Active smoking is associated with higher rates of incomplete wound healing after endovascular treatment of critical limb ischemia

Abstract

The association between active smoking and wound healing in critical limb ischemia (CLI) is unknown. Our objective was to examine in a retrospective cohort study whether active smoking is associated with higher incomplete wound healing rates in patients with CLI undergoing endovascular interventions. Smoking status was assessed at the time of the intervention, comparing active to no active smoking, and also during follow-up visits at 6 and 9 months. Cox regression analysis was conducted to compare the incomplete wound healing rates of the two groups during follow-up. A total of 264 patients (active smokers: n = 41) were included. Active smoking was associated with higher rates of incomplete wound healing in the 6-month univariate Cox regression analysis (hazard ratio (HR) for incomplete wound healing: 4.54; 95% CI: 1.41–14.28; p = 0.012). The 6-month Kaplan–Meier (KM) estimates for incomplete wound healing were 91.1% for the active smoking group versus 66% for the non-current smoking group. Active smoking was also associated with higher rates of incomplete wound healing in the 9-month univariable (HR for incomplete wound healing: 2.32; 95% CI: 1.11–4.76; p = 0.026) and multivariable analysis (HR for incomplete wound healing: 9.09; 95% CI: 1.06–100.0; p = 0.044). The 9-month KM estimates for incomplete wound healing were 75% in the active smoking group versus 54% in the non-active smoking group. In conclusion, active smoking status at the time of intervention in patients with CLI is associated with higher rates of incomplete wound healing during both 6- and 9-month follow-up.

Keywords

amputation free survival critical limb ischemia (CLI)endovascular interventions infrapopliteal disease smoking tobacco wound healing

Introduction

Peripheral artery disease (PAD) affects between 5% and 10% of the adult population (> 40 years old) in the United States.¹ Although smoking prevalence has decreased by more than 50% during the last half-century, close to 20% of the adult population in the United States still actively smokes. Cigarette smoking is the most important preventable risk factor for the development and progression of PAD.^2–6 Smokers have more than double the risk for PAD compared to non-smokers,^2,7–9 while between 50% and 90% of the PAD population are either current or past smokers.^2,10–14 Previous studies have shown that smoking cessation – when achieved – associates with improved limb and cardiovascular outcomes.^15–20

Notwithstanding the plethora of data in the coronary artery disease (CAD) population, for PAD and critical limb ischemia (CLI) data are scarce. A Swedish study of 343 patients with intermittent claudication showed that smoking cessation was associated with a decreased risk for development of CLI.¹⁶ Other studies have shown that active smoking among the CLI population is associated with worse limb outcomes after open surgery.^19,21,22 Smoking cessation in patients with CLI decreases mortality compared to continuation of smoking – to a much higher degree compared to cessation in the general PAD population.¹⁵

Several mechanisms have been reported that explain the association between smoking and poor wound healing. Smoking is associated with lower levels of subcutaneous collagen²³ and significantly reduces cutaneous microvascular function, fostering an environment conducive to the ischemic ulcerations associated with PAD.^24–29 Even after optimal endovascular revascularization, there are still a significant percentage of patients with CLI (40–50%) with either delayed healing or worsening of tissue loss.^25,30,31 Up to 70% of all the lower extremity major amputations are secondary to non-healing wounds in patients with CLI.³² With this study, we assessed the relationship of active smoking status to wound healing for patients with CLI undergoing endovascular revascularization.

Methods

The protocol for this study was approved by The University of California, Davis Medical Center Institutional Review Board, with a waiver of informed consent.

This was a single-center retrospective study including all patients with CLI who underwent lower extremity endovascular intervention from June 2006 to June 2014. Patients who were active smokers at the time of the endovascular intervention were compared to patients who were not active smokers.

Definitions and study outcomes

Patients who had isolated diagnostic angiography, those with presentation suggestive of acute limb ischemia, and those with intermittent claudication were excluded. CLI was classified as Rutherford category 4 to 6 (ischemic rest pain, minor tissue loss, or major tissue loss, respectively). Data collection from the electronic medical records and angiograms was performed by experienced abstractors and verified by board certified endovascular interventionalists. Smoking status was assessed retrospectively based on patient self-report in the clinic appointments, at baseline, and after 6 and 9 months of follow-up. If a patient denied smoking at the last clinic appointment before the endovascular intervention, the patient was registered as a non-active smoker (without a specific cut-off in the time interval from smoking status documentation until the time of the procedure). Other smoking-related variables that were recorded included number of cigarettes smoked per day at the time of the intervention, pack-years at the time of the intervention, and willingness to quit smoking (which was collected from the chart based on the documentation). Since this was a retrospective chart review, data on wound healing were collected by retrospectively looking at the chart documentation and abstracting information regarding the status of the wound (worse, better, similar, complete or incomplete wound healing). No pictures were available for most of the cases. The primary outcomes of the study were incomplete wound healing after 6 and 9 months of follow-up. Secondary outcomes included amputation, bypass, and major adverse limb events (MALE) rates defined as any of the following: major lower extremity limb amputation above the level of the ankle joint, thrombolysis for acute limb ischemia, thrombectomy or bypass surgery.

