Seminars in Vascular Surgery最新文献

Chronic superficial venous disease, including superficial venous insufficiency, superficial venous thrombosis, and aneurysms, are prevalent conditions that affect millions of individuals worldwide. With chronic venous insufficiency specifically, the advent of office-based minimally invasive procedures in recent decades has significantly expanded access to outpatient treatment. However, as venous insufficiency is rarely life- or limb-threatening, the clinical diagnosis, diagnostic evaluation, and treatment indications should be considered carefully when recommending elective intervention. Appropriateness of care guidelines intend to aid providers and patients in the decision-making process, based on the available evidence in the scientific literature, to select the best care for the patient when treating their superficial venous disease.

The growing number of prevalent arteriovenous (AV) accesses has been associated with an increase in the incidence of procedures being performed to maintain patency. To reduce the rate of unnecessary procedures, the 2019 Kidney Disease Outcome Quality Initiative guidelines addended the AV access surveillance recommendations, which includes clinical monitoring and assessment of dialysis adequacy alone. Abnormal clinical findings would necessitate follow-up angiography with or without confirmatory duplex ultrasound. Due to poor patency, increased surveillance schedules have been proposed to identify stenosis early and potentially prevent acute thrombotic events and AV access failure. In this review, we outlined current AV access monitoring and maintenance procedure recommendations, as described by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and 2019 Kidney Disease Outcome Quality Initiative guidelines. In addition, we highlight the findings of recently published randomized controlled trials that have examined increased surveillance schedules.

Concern regarding the exponential increase in optional utilization of inferior vena cava filters (IVCFs) in the early 2000s with a persistent low retrieval rate nationwide has resulted in increased scrutiny regarding clinical application of IVCFs. IVCFs are used in a variety of clinical scenarios, ranging from thromboembolic protection in patients with deep venous thrombosis and contraindication to anticoagulation to prophylactic deployment in multitrauma and critically ill patients. Evidence supporting IVCFs as mechanical thromboembolic protection in certain clinical scenarios has been established through evidenced-based guidelines. As an adjunct to evidence-based guidelines, appropriateness criteria to address specific clinical scenarios and facilitate clinical decision making when considering placement of an IVCF have been developed. In this review, current evidence-based and appropriateness guidelines are summarized.

Infective native arterial aneurysms and inflammatory aortic aneurysms are rare but morbid pathologies seen by vascular surgeons in the emergency setting. Presentation is not always clear, and a full workup must be obtained before adopting a management strategy. Treatment is multidisciplinary and is tailored to every case based on workup findings. Imaging with computed tomography, magnetic resonance, or with fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography aids in diagnosis and in monitoring response to treatment. Open surgery is traditionally performed for definitive management. Endovascular surgery may offer an alternative treatment in select cases with acceptable outcomes. Neither technique has been proven to be superior to the other. Physicians should consider patient's anatomy, comorbidities, life expectancy, and goals of care before selecting an approach. Long-term pharmacological treatment, with antibiotics in case of infective aneurysms and immunosuppressants in case of inflammatory aneurysms, is usually required and should be managed in collaboration with infectious disease specialists and rheumatologists.

Vascular surgeons have the ability to manage and intervene on numerous vascular diseases of both the arterial and venous systems. With the growing number of interventions available as endovascular technology evolves, it is important to determine when a procedure is safely indicated for a vascular surgery patient. Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) offer synthesized clinical information and practice standards that can aid clinicians in making these management decisions. Professional societies, such as the Society for Vascular Surgery, bring experts in the field together to collaborate and create AUC for various vascular diseases and interventions. It is essential to publish these criteria in peer-reviewed journals, as well as make them available on public websites so the information is available to vascular surgeons and interventionalists from other specialties who also treat patients with vascular disease. Cardiology, interventional radiology, and interventional nephrology are some other specialties that perform procedures for vascular disease, and vascular interventions by nonsurgeon specialists continue to increase. The Society for Vascular Surgery has published AUC on intermittent claudication, carotid disease, and abdominal aneurysm management. These are intended to guide practice, but also have highlighted areas for improvement that would allow for more universal implementation of AUC in vascular patient care across medical specialties. Increased intersocietal participation and perhaps inclusion of government and other payer participation will allow professional society–sponsored AUC to evolve, resulting in coordinated, appropriate care for vascular surgery patients.

