Journal of Vascular Surgery最新文献

Objective: Home-based walking exercise is first-line therapy for peripheral artery disease (PAD), but benefits of home-based walking exercise are variable. This study evaluated whether specific clinical characteristics were associated with greater improvement after home-based walking exercise or with higher rates of serious adverse events (SAEs).

Methods: Data were combined from two randomized clinical trials comparing home-based walking exercise with control in PAD. The home-based exercise interventions used behavioral interventions to help participants adhere to exercise. The primary outcome was the proportion of PAD participants who improved 6-minute walk (6MW) by at least 20 meters. Serious adverse events consisted of overnight hospitalizations or death that occurred during the randomized clinical trial.

Results: Of 376 participants with PAD (69.6 years; 54.5% Black; 49.5% women), 217 were randomized to exercise and 159 to control. Home-based exercise improved 6MW by at least 20 meters in 100 participants (54.9%), compared with 37 (28.0%) in control (odds ratio, 3.13; 95% confidence interval, 1.94-5.06; P < .001). Age, sex, race, comorbidities, baseline 6MW, and income did not significantly alter the effect of home-based exercise on improved 6MW. SAEs occurred in 28.1% and 23.3% of participants randomized to exercise and control, respectively (P = .29). There were statistically significant interactions, indicating that home-based exercise increased SAE rates, compared with control, in Black compared with non-Black participants (P interaction < .001), in those with vs without coronary artery disease (CAD) (P interaction < .001), and in people with vs without history of heart failure (P interaction = .005).

Conclusions: Among people with PAD, home-based exercise improved 6MW by at least 20 meters in 54.9% of people. Older age, female sex, Black race, and specific comorbidities were not associated with lower rates of attaining meaningful improvement in 6MW following home-based exercise. Further study is needed to establish whether certain patient characteristics, such as history of coronary artery disease, may affect SAE rates in patients with PAD participating in home-based exercise.

Objective: Elderly patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) undergoing revascularization are prone to delirium and prolonged hospitalization. Preoperative prehabilitation may prevent delirium and reduce the length of stay. This study investigates the effect of multimodal prehabilitation on delirium incidence in elderly patients with CLTI undergoing revascularization.

Methods: A comparative observational cohort study conducted in a large teaching hospital (intervention cohort n = 101, retrospective control cohort n = 207) and a university hospital (prospective control cohort n = 48) from 2020 to 2023. Patients aged ≥65 years undergoing revascularization were included, with acute treatment or severe cognitive impairment as exclusion criteria. The 3-week prehabilitation program included screening of general health and presence of delirium risk factors by a vascular nurse practitioner, screening and provision of personalized, home-based exercises by a physiotherapist, provision of nutritional advice by a dietician, and, if indicated, comprehensive geriatric assessment by a geriatrician, assessment of self-reliance and home situation by a prearranged homecare nurse, guidance and support for smoking cessation by a quit smoking coach, and anemia treatment. Primary outcome was 30-day delirium incidence, analyzed using regression models adjusting for potential confounders (age, physical impairment, history of delirium, preoperative anemia, and revascularization type). Secondary outcomes were length of stay, postoperative complications, 30-day mortality, and patient experiences.

Results: Median age was 76 years (interquartile range [IQR], 71-82 years). Delirium incidence was lower in the prehabilitation cohort (n = 2/101; 2%) compared with controls (n = 23/255; 9%; odds ratio, 0.21; 95% confidence interval, 0.05-0.89; P = .04). Adjusted analysis showed a non-significant delirium reduction (odds ratio, 0.28; 95% confidence interval, 0.06-1.3; P = .097). The prehabilitation cohort had a significantly shorter length of stay (2 [IQR, 1-5] vs 4 [IQR, 2-9] days; P ≤ .001), and fewer minor complications (14% vs 26%; P=.01). No differences were present in major complications and 30-day mortality. Patients reported high compliance and satisfaction (median score, 8/10 [IQR, 7-9]).