Statistical analysis

Continuous variables were described with mean ± SD and compared with the Wilcoxon rank sum test, while categorical variables were described with absolute and relative frequencies and compared using a chi-squared or Fisher exact test. The association between baseline demographic, clinical or angiographic characteristics included smoking-related variables and outcomes of interest was examined with a Cox regression analysis. Patients with missing data regarding their smoking habits or the outcomes were not included in the Cox regression analysis. Kaplan–Meier (KM) survival analysis was performed and the KM estimates for 6 and 9 months were calculated. Variables with a significant (p < 0.05) association in the univariable analysis or variables that were considered to have a clinically important association with wound healing were included in the multivariable model. A separate sensitivity analysis was performed among patients who were actively smoking at the time of the procedure. Patients who were still smokers after 6 and 9 months of follow-up were compared after each endpoint to their peers who had stopped smoking. The results are presented as hazard ratios (HR) and 95% CI for the Cox regression analysis. For all tests, p < 0.05 was considered significant. All analyses were performed using Stata software (release 14.1; StataCorp LP, College Station, TX, USA).

Results

In this cohort, 264 patients (active smokers: n = 41; non-active smokers: n = 223) with 554 lesions with intervention between 2006 and 2014 were included in the analysis. Baseline demographic, clinical, and laboratory characteristics are presented in Table 1. This was a largely male (66%), overweight (mean body mass index (BMI): 27.38 ± 6.30) cohort, highly prevalent with diabetes mellitus (DM) (70%), hypertension (HTN) (85%), and CAD (54%). Non-active smokers had a higher mean age (69.9 vs 65.8; p = 0.041). Active smokers were more likely to have chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (27% vs 8%; p = 0.001) and to receive multivessel intervention compared to non-active smokers (95% vs 75%; p = 0.004). Stenting rates were equal between the two groups (14% vs 17%). Angiographic and procedural characteristics are presented in Table 2.

Table 1.

Baseline characteristics of the included patients (patient level analysis).

Variables	Total, %(n = 264)	Active smokers, %(n = 41)	Non-active smokers, %(n = 223)	p-value
Age, years	69.2 ± 11.5	65.8 ± 10.8	69.9 ± 11.5	0.041
Female sex	34 (90/264)	34 (14/41)	34 (76/223)	0.993
Non-white	57 (133/231)	47 (16/34)	59 (117/197)	0.179
BMI, kg/m²	27.38 ± 6.30	26.16 ± 5.01	27.61 ± 6.49	0.286
Diabetes	70 (181/259)	67 (27/40)	70 (154/219)	0.721
HbA1c	7.8 ± 2.26	8.6 ± 2.80	7.7 ± 2.17	0.388
Hypertension	85 (226/264)	93 (38/41)	84 (188/223)	0.160
SBP, mmHg	134 ± 21.10	138 ± 20.84	133 ± 21.11	0.228
Carotid stenosis	10 (26/249)	15 (6/40)	9 (20/209)	0.303
Coronary artery disease	54 (141/262)	58 (24/41)	53 (117/221)	0.509
Congestive heart failure	34 (90/262)	29 (12/41)	35 (78/221)	0.456
Aspirin use	75 (197/264)	78 (32/41)	74 (165/223)	0.583
Clopidogrel use	43 (114/264)	32 (13/41)	45 (101/223)	0.107
Dyslipidemia	67 (177/262)	68 (28/41)	67 (149/221)	0.913
Triglycerides, mg/dL	127 ± 62.00	141 ± 80.39	125 ± 59.29	0.477
LDL, mg/dL	81.23 ± 37.90	80 ± 27.26	81.40 ± 35.95	0.805
HDL, mg/dL	36.96 ± 13.11	36.30 ± 12.05	37.05 ± 13.31	0.854
Statin use	66 (162/244)	66 (27/41)	66 (135/203)	0.936
ESRD	25 (65/263)	12 (5/40)	27 (60/223)	0.052
Cancer	7 (19/264)	12 (5/40)	6 (14/223)	0.178
COPD	11 (30/264)	27 (11/41)	8 (19/223)	0.001
Stroke history	21 (55/264)	19 (8/41)	21 (47/223)	0.821
Myocardial infarction history	24 (56/228)	25 (7/28)	24 (49/200)	0.954
Procedure type				0.568
Elective procedure	28 (75/264)	34 (14/41)	27 (61/223)
Urgent procedure	67 (177/264)	63 (26/41)	68 (151/223)
Emergent procedure	5 (12/264)	2 (1/41)	5 (11/223)
Multivessel intervention	78 (205/263)	95 (39/41)	75 (166/222)	0.004
Toe pressure, mmHg	40.27 ± 28.73	40.64 ± 32.38	40.22 ± 28.37	0.963
Preprocedural ABI	0.67 ± 0.29	0.64 ± 0.31	0.68 ± 0.29	0.930
Run-off	1.22 ± 0.79	1.52 ± 0.90	1.17 ± 0.76	0.118
Rutherford category at baseline				0.785
Rutherford 4 at baseline	14 (31/225)	18 (5/28)	13 (26/197)
Rutherford 5 at baseline	72 (163/225)	68 (19/28)	73 (144/197)
Rutherford 6 at baseline	14 (31/225)	14 (4/28)	14 (27/197)

