Fig 1.
A flow-chart of the concepts of the AHI.
AHI, ankle hemodynamic index.
Table 1.
Patient characteristics, medical therapy, and Rutherford grade.
Table 2.
Ankle blood pressure parameters, ABI, and AHI (derived from the ABI measurement).
Fig 2.
Correlation between the Rutherford classification and ABI and AHI.
The correlation between Rutherford grade and AHI (r = 0.50, R2 = 0.25, P < 0.001) but not between Rutherford grade and ABI (r = 0.07, R2 = 0.005, P = 0.52) was significant. ABI, ankle-brachial index; AHI, ankle hemodynamic index.
Fig 3.
Correlation between the Rutherford classification and ABI and AHI in patients with a totally occluded iliofemoral artery or diabetes.
In the subset of patients with totally occluded iliofemoral arteries (n = 33) or those with diabetes (n = 54) the correlation between Rutherford grade and AHI (r = 0.39, R2 = 0.15, P = 0.02 and r = 0.32, R2 = 0.10, P = 0.02, respectively) but not between Rutherford grade and ABI (r = −0.21, R2 = 0.04, P = 0.23, r = −0.12, R2 = 0.01, P = 0.40) was significant. ABI, ankle-brachial index; AHI, ankle hemodynamic index.
Table 3.
Univariate analyses of relationships between Rutherford grade and independent variables.
Table 4.
Multiple ordinal regression analysis of the relationships between Rutherford grade and independent variables.