Conclusions: Prehabilitation among elderly patients with CLTI is safe and has the potential to yield multiple beneficial effects on general outcomes following revascularization, while also achieving high levels of patient satisfaction. Further validation and consideration of implementation in surgical settings is recommended.

Objective: Several observational studies have demonstrated an association between diabetes mellitus (DM) and above-ankle amputation after lower extremity revascularization (LER). However, data from prospective randomized trials is lacking. This analysis compares the outcomes of patients with and without DM enrolled in the Best Endovascular vs Best Surgical Therapy in patients with Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia (BEST-CLI) trial.

Methods: Baseline characteristics were compared between patients with and without DM in the BEST-CLI trial. Cox regression was used to determine the association between DM and major outcomes of major adverse limb events (MALE), reintervention, above-ankle amputation, and all-cause death.

Results: Among 1777 patients who underwent LER, 69.2% had DM. Compared with patients without DM, those with DM were significantly younger, less likely to be White, and more likely to be Hispanic. Patients with DM were more likely to have hypertension, hyperlipidemia, coronary artery disease, congestive heart failure, and renal disease and be on optimal medical therapy (antiplatelets and statins), whereas patients without DM were significantly more likely to be smokers and have chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Patients with DM were significantly more likely to present with late Wound Ischemia foot Infection (WIfI) stages (3-4) (73.7% vs 45.9%; P < .001) that were driven predominantly by differences in wound and infection grade. Conversely, patients without DM had significantly lower ankle pressures and toe pressures and were significantly more likely to have WIfI ischemia grade 3 compared with patients with DM (60% vs 52.5%; P = .016). At 3 years, patients with DM exhibited higher rates of above-ankle amputation and all-cause death compared with patients without DM. Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated significantly higher MALE or all-cause death compared with patients without DM (3-year estimate: 53.5% vs 46.4%; P < .001). After adjusting for potential confounders, regression analysis demonstrated that DM was independently associated with increased above-ankle amputation (1.75 [1.22-2.51]), all-cause death (1.63 [1.31-2.03]), and MALE or all-cause death (1.24 [1.04-1.47]).

Conclusions: Patients with DM undergoing LER for chronic limb-threatening ischemia experienced a greater incidence of MALE or all-cause death compared with patients without DM. The impact of DM seems to be mediated by more severe wounds and infections at the time of presentation, and a higher prevalence of cardiac and renal disease.

Objective: Previous studies suggest partly different risk factor profiles of thoracic aortic aneurysms (TAAs) and abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs), but prospective data are scarce. The purpose of this prospective population-based case-control study was to investigate differences in risk factor profile between TAAs and AAAs.

Methods: Participants in two prospective population-based studies, the Västerbotten Intervention Project (VIP) and the Monitoring of Trends and Determinants in Cardiovascular Disease (MONICA) study, between 1986 and 2010, underwent cardiovascular risk assessments, including blood samples, oral glucose tolerance test, blood pressure readings, and a self-reported health questionnaire. All individuals who were later diagnosed with TAAs or AAAs were identified. Age, sex, and time-matched controls were selected from the same cohorts, aiming at four controls/case. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) for potential risk factors for later diagnosis of TAAs and AAAs, respectively, were estimated by multivariate conditional logistic regression analyses.

Results: From a total of 96,196 individuals with prospectively collected data in the VIP/MONICA cohort, a total of 236 individuals with AAAs (181 men and 55 women) and 935 matched controls, and 168 individuals with TAAs (115 men and 53 women) and 662 controls were included. The average age at baseline examination was 57.0 ± 5.7 years for AAA cases and controls, and 52.1 ± 8.8 years for TAA cases and controls. Mean time between baseline examination and diagnosis of AAAs/TAAs was 12.1 and 11.7 years, respectively. There was a clear difference in risk factor profile between AAAs and TAAs. Smoking, hypertension, and coronary artery disease were significantly associated with later diagnosis of AAAs, with highest aORs for a history of smoking (aOR, 10.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 6.3-16.8). For TAAs, hypertension was the only positive risk factor (aOR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.1-2.7), whereas smoking was not associated. Diabetes was not associated with either AAAs or TAAs; neither was self-reported physical activity.