Categorical variables are expressed as absolute and relative frequencies. Continuous variables are expressed as mean and SD.

ABI, ankle–brachial index; BMI, body mass index; COPD, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; ESRD, end-stage renal disease; HDL, high-density lipoprotein, LDL, low-density lipoprotein; SBP, systolic blood pressure.

Table 2.

Angiographic and procedural characteristics (lesion level).

Variables	Total(n = 554)	Active smokers(n = 91)	Non-active smokers(n = 463)	p-value
Chronic total occlusions	41 (170/419)	35 (26/74)	42 (144/345)	0.294
TASC C/D	52 (115/223)	50 (23/46)	52 (92/177)	0.811
Moderate/severe calcification	30 (126/419)	32 (24/74)	30 (102/345)	0.626
Thrombus	5 (19/421)	3 (2/74)	5 (17/347)	0.409
Thrombolysis	3 (11/435)	1 (1/78)	3 (10/357)	0.439
Stent placed	16 (72/437)	14 (11/78)	17 (61/359)	0.734
Maximal stent diameter (mm)	3.52 ± 1.36	3.81 ± 1.39	3.46 ± 1.35	0.029
Flouro time (min)	37.31 ± 25.47	39.38 ± 21.51	36.94 ± 26.13	0.148
Contrast (mL)	180.81 ± 92.68	207.70 ± 112.65	175.71 ± 87.62	0.021
Atherectomy	18 (81/437)	20 (16/78)	18 (65/359)	0.620
Location of the lesion				0.317
Popliteal	2 (12/554)	3 (3/91)	2 (9/463)
Tibial	50 (278/554)	41 (37/91)	52 (241/463)
TP trunk	21 (119/554)	27 (25/91)	20 (94/463)
Peroneal	21 (114/554)	23 (21/91)	20 (93/463)
Dorsalis pedis	5 (26/554)	5 (5/91)	5 (21/463)
Lateral plantar	1 (5/554)	0 (0/91)	1 (5/463)
Procedural success	96 (529/553)	97 (88/91)	95 (441/462)	0.593
Limb loss	12 (63/547)	9 (8/90)	12 (55/457)	0.393
Restenosis	11 (49/437)	10 (8/78)	11 (41/359)	0.768
Post-procedural aspirin use	96 (197/206)	100 (31/31)	95 (166/175)	0.197
Post-procedural clopidogrel use	80 (164/206)	81 (25/31)	79 (139/175)	0.877
ABI 30 days	0.70 ± 0.34	0.78 ± 0.25	0.67 ± 0.37	0.150
ABI 1 year	0.46 ± 0.44	0.60 ± 0.37	0.40 ± 0.45	0.078

Categorical variables are expressed as absolute and relative frequencies. Continuous variables are expressed as mean and SD.

ABI, ankle–brachial index; TASC, TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus.

The time to complete wound healing was longer in the active smoking group (269.7 ± 187.5 days vs 208.3 ± 115.7; p = 0.009). There was no difference in the 9-month rates of minor amputations between the two groups (26.5% in the active smoking group vs 24.6% in the non-active smoking group; p = 0.81). Limb loss occurred in 9% and 12% of active smokers and non-active smokers, respectively, during a mean follow-up of 10.5 months, without a statistically significant difference between the two groups. The time to limb loss was similar between active smokers and non-active smokers (93.3 ± 125.0 vs 100.4 ± 134.6 days; p = 0.555). Female gender was associated with lower rates of 12-month lack of wound healing in the multivariate analysis (HR: 0.43; 95% CI: 0.19–0.97; p = 0.041). There was a high loss to follow-up rate in both groups, but without significant differences. For the active smoking group, only 20 out of the 41 patients completed the 9-month follow-up (loss to follow-up rate 51%) vs 116 patients who completed follow-up out of 223 total patients in the non-active smoking group (loss to follow-up rate 48%).

Six-month follow-up

Active smoking (vs non-active smoking) was associated with significantly higher rates of incomplete wound healing in the univariable analysis (HR: 4.54; 95% CI: 1.41–14.28; p = 0.012). No difference was found after adjusting for covariates. The univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses for incomplete wound healing at 6 months are presented in Table 3. The 6-month KM estimates for incomplete wound healing were 91.1% for the active smoking group versus 66% for the non-active smoking group (Log-rank test p < 0.001). Patients who were still smoking after the intervention did not have a higher risk for incomplete wound healing compared to their peers who had stopped (HR for incomplete wound healing: 1.49; 95% CI: 0.14–16.6; p = 0.74).

