Search PubMedSearch

PubMed · 42692569

Transverse Tibial Transport for Limb Salvage in Ischemic Lower Extremity Disease: Technique, Mechanisms, and Clinical Outcomes-A Systematic Review.

Abstract

Transverse tibial transport (TTT) is a surgical technique derived from Ilizarov's distraction osteogenesis principles that stimulates angiogenesis and microcirculatory regeneration in the ischemic lower limb without directly manipulating macrovascular anatomy. By creating a proximal tibial cortical bone window and distracting it transversely using an external fixator, TTT triggers converging cascades of growth factor release, endothelial progenitor cell mobilization, and immunomodulation that translate into improved distal limb perfusion and wound healing. Combined TTT plus endovascular therapy improves amputation-free survival versus endovascular therapy alone. Prospective randomized trials and standardized international protocols are needed to consolidate TTT's role in multidisciplinary limb salvage pathways.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Samuel Raszka, Max Michalski, Charles Moon. 2026-07-17. Transverse Tibial Transport for Limb Salvage in Ischemic Lower Extremity Disease: Technique, Mechanisms, and Clinical Outcomes-A Systematic Review.. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocl.2026.05.007

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Efficacy and Safety of Rivaroxaban in Patients with Peripheral Artery Disease: A GRADE-assessed Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Peripheral artery disease (PAD) is a common atherosclerotic disorder characterized by progressive arterial narrowing in the limbs. This study aims to determine the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban, focusing on major cardiovascular events, limb outcomes, and bleeding risks. METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane, and EMBASE were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nonrandomized comparative studies that compared rivaroxaban, either alone or in combination with aspirin, to placebo or standard care such as antiplatelet therapy. Risk ratios and hazard ratios with 95% confidence intervals were pooled using R v4.5.1 with an appropriate random-effects model applied. Subgroup analyses were performed according to rivaroxaban plus aspirin versus rivaroxaban alone. RESULTS: A total of 39,991 participants across 6 studies were included. Compared with control, use of rivaroxaban was linked to a significant reduction in composite efficacy outcomes (relative risk [RR] = 0.84, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.78-0.91, P < 0.001), risk of acute limb ischemia (RR = 0.65, 95% CI 0.55-0.78, P < 0.001), and thromboembolism (RR = 0.60, 95% CI 0.38-0.97, P = 0.037). Although rivaroxaban plus aspirin failed to show a significant reduction in the risk of amputation, rivaroxaban alone reported a significant risk reduction (RR = 0.50, 95% CI 0.30-0.85, P = 0.003). However, its use was associated with a significantly higher risk of major bleeding (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.54, 95% CI 1.38-1.72, P < 0.001) and International Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis-defined bleeding (RR = 1.45, 95% CI 1.19-1.76, P < 0.001). No significant differences were observed for stroke, myocardial infarction, major adverse limb events, fatal bleeding, mortality, or cardiovascular mortality. CONCLUSION: Rivaroxaban-based therapy reduced the trial-defined composite efficacy outcome, acute limb ischemia, and thromboembolism in patients with PAD, but increased the risk of major bleeding. These findings support individualized use of rivaroxaban-based therapy in carefully selected patients, balancing ischemic and limb-protective benefits against bleeding risk.

Humans

Efficacy and Safety of Autologous Versus Prosthetic Grafts in the Repair of Popliteal Artery Aneurysms: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Popliteal artery aneurysms (PAAs) present a severe risk of progression to acute limb ischemia. Open surgery (OS) is the gold standard treatment; however, prosthetic grafts are acceptable in highly selected cases, especially when the great saphenous vein is not available. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing autologous versus prosthetic grafts for patency and limb preservation outcomes in patients with PAAs. MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central were systematically searched from inception through October 2024. Outcomes were pooled using a frequentist random-effects model as odds ratios, mean differences, and hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) on RStudio (Version 4.5.0). Risk-of-bias assessments were performed using ROBINS-I and MINORS. RESULTS: Twenty-two observational studies were pooled comprising 9,145 PAAs in 8,370 patients, of whom 6,434 (74.51%) were treated with autologous grafts and 2,200 (25.49%) with prosthetic grafts. Follow-up ranged from 12 to 86 months. Repair with autologous conduits significantly improved long-term primary patency (HR 3.93; P < 0.001), secondary patency (HR 6.02; P < 0.001), and long-term limb salvage (HR 2.69; P = 0.044) compared with prosthetic conduits. There were no significant differences in in-hospital amputation (P = 0.36), myocardial infarction (P = 0.61), mortality (P = 0.50), 2-year primary patency (P = 0.25), 5-year secondary patency (P = 0.06), or length of hospital stay (P = 0.95). Risk of bias was classified as moderate-to-high, reflecting confounding factors inherent to observational studies and moderate methodological quality by MINORS. Despite these limitations, treatment effects consistently favored autologous grafts in both short- and long-term analyses; however, caution is warranted given the limited number of available studies. CONCLUSION: The use of autologous conduits significantly favors both short-term and long-term efficacy and safety in the OS repair of PAAs. Given the limitations of the existing evidence, further comparative studies are needed.

Humans

Efficacy and safety of revascularization in patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia by kidney function.

BACKGROUND: The optimal revascularization strategy for patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) with chronic kidney disease (CKD) remains unknown. We evaluated whether the efficacy and safety of surgical vs endovascular revascularization differ by kidney function. METHODS: In this post hoc secondary analysis of BEST-CLI trial (NCT02060630), 1,704 patients with CLTI were stratified by baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR, mL/min/1.73 m&#xb2;): non-CKD (eGFR &#x2265; 90), mild-moderate CKD (eGFR 45-89), advanced CKD (eGFR < 45 or dialysis). The primary outcome was a composite of major adverse limb events (MALE) or death. We estimated the difference in restricted mean time lost (RMTL, in days) adjusted for inverse probability treatment weights. RESULTS: Surgical revascularization was significantly associated with fewer days with MALE or death in non-CKD (RMTL difference: -127.8 days; 95% CI -176.1, -79.6) and mild-moderate CKD (-63.2 days; 95% CI -104.7, -21.8) but not in advanced CKD (-16.4 days; 95% CI -78.8, 46.0; P interaction = .02). This attenuation reflected a diminishing mortality benefit with more severe CKD (P interaction = .01), whereas the association with fewer days with MALE remained consistent across CKD strata (P interaction = .34). Major adverse cardiovascular events and serious adverse events were more common with more severe CKD but did not differ significantly by treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical vs endovascular revascularization was consistently associated with fewer days with MALE across CKD strata. However, its association with mortality varied by kidney function, attenuating the overall benefit for the composite endpoint of MALE or death. These results support individualized revascularization strategies, but require prospective confirmation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The BEST CLI trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02060630).

Humans