Conclusions: In this prospective, population-based, case-control study, risk factor profile differed between AAAs and TAAs. This suggests a partially different etiology for TAAs and AAAs.

Objective: As a result of conflicting, inadequate or controversial data in the literature, several issues concerning the management of patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) remain unanswered. The aim of this international, expert-based Delphi consensus document was to provide some guidance for clinicians on these controversial topics.

Methods: A three-round Delphi consensus document was produced with 44 experts on 6 prespecified topics regarding the management of AAAs. All answers were provided anonymously. The response rate for each round was 100%.

Results: Most participants (42 of 44 [95.4%]) agreed that a minimum case volume per year is essential (or probably essential) for a center to offer open or endovascular AAA repair (EVAR). Furthermore, 33 of 44 (75.0%) believed that AAA screening programs are (probably) still clinically effective and cost effective. Additionally, most panelists (36 of 44 [81.9%]) voted that surveillance after EVAR should be (or should probably be) lifelong. Finally, 35 of 44 participants (79.7%) thought that women smokers should (or should probably/possibly) be considered for screening at 65 years of age, similar to men. No consensus was achieved regarding lowering the threshold for AAA repair and the need for deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis in patients undergoing EVAR.

Conclusions: This expert-based Delphi consensus document provides guidance for clinicians regarding specific unresolved issues. Consensus could not be achieved on some topics, highlighting the need for further research in those areas.

Background: Chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) has a high risk of poor outcomes. We aimed to compare the outcomes of lower extremity revascularization in patients with CLTI stratified by CKD severity in patients enrolled in the prospective, randomized Best Endovascular vs Best Surgical Therapy in Patients with CLTI (BEST-CLI) trial.

Methods: The BEST-CLI trial dataset was queried to categorize patients into three groups according to CKD stage. Group A includes non-CKD and CKD stages <3; group B includes stage 3 and stage 4 CKD patients; and group C includes stage 5 CKD and dialysis-dependent patients. Furthermore, spline modeling was performed across the range of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR, mL/min/1.73 m²) observed in study participants to identify a threshold eGFR that impacted the primary trial outcomes: major adverse limb events (MALEs; defined as above-ankle amputation or major reintervention) or all-cause mortality, by surgical or endovascular revascularization (as-treated analysis). Kaplan-Meier and multivariate Cox regression analyses were used to assess association of CKD risk groups with the outcomes.

Results: A total of 1797 patients were included. Group C patients had double the risk of amputation (hazard ratio [HR], 2.13; P < .001), MALE, or all-cause mortality (HR, 2.05; P < .001) and more than triple the risk of all-cause mortality (HR, 3.40; P < .001) compared with group A. In dialysis-dependent patients, endovascular therapy was associated with better survival, but twice the risk of reintervention compared with surgical revascularization. According to spline model analysis, hazard of MALE or all-cause mortality increased sharply at eGFR <30. The hazard ratios for eGFR <30 vs ≥60 were 2.03 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.68-2.43; P < .001) and 3.46 (95% CI, 2.80-4.27; P < .001) for MALE and mortality, respectively. At eGFR <30, there was no difference in the primary outcome by treatment received (surgical or endovascular revascularization).

Conclusions: The progressive nature of renal impairment in patients with CLTI threatens their survival and limb salvage and may reduce the relative benefit of open vs endovascular revascularization seen in the overall BEST-CLI trial population. In dialysis-dependent patients, endovascular therapy was associated with lower mortality but increased reintervention rate.

Objective: Acute mesenteric artery obstruction is a severe cause of acute mesenteric ischemia, associated with significant morbidity and mortality. However, there is limited guidance on choosing between traditional and minimally invasive techniques comprehensively. This study introduces a selective, minimally invasive strategy designed to improve the survival and prognosis of patients with acute superior mesenteric artery obstruction.