Table 3.

Predictors of lack of wound healing (Cox regression analysis).

Variables	6-month lack of wound healing				9-month lack of wound healing				12-month lack of wound healing
Variables	Unadjusted		Adjusted		Unadjusted		Adjusted		Unadjusted		Adjusted
	HR (CI)	p-value	HR (CI)	p-value	HR (CI)	p-value	HR (CI)	p-value	HR (CI)	p-value	HR (CI)	p-value
Current vs no current smokers at baseline	4.54 (1.41–14.28)	0.012	0.00 (0–0)	1.00	2.32 (1.11–4.76)	0.026	9.09 (1.06–100)	0.044	1.29 (0.77–2.22)	0.336	3.12 (0.79–12.5)	0.105
Pack-years at baseline	1.01 (1.00–1.02)	0.361	1.00 (0.98–1.02)	0.744	1.00 (1.00–1.01)	0.916	1.00 (0.99–1.02)	0.637	1.00 (1.00–1.01)	0.702	1.01 (0.99–1.02)	0.946
Female vs male	1.54 (0.89–2.63)	0.125	1.16 (0.35–3.85)	0.806	0.66 (0.44–1.00)	0.05	0.44 (0.18–1.09)	0.077	0.75 (0.51–1.09)	0.124	0.43 (0.19–0.97)	0.041
Non-white vs white	0.79 (0.46–1.37)	0.397	0.65 (0.21–2.00)	0.449	1.00 (0.64–1.59)	0.993	0.83 (0.35–1.96)	0.655	1.20 (0.81–1.78)	0.358	0.89 (0.42–1.92)	0.768
Diabetes mellitus	1.02 (0.56–1.85)	0.963	0.61 (0.07–5.26)	0.647	1.11 (0.67–1.85)	0.691	0.48 (0.09–2.44)	0.369	1.09 (0.70–1.72)	0.692	0.29 (0.06–1.41)	0.123
Coronary artery disease	0.80 (0.49–1.29)	0.362	1.39 (0.55–3.57)	0.496	0.86 (0.57–1.29)	0.462	1.45 (0.65–3.22)	0.371	1.03 (0.72–1.49)	0.871	1.37 (0.66–2.85)	0.412
Statin	0.84 (0.50–1.41)	0.495	0.99 (0.33–3.03)	0.999	0.87 (0.56–1.35)	0.531	0.81 (0.32–2.04)	0.647	0.80 (0.53–1.19)	0.265	0.83 (0.37–1.89)	0.649
Run-off	0.91 (0.59–1.41)	0.655	3.12 (0.44–1.28)	0.296	0.94 (0.65–1.39)	0.753	0.83 (0.53–1.31)	0.408	0.96 (0.69–1.33)	0.779	0.83 (0.55–1.26)	0.379

HR, hazard ratio.

Nine-month follow-up

Active smoking (vs non-active smoking) was associated with a significant increase in the rates of incomplete wound healing in univariable (HR for incomplete wound healing: 2.32; 95% CI: 1.11–4.76; p = 0.026) and multivariable analysis (HR for incomplete wound healing: 9.09; 95% CI: 1.06–100.0; p = 0.044). The univariable and multivariable Cox regression analysis is presented in Table 3. The 9-month KM estimates for incomplete wound healing were 74.8% in the active smoking group versus 54.0% in the non-active smoking group (log-rank p < 0.001). The KM survival analysis is presented in Figure 1. Patients who were still smoking at 9 months after the intervention had a trend towards higher rates of incomplete wound healing rates, although the difference did not reach levels of statistical significance (HR for incomplete wound healing: 4.54; 95% CI: 0.90–25.0; p = 0.067).

Figure 1.

Kaplan–Meier survival analysis curves for 9-month lack of wound healing.

There was no difference between the two groups in the 9-month surgical bypass rates (HR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.19–2.12; p = 0.465). Figure 2 presents the KM survival curves for 9-month limb loss. There was no difference between the two groups (HR: 0.37; 95% CI: 0.11–1.20; p = 0.098). Figure 3 presents the KM curves for wound healing, freedom from limb loss and amputation-free survival for the whole cohort. In the analysis among patients who were smokers at the time of the procedure, patients who were still smoking at 9 months after the intervention were more likely to experience incomplete wound healing compared to patients who stopped smoking after the intervention (HR: 3.12; 95% CI: 1.12–9.09; p = 0.029) (Figure 4).

Figure 2.

Kaplan–Meier survival analysis curves for 9-month freedom from limb loss.

Figure 3.

Kaplan–Meier survival analysis curves for the whole population of the study.

Figure 4.

