Abstract
Background: Patients with peripheral artery disease face high amputation and mortality risk. When assessing vascular outcomes, consideration of mortality as a competing risk is not routine. We hypothesize standard time-to-event methods will overestimate major amputation risk in chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) and non-CLTI. Methods: Patients undergoing peripheral vascular intervention from 2017 to 2018 were abstracted from the Vascular Quality Initiative registry and stratified by mean age (⩾ 75 vs < 75 years). Mortality and amputation data were obtained from Medicare claims. The 2-year cumulative incidence function (CIF) and risk of major amputation from standard time-to-event analysis (1 - Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression) were compared with competing risk analysis (Aalen-Johansen and Fine-Gray model) in CLTI and non-CLTI. Results: A total of 7273 patients with CLTI and 5095 with non-CLTI were included. At 2-year follow up, 13.1% of patients underwent major amputation and 33.4% died without major amputation in the CLTI cohort; 1.3% and 10.7%, respectively, in the non-CLTI cohort. In CLTI, standard time-to-event analysis overestimated the 2-year CIF of major amputation by 20.5% and 13.7%, respectively, in patients ⩾ 75 and < 75 years old compared with competing risk analysis. The standard Cox regression overestimated adjusted 2-year major amputation risk in patients ⩾ 75 versus < 75 years old by 7.0%. In non-CLTI, the CIF was overestimated by 7.1% in patients ⩾ 75 years, and the adjusted risk was overestimated by 5.1% compared with competing risk analysis. Conclusions: Standard time-to-event analysis overestimates the incidence and risk of major amputation, especially in CLTI. Competing risk analyses are alternative approaches to estimate accurately amputation risk in vascular outcomes research.