Journal of Vascular Surgery最新文献

Objective: Popliteal access as an alternative to conventional femoral access has not been reported in the office-based catheter laboratory setting (OBL) and may be perceived to have higher risks. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of popliteal access for the endovascular treatment of iliofemoral arterial occlusive disease in an OBL setting.

Methods: From October 2018 to October 2023, a total of 1408 interventions for peripheral artery disease were performed in our OBL. A cohort of 27 popliteal access consecutive procedures for femoral and iliac artery occlusions were studied. All interventions were done using a micropuncture needle under ultrasound guidance. All patients were discharged 1 hour after completion of the procedure. Indications for popliteal access were presence of aortoiliac stent grafts, aortobifemoral or aortoiliac bypasses, difficult contralateral or antegrade femoral access, and flush superficial femoral artery occlusions. Procedures were determined to be successful upon complete resolution of the target lesions and safety was measured perioperatively and at 90 days. Patency was determined clinically, by arterial duplex examination, and by need for reintervention for ≤2 years.

Results: We performed 27 popliteal access procedures in 25 patients (21 complete femoral artery occlusions, 6 severe stenosis). Iliac disease was present in nine. Indications for popliteal access were existing aortoiliac stent graft in 11, aortobifemiliac bypass in 4, noncrossable iliac occlusions in 3, failed antegrade femoral access in 4, flush superficial femoral artery occlusion in 3, and bilateral common femoral artery disease precluding access in 2. Trans-Atlantic Inter-Society Consensus classification preoperatively was B, 4; C, 4; and D, 19. Treatments included atherectomy/balloon angioplasty and stent in 12, balloon angioplasty and stenting in 4, atherectomy/balloon angioplasty in 5, and balloon angioplasty alone in 6. Successful opening of occlusions occurred in 25 of 27 patients (92.5%). No complications or major adverse cardiac events occurred, except one asymptomatic small popliteal arteriovenous fistula. Of the 25 successful procedures, the duplex patency at 3, 6, and 12 months was 19/20 (95%), 11/15 (69.3%), and 11/13 (61%). Rutherford Classification improved from a preoperative value of >4 in 24 of 27 (89%) to a postoperative value of <2 at 1 month in 23 of 23 (100%), at 3 months in 19 of 20 (95%), at 6 months in 11 of 15 (69.3%), and at 12 months in 11 of 13 (61%). Freedom from reintervention at 3 months occurred in 19 of 20 (95%), at 6 months in 13 of 15 (86%), and at 12 months in 12 of 13 (79%).

Conclusions: Popliteal artery access for complex iliofemoral disease is safe and effective and should be considered as a valid alternative option in the OBL setting.

Objective: The Vascular Surgery In-Training Examination (VSITE) is a yearly exam evaluating vascular trainees' knowledge base. Although multiple studies have evaluated variables associated with exam outcomes, few have incorporated training program-specific metrics. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of the learning environment and burnout on VSITE performance.

Methods: Data was collected from a confidential, voluntary survey administered after the 2020 to 2022 VSITE as part of the SECOND Trial. VSITE scores were calculated as percent correct then standardized per the American Board of Surgery. Generalized estimating equations with robust standard errors and an independent correlation structure were used to evaluate trainee and program factors associated with exam outcomes. Analyses were further stratified by integrated and independent training paradigms.

Results: A total of 1385 trainee responses with burnout data were collected over 3 years (408 in 2020, 459 in 2021, 498 in 2022). On average, 46% of responses reported at least weekly burnout symptoms. On unadjusted analysis, burnout symptoms correlated with a 14 point drop in VSITE score (95% confidence interval [CI], -24 to -4; P = .006). However, burnout was no longer significant after adjusted analysis. Instead, higher postgraduate year level, being in a relationship, identifying as male gender with or without kids, identifying as non-Hispanic white, larger programs, and having a sense of belonging within a program were associated with higher VSITE scores.

Conclusions: Despite high rates of burnout, trainees generally demonstrate resilience in gaining the medical knowledge necessary to pass the VSITE. Performance on standardized exams is associated with trainee and program characteristics, including availability of support systems and program belongingness.

Background: Optimal medical therapy (OMT) is a modifiable factor that decreases mortality and cardiovascular events in patients with severe peripheral arterial disease. We hypothesized that preintervention OMT would be associated with improved 1-year reintervention and major adverse limb event (MALE) rates after elective endovascular revascularization for intermittent claudication (IC).

Methods: Using the Vascular Quality Initiative (2010-2020), we identified patients with IC undergoing elective endovascular, hybrid, and open surgical interventions. Preoperative antiplatelet, statin, and nonsmoking status defined OMT components and created three groups: complete (all components), partial (1-2 components), and no OMT. The primary outcome was 1-year reintervention. Secondary outcomes included MALE and factors associated with OMT usage. Multivariable logistic regression generated adjusted odds ratios (aOR).