The 9-month lack of wound healing rates among patients who were smoking at baseline.

Discussion

This was a single-center observational study of 264 patients with CLI who underwent endovascular revascularization procedures from 2006 to 2014 for 554 infrapopliteal lesions. The two groups had similar baseline conditions with notable exceptions including ESRD (higher among non-active smokers) and COPD (higher among smokers). Active smoking at the time of the intervention was associated with higher rates of incomplete wound healing after 6 and 9 months of follow-up. Patients who continued to be active smokers in the follow-up period were less likely to achieve wound healing.

Smoking cessation is strongly recommended in patients with PAD according to both the recent American College of Cardiology (ACC) / American Heart Association (AHA) guidelines (Class I, Level of Evidence: A)¹² and European Society of Cardiology.³³ A previous study from our group showed that smoking cessation in PAD is associated with decreased mortality rates and improved amputation-free survival during 5 years of follow-up.¹⁵ These findings were confirmed in a subgroup analysis among patients with CLI.¹⁵ The cardiovascular risk reduction and reduced incidence of CLI becomes apparent 5 years after smoking cessation.^16,34–36 In our study, 15% of the patients were actively smoking at the time of the intervention. These rates are lower compared to other reports of the PAD literature, which usually show a smoking rate in elective PAD interventions of around 40%.³⁷ However, our cohort included only patients with CLI, commonly treated for PAD for years (and thus, were instructed to discontinue smoking in the past). These rates are not so different from the TAMARIS trial (active smoking rates 15–18%), but less than the Circulase CLI trial (25%) and the EUCLID CLI subgroup analysis (24%).^38–40

Smoking in CLI and PAD populations is also known to be associated with decreased graft patency and acceleration of PAD progression to CLI.^16,19,21,22 However, it is unclear if this is related to baseline smoking at the time of the intervention/surgery or to persistent smoking during follow-up.^41–43 As a consequence, smokers are less likely to undergo bypass compared to non-smokers.⁴⁴ Contrast volume was higher among smokers secondary to the higher rates of multivessel interventions in the active smoking population, while procedural and access-related interventions were more common in the active smoking group. Smoking is known in the surgical literature to be associated with worse procedural, short- and long-term surgical outcomes.^45–47 Earlier studies have shown that smoking intensity may be even more important than smoking status for long-term outcomes such as amputations, MALE, and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) after open revascularization for PAD.³⁷ Contrary to intermittent claudication, where it is reasonable to postpone elective interventions until patients achieve smoking cessation, there is no such option in CLI.^48,49 In CLI, interventions are performed more urgently to ensure limb salvage.⁵⁰

Our study is not the first that investigates the effect of smoking in CLI, although it is the first to study smoking’s effect on wound healing in patients with CLI after endovascular revascularizations. It is known that lower extremity wound healing is not only related to the size, severity, depth, and treatment selection, but also to modifiable lifestyle and history-related factors such as diabetes status and smoking.^51–53 A recent meta-analysis among patients with diabetic ulcers, showed a significant association between smoking and delayed healing (healing rates in smokers were 62.1% vs 71.5% in non-smokers).⁵⁴ We showed that active smoking is associated with higher 6-month (91.1% for the active smoking group vs 66% in the non-active smoking group) and 9-month (74.8% in the active smoking group vs 54.0% in the non-active smoking group) incomplete wound healing rates. We also showed that smoking continuation after endovascular revascularization was negatively associated with wound healing, especially after a longer follow-up period (the difference became significant close to the 9-month follow-up, while earlier there was no significant difference).

Smoking may delay wound healing in CLI and diabetic foot ulceration in several ways. First, smoking increases oxidative stress and apoptosis of vascular endothelial cells, increasing vascular dysfunction.⁵⁵ Second, nicotine is a direct vasoconstrictor and can decrease perfusion to the lower extremity tissues, further impairing in this way the process of wound healing. Third, smoking increases carboxyhemoglobin levels, decreasing oxygen transport through hemoglobin to the injured wound tissues.⁵⁶ Fourth, smoking is associated with an increased risk for uncontrolled diabetes, which further delays wound healing in these patients.^15,57

The results of our study extend prior reports in PAD or diabetic foot ulcer populations.¹² Smoking cessation programs should be fully incorporated in multidisciplinary CLI teams and combined with aggressive medical therapy, revascularization, exercise and nutritional support, orthotic devices, and infection control strategies.^50,58,59 However, even if smoking cessation is recommended for all patients with CLI and considered to be the most cost-effective intervention for PAD, reported quit rates and cessation times are suboptimal across the literature.^15,60–62 This is related to a number of different factors, including the lack of evidence-based treatment offered to the patient, limited patient education about the benefits of smoking cessation, difficulties in assessing patients’ smoking addiction severity at baseline, and future compliance with therapeutic interventions.^14,60,63 A preliminary analysis of the Vascular Physician Offer and Report (VAPOR) trial showed that even when physicians try to convince patients to stop smoking through counseling and nicotine replacement therapy prescription, there is no difference compared to the control group.⁶⁴