Methods: In this prospective, single-arm trial conducted between 2020 and 2023, patients with acute mesenteric ischemia due to acute superior mesenteric artery obstruction were enrolled. A total of 42 patients were included, meeting the predetermined sample size. The primary outcome was the 30-day chronic intestinal failure (CIF)-free survival rate. Based on an algorithm incorporating preoperative radiographic findings, physical signs, and laboratory markers, patients were assigned to one of three therapeutic pathways: traditional laparotomy with thrombectomy, laparoscopy combined with endovascular therapy, or endovascular therapy alone.

Results: The CIF-free survival rates at 30 days and 2 years were 71% (30/42) and 60%, respectively. Short-term mortality, including 30-day and in-hospital mortality, was 11.9%, indicating an improvement compared to historical cohorts. The cumulative mortality rates at 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years were 26%, 32%, and 32%, respectively. The primary and assisted patency rates at 1 year were 90% and 97%, respectively. Transition to laparotomy was required in 43% of patients undergoing laparoscopic exploration. Improved blood supply was observed in 73% of the patients who underwent two laparoscopic procedures (15 patients), and bowel resection was avoided in 40% of cases. The median durations of hospitalization and intensive care unit stay were 19 days (IQR 11-31) and 2 days (IQR 0-6), respectively.

Conclusions: This selective, minimally invasive strategy for managing acute mesenteric ischemia demonstrated high 30-day CIF-free survival rates and reduced short-term mortality. These findings suggest the potential advantages of this approach in improving outcomes for patients with acute mesenteric ischemia.

Objective: As aneurysmal disease is progressive, proximal disease progression and para-anastomotic aneurysms are complications experienced after open infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (AAA). As such, fenestrated or branched endovascular repair (F/BEVAR) may be indicated in these patients. Data describing fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair after prior open repair are limited to institutional databases. The aim of our study is to describe the safety and efficacy of fenestrated/branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F/BEVAR) in patients with prior open repair (OSR) compared with primary F/BEVAR using the Vascular Quality Initiative.

Methods: Using the VQI complex endovascular AAA module from 2014-2022, we identified all single-staged F/BEVAR repair in patients having prior OSR or no prior aortic surgery (primary F/BEVAR). The primary outcomes were perioperative mortality and completion endoleaks. Secondary outcomes were 5-year survival and one-year sac dynamics. Between the two cohorts, differences in the primary and secondary outcomes were evaluated using Wilcoxon-Rank Sum tests for continuous variables and Chi-squared analysis for categorical variables. Kaplan-Meier methods and Cox-regression were used to examine 5-year mortality.

Results: We identified 3,331 primary F/BEVAR patients and 102 prior OSR patients. Patients with prior OSR were more likely to have peripheral arterial disease (22% vs. 7.4%), prior smoking (67% vs 56%), undergo F/BEVAR with medium/high volume physicians (74% vs 62%), but less likely to be female (8.8% vs 23%) (all p<0.05). Patients with prior OSR were also more likely to have a more proximal aneurysm extent (median zone 7[6-8] vs. 8[7-8]), larger AAA diameters (62[56-66] mm vs 58[55-63] mm), receive a physician modified endograft (PMEG) vs commercial custom-made device (CCMD) (36% vs 20% PMEG), have longer surgery times (240[186-308] min vs. 206[155-272] min), and have a higher rate of celiac (51% vs 26%) and SMA (86% v 73%) artery involvement (all p < 0.05). Patients with prior OSR had lower rates of completion endoleaks (25% vs 36%) driven by lower rates of type II leaks (11% vs 20%) despite higher rates of indeterminate leaks (11% vs. 5.1%) (all p<0.01). There was, however, no difference in perioperative mortality (2% vs. 2.9%; p = 0.78). They had similar one-year sac dynamics (48% vs. 50% regression; 12% vs 8% expansion, p>0.5) and 5-year mortality (23% vs 18%, HR: 1.44[0.89-2.31]; p=0.13).

Conclusion: Based on VQI data, F/BEVAR after prior OSR seems to be well-tolerated and safe. Prior open repair patients also had lower rates of completion type II endoleaks and similar sac dynamics and 5-year mortality compared to primary F/BEVAR patients.