Results: There were 39,088 patients (14,907 [38.1%] complete, 22,054 [56.4%)] partial, 2127 [5.4%] no OMT) who met our criteria. Patients with any OMT were more frequently older with more cardiovascular diseases and diabetes (P < .0001). Patients without OMT were more likely to be Black or with Medicare or Medicaid (P < .05). Observed 1-year reintervention (5.3% complete OMT, 6.1% partial OMT, 8.3% no OMT; P < .001) and MALE (5.6% complete OMT, 6.3% partial OMT, 8.8% no OMT; P < .001) were decreased by partial or complete OMT compared with no OMT. Complete OMT significantly decreased the adjusted odds of reintervention and MALE by 28% (aOR, 0.72, 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.59-0.88) and 30% (aOR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.58-0.85), respectively, compared with no OMT. Partial OMT decrease the adjusted odds of reintervention and MALE by 24% (aOR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.63-0.92) and 26% (aOR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.62-0.89), respectively.

Conclusions: Preintervention OMT is an underused, modifiable risk factor associated with improved 1-year reintervention and MALE. Vascular surgeons are uniquely positioned to initiate and maintain OMT in patients with IC before revascularization to optimize patient outcomes.

Background: TransCarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) is a safe minimally invasive option for patients with carotid artery stenosis who are not appropriate candidates for carotid endarterectomy (CEA). Many physicians have not yet adopted this technique in the management of carotid artery stenosis. The aim of this study is to explore overall outcomes of carotid revascularization based on physicians' practices in the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI).

Methods: Individual physicians participating in both the carotid artery stenting (CAS) and carotid endarterectomy (CEA) modules in VQI were categorized as performing CEA and TCAR, CEA and transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TfCAS) or all 3 procedures (CEA, TCAR and TFCAS). Physicians performing CEA only or TCAR/TfCAS only were excluded. In-hospital and one-year outcomes were compared between the 3 groups using univariable and multivariable analysis.

Results: A total of 104,925 carotid revascularization procedures performed by 1,433 physicians were included. Most physicians performed CEA and TCAR (n=714, 49.8%), while 35.1% (n=503) performed all 3 procedures and 15.1% (n=216) performed CEA and TfCAS only. Physicians performing CEA and TfCAS had higher overall stroke/death rates after carotid procedures (2.2%) compared to those performing CEA and TCAR (1.4%) or those performing all 3 procedures (1.6%, p<.001). They also had higher rates of cranial nerve injuries (3.1% vs. 1.9% vs. 1.9%, p<.001). After adjusting for baseline characteristics, procedures performed by CEA and TfCAS physicians had significantly higher odds of in-hospital stroke/death compared with those in the CEA and TCAR group (OR 1.31, 95%CI 1.03-1.66, p=.03]. They also had increased hazard of 1-year stroke/death (HR 1.45, 95% CI 1.1-1.9, p=.01). No significant difference in the adjusted odds of stroke/death was observed between CEA and TCAR performers versus (CEA, TCAR and TfCAS) performers [OR 1.05; 95% CI 0.92-1.20, p=.44]. When adjusting for the type of carotid revascularization technique, difference in outcomes based on surgeon's experience were no longer significant, indicating that differences in outcomes were procedure-specific and attributable to the inferior outcomes associated with TfCAS compared to CEA and TCAR. TCAR case volumes did not impact outcomes of carotid revascularization. On the other hand, a high TfCAS volume among physicians performing all 3 carotid procedures was associated with higher overall in-hospital and one-year mortality.

Conclusions: Physicians' preference for carotid artery stenosis management has a bearing on their overall stroke/death rates. Careful patient and procedure selection are the cornerstone to improve carotid revascularization outcomes.

Objective: Acute pediatric vascular issues are infrequent and result in a diverse, unpredictable experience for vascular surgeons and trainees. We reviewed the indications for consult and resulting interventions provided by the Vascular Surgery (VS) service at a freestanding Children's Hospital (CH) adjacent to a university hospital.

Methods: Consults to VS at our CH were reviewed over a 4.5-year period. The acuity of the patient, nature of the disease (arterial, venous, and other), and etiology were documented. Treatments resulting from consultation (medical therapy, observation, or intervention - open/endovascular), and patient outcomes were documented.

Results: One hundred consults to VS occurred. Average patient age was 8.5 years (range, 1 day to 18 years). Ninety consults were for acute conditions. Pathology included arterial (n = 64), venous (n = 20), and other (n = 16). Primary etiologies were iatrogenic injury (n = 40) and trauma (n = 31). Nearly two-thirds of patients were in the intensive care unit (n = 66), and one-third of intensive care unit consults were for children <1 year old. Medical management alone was utilized in 46 cases: 65% receiving anticoagulation, 13% ASA, 9% blood pressure control, 4% antibiotics, and 9% other. In 37 cases, no interventions for the vascular query were needed. Overall, 17 consults resulted in 19 surgical interventions (5 bypass/interposition/patch, 4 primary vascular repairs, 3 fasciotomies, 2 angiograms, 2 embolectomies, 1 amputation, 1 thoracic endograft, 1 first rib resection). The one early graft failure required revision. No operative interventions were performed in children <3 years old. Of 17 deaths, none were due to vascular injury.