Carotid artery stenosis is one of the most common diagnoses treated by vascular specialists in the United States. The optimal management of carotid stenosis remains controversial, however, with notable variation surrounding diagnostic imaging modalities, longitudinal surveillance, medical therapies, and procedural interventions. Data from high-quality randomized controlled trials and observational studies form the foundation for current management paradigms and societal guidelines that inform clinical practice. Presently, a diagnosis of carotid disease is most often established with duplex ultrasound and supplemental cross-sectional imaging using computed tomography or magnetic resonance angiography as needed to provide additional anatomic information. All patients with documented occlusive disease should receive goal-directed medical therapy with antiplatelet agents and a lipid-reduction strategy, most commonly with a statin. Those with severe carotid stenosis and an acceptable life expectancy may be considered for carotid artery revascularization. The proceduralist should optimally consider a shared decision-making approach in which the tradeoffs of revascularization can be carefully considered with the patient to optimize informed therapeutic decision making. In current practice, three distinct procedure options exist to treat carotid artery stenosis, including carotid endarterectomy, transfemoral carotid artery stenting, and transcarotid artery revascularization. It should be noted that each procedure, although often used interchangeably in most clinical settings, carry technical nuances and outcome disparities. In this review, each of these topics are explored and various approaches are outlined surrounding the appropriate use of treatments for patients with asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis.

Fenestrated and branched endovascular repair of complex abdominal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms is increasingly replacing open repair as the primary modality of treatment. Mid- and long-term results are encouraging and support its use in the correct settings. Nevertheless, appropriateness of indication for treatment, patient selection, and surgeon and hospital performance has not been clearly evaluated and reviewed. The objective of this review article was to identify areas in which appropriateness of care is relevant and can be optimized when considering treatment of patients with fenestrated and branched endovascular repair for complex abdominal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms.

Arterial thoracic outlet syndrome (TOS) is a condition in which anatomic abnormalities in the thoracic outlet cause compression of the subclavian or, less commonly, axillary artery. Patients are usually younger and typically have an anatomic abnormality causing the compression. The condition usually goes undiagnosed until patients present with signs of acute or chronic hand or arm ischemia. Workup of this condition includes a thorough history and physical examination; chest x-ray to identify potential anatomic abnormalities; and arterial imaging, such as computed tomographic angiography or duplex to identify arterial abnormalities. Patients will usually require operative intervention, given their symptomatic presentation. Intervention should always include decompression of the thoracic outlet with at least a first-rib resection and any other structures causing external compression. If the artery is identified to have intimal damage, mural thrombus, or is aneurysmal, then arterial reconstruction is warranted. Stenting should be avoided due to external compression. In patients with symptoms of embolization, a combination of embolectomy, lytic catheter placement, and/or therapeutic anticoagulation should be done. Typically, patients have excellent outcomes, with resolution of symptoms and high patency of the bypass graft, although patients with distal embolization may require finger amputation.

Venous thoracic outlet syndrome (vTOS) is an esoteric condition that presents in young, healthy adults. Treatment includes catheter-directed thrombolysis, followed by first-rib resection for decompression of the thoracic outlet. Various techniques for first-rib resection have been described with successful outcomes. The infraclavicular approach is well-suited to treat the most medial structures that are anatomically relevant for vTOS. A narrative review was conducted to specifically examine the literature on infraclavicular exposure for vTOS. The technique for this operation is described, as well as the advantages and disadvantages of this approach. The infraclavicular approach is a reasonable choice for definitive treatment of uncomplicated vTOS.