurements. The balance between benefits and harms associated with use of prostanoids in patients with critical limb ischaemia with no chance of reconstructive intervention is uncertain; therefore careful assessment of therapeutic alternatives should be considered. Main reasons for downgrading the quality of evidence were high risk of attrition bias and imprecision of effect estimates.

Effectiveness of prostaglandin E1 in patients with mixed arterial and venous ulcers of the lower limbs

Mixed arterial and venous ulcers of the lower limbs are present in around 15-30% of patients with chronic venous ulcers (CVUs) and are considered difficult-to-heal wounds. The aim of this study was to evaluate the results of the treatment of mixed arterial and venous ulcers of the lower limbs with prostaglandin E1 (PGE1) infusion. This study was carried out in 48 consecutive patients. Patients who showed intolerability to PGE1, and patients with peripheral neuropathy, blood or systemic diseases, malignancy and acute wound infections or necrotic tissue on the wound bed were excluded. The patients were separated at random into two main groups: group I (25 patients) received standard treatment and PGE1 infusion. Group II (23 patients) received only standard treatment. Pre-treatment data indicated the area of ulceration. The number of healed ulcers and the variation in the area of ulceration were considered as endpoints. The endpoints were noticed after 120 days from the beginning of treatment. Healing occurred in 80% of limbs of group I and in 52·2% of limbs of group II patients. The average reduction in area was 92% versus 60% in patients of group I and II, respectively. During the whole treatment period, the incidence of adverse events was 8% in group I: there was one case of headache and one case of headache and hypotension combined. No side effects were recorded in patients of group II. In conclusion, PGE1 infusion is a determinant in the reduction of the healing time of mixed ulcers of the lower limbs.

A case of peripheral gangrene and osteomyelitis secondary to terlipressin therapy in advanced liver disease

Variceal bleeding and hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) are serious and life-threatening complications of advanced liver disease. Terlipressin is widely used to manage both acute variceal bleeding and HRS due to its potency and long duration of action. The most severe (though rare) adverse event is ischemia. The present report describes the case of a patient with gangrene and osteomyelitis secondary to terlipressin therapy. A 71-year-old male with alcoholic liver cirrhosis (Child-Pugh B) and chronic hepatitis C was admitted due to a drowsy mental status. The patient had several experiences of orthopedic surgery. His creatinine level had gradually elevated to 4.02 mg/dL, and his urine output decreased to 500 mL/24 hr. The patient was diagnosed as having grade III hepatic encephalopathy (HE) and type II HRS. Terlipressin and albumin were administered intravenously to treat the HRS over 11 days. Although he recovered from the HE and HRS, the patient developed peripheral gangrene and osteomyelitis in both feet. His right toes were cured with the aid of rescue therapy, but his left three toes had to be amputated. Peripheral gangrene and osteomyelitis secondary to terlipressin therapy occur only rarely, and there is no specific rescue therapy for these conditions. Thus, attention should be paid to the possibility of ischemia of the skin and bone during or after terlipressin therapy.