In spite of the most vigorous efforts to intervene medically and surgically when peripheral vascular disease threatens a patient, amputation of the extremity may be the only option left to arrest the progression of the disease. In a previous study, the authors assessed amputations, examined gross pathology, and identified scanning electron microscopic features associated with atherosclerotic disease. In the present study, the authors discuss this disease in terms of conventional light microscopy and transmission electron microscopy.
Reported here is the case of a 55-year-old woman presenting to a podiatry clinic with a chief complaint of left heel and ankle pain, who ultimately underwent operative excision of an angioleiomyoma adjacent to the tibialis posterior artery at the level of the medial malleolus. Accompanying this case are images from three modalities through which the defining characteristics of an angioleiomyoma can be appreciated. This case advocates for the inclusion of angioleiomyoma in the preoperative differential diagnosis of a mass presenting as a pseudoaneurysm in the lower extremity, particularly among women in the fourth to sixth decades of life.
The publication of the Global Vascular Guidelines in 2019 provide evidence-based, best practice recommendations on the diagnosis and treatment of chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI). Certainly, the multidisciplinary team, and more specifically one with collaborating podiatrists and vascular specialists, has been shown to be highly effective at improving the outcomes of limbs at risk for amputation. This article uses the Guidelines to answer key questions for podiatrists who are caring for the patient with CLTI.
BACKGROUND: Multiple organizations have issued guidelines to address the prevention, diagnosis and management of diabetic foot ulcers. These guidelines are based on evidence review and expert opinion. <p>METHODS: Literature review was conducted and guidelines were reviewed to identify consensus (or lack thereof) on the nature of these recommendations, the strength of the recommendations and the level of evidence.</p> <p>RESULTS: Most guidelines were not based on highest level of evidence (randomized controlled trials). A listing of recommendations for prevention, diagnosis and management was created with evidence basis for all recommendations.</p> <p>CONCLUSIONS: Areas for future research were identified among recommendations based on minimal evidence, areas of controversy, or in areas of clinical care without recommendations.</p>