Limitations

This was a real-world study and thus should be interpreted in the context of observational research and its limitations. Retrospective chart reviews have the disadvantage that questions are asked in a non-uniform way across different patients and providers. Similarly, wound assessment accuracy and uniformity would be improved and standardized in a prospectively designed study and variability in wound care among different patients may have affected our results. We followed the smoking habits of the enrolled patients over time based on clinic appointments but some of the patients may have crossed over from the one group to the other in the follow-up, which we were unable to adjust for with the current analysis. Additionally, the loss to follow-up rate was very high, which can limit the certainty in our findings, while additional events – which are expected in CLI patients, such as amputation and death – contributed to a high number of censored patients. Not accounting for possible overfitting of our model is another limitation. Some of the variables included in the multivariable analysis did not have a significant univariate association, but they were deemed to be clinically significant. Finally, yet importantly, prior data have shown that smoking tends to be under-reported by patients.^37,60 A significant number of patients who deny that they smoke or state that they have quitted smoking, still smoke when biochemical data are tested. Similarly, there is under-reporting in the number of consumed cigarettes. Thus, it is likely that a significant number of our non-active smoking patients were still actively smoking and this could have affected our results.

Conclusion

This is the first study that examines the association between smoking status and wound healing in patients with CLI undergoing endovascular revascularization. We found that active smoking status was associated with increased rates of lack of wound healing after 6 and 9 months of follow-up. Future studies should seek the ideal intervention in order to decrease the smoking rates and try to explain the pathophysiologic mechanism behind this relationship.

Footnotes

Dr Marc Bonaca served as Guest Editor for this manuscript.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The authors declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Dr Armstrong is a consultant to Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, Cardiovascular Systems, Intact Vascular, Janssen, Medtronic, Philips, and PQ Bypass. Dr Giri has received research funds to the institution from ReCor Medical and St Jude Medical, and has served on advisory boards for AstraZeneca and Philips Medical. Dr Secemsky has received consulting/speaking honorarium from Cook Medical, CSI, Medtronic, and Philips and grants to his institution from AstraZeneca, BD Bard, Boston Scientific, Cook Medical, CSI, Medtronic, and Philips. Dr Beckman is a consultant to Amgen, Antidote Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi. The other authors had nothing to disclose.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Damianos G Kokkinidis

Stefanos Giannopoulos

Ehrin J Armstrong

References

Hirsch

Criqui

Treat-Jacobson

, et al. Peripheral arterial disease detection, awareness, and treatment in primary care. JAMA 2001; 286: 1317–1324.

Cole

Hill

Farzad

, et al. Cigarette smoking and peripheral arterial occlusive disease. Surgery 1993; 114: 753–757.

Drexel

Steurer

Muntwyler

, et al. Predictors of the presence and extent of peripheral arterial occlusive disease. Circulation 1996; 94: II199–205.

Muller

Reed

Leuenberger

, et al. Physiology in medicine: Peripheral arterial disease. J Appl Physiol 2013; 115: 1219–1226.

Kannel

Shurtleff

The Framingham Study. Cigarettes and the development of intermittent claudication. Geriatrics 1973; 28: 61–68.

Shammas

NW.

Epidemiology, classification, and modifiable risk factors of peripheral arterial disease. Vasc Health Risk Manag 2007; 3: 229–234.

Creager

MA.

The relationship of cigarette smoking to peripheral arterial disease. Rev Cardiovasc Med 2004; 5: 189–193.

Price

Mowbray

Lee

, et al. Relationship between smoking and cardiovascular risk factors in the development of peripheral arterial disease and coronary artery disease: Edinburgh Artery Study. Eur Heart J 1999; 20: 344–353.

Willigendael

Teijink

JAW

Bartelink

M-L

, et al. Influence of smoking on incidence and prevalence of peripheral arterial disease. J Vasc Surg 2004; 40: 1158–1165.

10.

Hoel

Nolan

Goodney

, et al. Variation in smoking cessation after vascular operations. J Vasc Surg 2013; 57: 1334–1338.

11.

Schanzer

Hevelone

Owens

, et al. Technical factors affecting autogenous vein graft failure: Observations from a large multicenter trial. J Vasc Surg 2007; 46: 1180–1190; discussion 1190.

12.

Gerhard-Herman

Gornik

Barrett

, et al. 2016 AHA/ACC guideline on the management of patients with lower extremity peripheral artery disease: Executive Summary: A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol 2017; 69: 1465–1508.

13.

Hennrikus

Joseph

Lando

, et al. Effectiveness of a smoking cessation program for peripheral artery disease patients: A randomized controlled trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010; 56: 2105–2112.

14.

Hobbs

Bradbury

AW.

Smoking cessation strategies in patients with peripheral arterial disease: An evidence-based approach. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2003; 26: 341–347.

15.

