Dan F. Filip
First, we want to thank Dr. M. Croitoru for his kind words. An appreciation from a top specialist in this fi eld is an honor for us. Secondly, at present, the problem of PAD and CLI cannot be neglected due to high rate of mortality and morbidity especially after amputation. Technology has achieved substantial progresses that made endovascular approach first choice in the majority of cases (fact reinforced also by the high rate of procedural success, as presented by Dr. Croitoru in his center). In the third line, we consider that in our country the lack of awareness, late presentation, pour funding from the authorities and reduced number of dedicated centers are some of the important problems that can be ameliorated in order to achieve better prognosis for these complex patients.
RESPONSE FOR DR. C.N. IONESCU
We appreciated the relevant remarks and observations written by Assistant Professor C.N. Ionescu. In our center the success rate for endovascular interventions in CLI patients is around 90%. In the cases of procedural failures, the vast majority was in the infrapopliteal segment. Unfortunately, we do not have relevant data regarding the follow-up of these patients. We have retained the author’s suggestions in the direction of expanding the descriptive data for further studies. In this context, we are agreeing with the general opinion that in this field reported data about arterial reconstruction and outcome should be somehow standardized between centers in order to minimize the large discrepancies presented in literature.
This work is licensed under a