Conclusions: Consults to VS in a CH are infrequent and encompass a wide breadth of vascular disease. In contrast to the adult population, medical therapies are frequently utilized, whereas a minority undergo open or endovascular interventions. At 20 consults per year, a typical trainee may be involved in 40 to 60 pediatric cases during their residency. Exposure to the pediatric population is a small but important niche in vascular education and practice.

Objective: The 2019 Global Vascular Guidelines recommend risk assessment for evidence based revascularization based on the acronym PLAN: Patient risk, Limb severity and ANatomical complexity of disease. This meta-analysis compares a multitude of prognostic tests within these categories.

Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of tests that estimated 1-year major event (amputation-free survival and major adverse limb events) probability. Individual patient data were reconstructed from survival estimate curves. With presence or absence of major events, sensitivity, specificity, and area under receiver operating characteristics curves (AUC) were computed. Tests with an AUC ≥70%, or that correlated with revascularization feasibility were included. Practical application of tests was assessed to make a recommendation on PLAN implementation.

Results: Ninety-six studies describing 77 unique predictive techniques were included, of which thirteen were sufficient. These 13 tests were divided in four Patient risk (5 studies), three Limb severity (3 studies), and six ANatomical complexity of disease (9 studies). Patient risk: Three tests were included: biochemical assessment of calprotectin and C-reactive protein, radiologic measurement of sarcopenia, and predictive score with the GermanVasc chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) score. These tests scored AUCs of 82.0%, 72.7%, and 71.8%, respectively, of which the GermanVasc CLTI score was deemed most applicable in clinical practice. Limb severity: The adjusted Wound Ischemia foot Infection score (WIfI) resulted as best predictive score (AUC, 78.8%), but due to the lack of external validation, the original WIfI score was deemed best applicable. ANatomical complexity of disease: No test surpassed 70% AUC for 1-year event estimation, and was correlated with feasibility of revascularization, the latter only being served by the Global Limb Anatomic Staging System.

Conclusions: In evidence-based revascularization in patients with CLTI according to the PLAN concept, we recommend to use GermanVasc, WIfI, and the Global Limb Anatomic Staging System.

Objective: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) clinical pathways have demonstrated improved perioperative outcomes after major surgery. However, its adoption within vascular surgery has been limited. In this study, we examined the impact of an ERAS protocol with multimodal anesthesia on open abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair by comparing early outcomes before and after its implementation.

Methods: This retrospective study analyzed early outcomes after elective open repairs of intact AAA performed from 2013 to 2023 at a single institution. Eighty consecutive patients treated after implementation of an ERAS protocol with multimodal anesthesia were compared with 161 patients treated before its implementation. Propensity score matching based on age, gender, body mass index, Vascular Quality Initiative AAA Mortality Risk Score, Rockwood Frailty Scale, aortic cross clamp location, aneurysm size, and type of exposure was performed to achieve one:one matching using the nearest neighbor technique. Quantile and logistic regression assessed the impact of the ERAS protocol on length of stay, 30-day mortality, opioid consumption (morphine milligram equivalents), hospital cost, complications, and readmissions.

Results: Both groups (ERAS vs pre-ERAS, respectively) were predominantly male (80% vs 73%; P = .27), with a median age of 74 years. Similar mean Vascular Quality Initiative predicted mortality (2.9% vs 4.0%; P = .13), clinical frailty score (3.1 vs 3.3; P = .17), aneurysm size (60 mm vs 62 mm; P = .06), rates of suprarenal cross-clamp (76% vs 88%; P = .07), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (29% vs 31%; P = .73), chronic kidney disease (14% vs 16%; P = .66), myocardial disease (16% vs 20%; P = .54), and cerebrovascular disease (15% vs 19%; P = .53) were observed in the matched groups. ERAS was associated with a reduction in length of stay by 3 days (P < .001), a decrease in opioid consumption by 37 morphine milligram equivalents (P < .001), and a reduction in hospital costs by US$4704 (P < .001). There was a trend toward a lower risk of major complications (odds ratio, 0.44; 95% confidence interval, 0.2-1.1; P = .06). Thirty-day mortality (5% vs 6.3%; P = .73) and readmission (7.9% vs 13.2%; P = .29) rates were similar in both groups.

Conclusions: An ERAS protocol using a multimodal anesthesia was associated with improved early outcomes compared with patients treated before ERAS implementation. These results mirror similar benefits seen in nonvascular ERAS programs, and broader application should be considered in institutions that perform a high volume of open aortic repairs.