Armstrong

Singh

, et al. Smoking cessation is associated with decreased mortality and improved amputation-free survival among patients with symptomatic peripheral artery disease. J Vasc Surg 2014; 60: 1565–1571.

16.

Jonason

Bergstrom

Cessation of smoking in patients with intermittent claudication. Effects on the risk of peripheral vascular complications, myocardial infarction and mortality. Acta Med Scand 1987; 221: 253–260.

17.

Lepantalo

Lassila

Smoking and occlusive peripheral arterial disease. Clinical review. Eur J Surg 1991; 157: 83–87.

18.

Alvarez

Balibrea

Surinach

, et al. Smoking cessation and outcome in stable outpatients with coronary, cerebrovascular, or peripheral artery disease. Eur J Prev Cardiol 2013; 20: 486–495.

19.

Smith

Franks

Greenhalgh

, et al. The influence of smoking cessation and hypertriglyceridaemia on the progression of peripheral arterial disease and the onset of critical ischaemia. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 1996; 11: 402–408.

20.

McCoach

Armstrong

Singh

, et al. Gender-related variation in the clinical presentation and outcomes of critical limb ischemia. Vasc Med 2013; 18: 19–26.

21.

Wiseman

Powell

Greenhalgh

, et al. The influence of smoking and plasma factors on prosthetic graft patency. Eur J Vasc Surg 1990; 4: 57–61.

22.

Wiseman

Kenchington

Dain

, et al. Influence of smoking and plasma factors on patency of femoropopliteal vein grafts. BMJ 1989; 299: 643–646.

23.

Faarvang

Rørdam Preil

Nielsen

, et al. Smoking is associated with lower amounts of arterial type I collagen and decorin. Atherosclerosis 2016; 247: 201–206.

24.

Muhs

Gagne

Sheehan

Peripheral arterial disease: Clinical assessment and indications for revascularization in the patient with diabetes. Curr Diab Rep 2005; 5: 24–29.

25.

Henry

Peterson

Schlanger

, et al. Wound healing in peripheral arterial disease: Current and future therapy. J Vasc Med Surg 2014; 2: 157.

26.

Walker

Bunch

Cavros

, et al. Multidisciplinary approach to the diagnosis and management of patients with peripheral arterial disease. Clin Interv Aging 2015; 10: 1147–1153.

27.

Siana

Rex

Gottrup

The effect of cigarette smoking on wound healing. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Hand Surg 1989; 23: 207–209.

28.

Silverstein

Smoking and wound healing. Am J Med 1992; 93: 22S–24S.

29.

Rossi

Pistelli

Pesce

, et al. Impact of long-term exposure to cigarette smoking on skin microvascular function. Microvasc Res 2014; 93: 46–51.

30.

Marston

Davies

Armstrong

, et al. Natural history of limbs with arterial insufficiency and chronic ulceration treated without revascularization. J Vasc Surg 2006; 44: 108–114.

31.

Forsythe

Brownrigg

Hinchliffe

RJ.

Peripheral arterial disease and revascularization of the diabetic foot. Diabetes Obes Metab 2015; 17: 435–444.

32.

Harker

Wound healing complications associated with lower limb amputation. World Wide Wounds, http://www.worldwidewounds.com/2006/september/Harker/Wound-Healing-Complications-Limb-Amputation.html (accessed January 20, 2020).

33.

Aboyans

Ricco

J-B

Bartelink

M-LEL

, et al.; ESC Scientific Document Group. 2017 ESC guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of peripheral arterial diseases, in collaboration with the European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS): Document covering atherosclerotic disease of extracranial carotid and vertebral, mesenteric, renal, upper and lower extremity arteries. Endorsed by: The European Stroke Organization (ESO), The Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Peripheral Arterial Diseases of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and of the European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS). Eur Heart J 2018; 39: 763–816.

34.

Gordon

Kannel

McGee

, et al. Death and coronary attacks in men after giving up cigarette smoking. A report from the Framingham study. Lancet 1974; ii: 1345–1348.

35.

Shaper

Pocock

Walker

, et al. British Regional Heart Study: Cardiovascular risk factors in middle-aged men in 24 towns. Br Med J 1981; 283: 179–186.

36.

Rosenberg

Palmer

Shapiro

Decline in the risk of myocardial infarction among women who stop smoking. N Engl J Med 1990; 322: 213–217.

37.

Young

Paul

Karatas

, et al. Cigarette smoking intensity informs outcomes after open revascularization for peripheral artery disease. J Vasc Surg 2019; 70: 1973–1983.e5.

38.

Nehler

Brass

Anthony

, et al. Adjunctive parenteral therapy with lipo-ecraprost, a prostaglandin E₁ analog, in patients with critical limb ischemia undergoing distal revascularization does not improve 6-month outcomes. J Vasc Surg 2007; 45: 953–961.

39.

Norgren

Patel

Hiatt

, et al. Outcomes of patients with critical limb ischaemia in the EUCLID Trial. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2018; 55: 109–117.

40.

Belch

Hiatt

Baumgartner

et al.; TAMARIS Committees and Investigators. Effect of fibroblast growth factor NV1FGF on amputation and death: A randomised placebo-controlled trial of gene therapy in critical limb ischaemia. Lancet 2011; 377: 1929–1937.

41.

Lancaster

Conrad

Patel

, et al. Predictors of early graft failure after infrainguinal bypass surgery: A risk-adjusted analysis from the NSQIP. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2012; 43: 549–555.

42.

Singh

Sidawy

DeZee

, et al. Factors associated with early failure of infrainguinal lower extremity arterial bypass. J Vasc Surg 2008; 47: 556–561.

43.

Carter

Murphy

Halka

, et al. The natural history of stenoses within lower limb arterial bypass grafts using a graft surveillance program. Ann Vasc Surg 2007; 21: 695–703.

44.

Selvarajah

Black

3rd Malas

, et al. Preoperative smoking is associated with early graft failure after infrainguinal bypass surgery. J Vasc Surg 2014; 59: 1308–1314.

45.

Trang

Spain

DA.

Smoking cessation in elective surgery. Am Surg 2019; 85: e193–e194.

46.

Czerniecki

Thompson

Littman

, et al. Predicting reamputation risk in patients undergoing lower extremity amputation due to the complications of peripheral artery disease and/or diabetes. Br J Surg 2019; 106: 1026–1034.

47.

Arinze

Farber

Levin

, et al. The effect of the duration of preoperative smoking cessation timing on outcomes after elective open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair and lower extremity bypass. J Vasc Surg 2019; 70: 1851–1861.

48.

Hossain

Kokkinidis

Armstrong

EJ.

How to assess a claudication and when to intervene. Curr Cardiol Rep 2019; 21: 138.

49.

Kokkinidis

Strobel

Jawaid

, et al. Development and validation of a predictive score for anterograde crossing of infrapopliteal chronic total occlusions: (The Infrapop–CTO Score). Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2020; 95: 748–755.

50.

Kokkinidis

Armstrong

EJ.

Emerging and future therapeutic options for femoropopliteal and infrapopliteal endovascular intervention. Interv Cardiol Clin 2017; 6: 279–295.

51.

Gershater

Londahl

Nyberg

, et al. Complexity of factors related to outcome of neuropathic and neuroischaemic/ischaemic diabetic foot ulcers: A cohort study. Diabetologia 2009; 52: 398–407.

52.

Shin

Roh

S-G

Lee

N-H

, et al. Influence of epidemiologic and patient behavior-related predictors on amputation rates in diabetic patients: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Low Extrem Wounds 2017; 16: 14–22.

53.

Liu

Zhang

Yan

, et al. Smoking increases the risk of diabetic foot amputation: A meta-analysis. Exp Ther Med 2018; 15: 1680–1685.

54.

X-L

Ding

Miao

W-W

, et al. Association between cigarette smoking and diabetic foot healing: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Low Extrem Wounds. Epub ahead of print 21 Nov 2018. DOI: 10.1177/1534734618809583.

55.

Thun

Carter

Feskanich

, et al. 50-Year trends in smoking-related mortality in the United States. N Engl J Med 2013; 368: 351–364.

56.

Lee

FS.

Genetic causes of erythrocytosis and the oxygen-sensing pathway. Blood Rev 2008; 22: 321–332.

57.

Pan

Wang

Talaei

, et al. Relation of active, passive, and quitting smoking with incident type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2015; 3: 958–967.

58.

Armstrong

Alam

Henao

, et al. Multidisciplinary care for critical limb ischemia: Current gaps and opportunities for improvement. J Endovasc Ther 2019; 26: 199–212.

59.

Kokkinidis

Armstrong

Giri

Balancing weight loss and sarcopenia in elderly patients with peripheral artery disease. J Am Heart Assoc 2019; 8: e013200.

60.

Hobbs

Wilmink

ABM

Adam

, et al. Assessment of smoking status in patients with peripheral arterial disease. J Vasc Surg 2005; 41: 451–456.

61.

Ding

Sang

Ballew

, et al. Abstract 16674: Smoking, its cessation, and future risk of peripheral artery disease. Circulation. 2017; 136(suppl 1): A16674.

62.

Spangler

Brooke

Beck

, et al. Design and initial enrollment in the Vascular Physicians Offer and Report (VAPOR) trial. J Vasc Surg 2016; 63: 1121–1125.e2.

63.

Burns

Lima

Bradbury

AW.

Second best medical therapy. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2002; 24: 400–404.

64.

Goodney

Spangler

Newhall

, et al. Feasibility and pilot efficacy of a brief smoking cessation intervention delivered by vascular surgeons in the Vascular Physician Offer and Report (VAPOR) trial. J Vasc Surg 2017; 65: 1152–1160.e2.