Recent evidence from the Safety and Efficacy Study for Reverse Flow Used During Carotid Artery Stenting Procedure (ROADSTER) multicenter trial in high-risk patients undergoing transcarotid artery ...stenting with dynamic flow reversal reported the lowest stroke rate compared with any prospective trial of carotid artery stenting. However, clinical trials have selection criteria that exclude many patients from enrollment and are highly selective of operators performing the procedures, which limit generalizability. The aim of this study was to compare in-hospital outcomes after transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) and transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TFCAS) as reported in the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI).
The Society for Vascular Surgery VQI TCAR Surveillance Project (TSP) was designed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of TCAR in real-world practice. Data from the initial 646 patients enrolled in the TSP from March 2016 to December 2017 were analyzed and compared with those of patients who underwent TFCAS between 2005 and 2017. Patients with tandem, traumatic, or dissection lesions were excluded. Multivariable logistic regression and 1:1 coarsened exact matching were used to analyze neurologic adverse events (stroke and transient ischemic attacks TIAs) and in-hospital mortality. Patients in the two procedures were matched on age, ethnicity, coronary artery disease, congestive heart failure, prior coronary artery bypass graft or percutaneous coronary intervention, chronic kidney disease, degree of ipsilateral stenosis, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, symptomatic status, restenosis, anatomic and medical risk, and urgency of the procedure.
Compared with patients undergoing TFCAS (n = 10,136), those undergoing TCAR (n = 638) were significantly older, had more cardiac comorbidities, were more likely to be asymptomatic, and were less likely to have a recurrent stenosis. The rates of in-hospital TIA/stroke as well as of TIA/stroke/death were significantly higher in TFCAS compared with TCAR (3.3% vs 1.9% P = .04 and 3.8% vs 2.2% P = .04, respectively). In both procedures, symptomatic patients had higher rates of TIA/stroke/death compared with asymptomatic patients (TCAR, 3.7% vs 1.4% P = .06; TFCAS, 5.3% vs 2.7% P < .001). After multivariable adjustment, there was a trend of increased stroke or death rates in TFCAS compared with TCAR, but it was not statistically significant (2.5% vs 1.7%; P = .25; odds ratio, 1.75, 95% confidence interval, 0.85-3.62). However, TFCAS was associated with twice the odds of in-hospital adverse neurologic events and TIA/stroke/death compared with TCAR (odds ratio, 2.10; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-4.08; P = .03), independent of symptom status. Coarsened exact matching showed similar results.
Compared with patients undergoing TFCAS, patients undergoing TCAR had significantly more medical comorbidities but similar stroke/death rates and half the risk of in-hospital TIA/stroke/death. These results persisted despite rigorous adjustment and matching of potential confounders. This initial evaluation of the VQI TSP demonstrates the ability to rapidly monitor new devices and procedures using the VQI. Although it is preliminary, this is the first study to demonstrate the benefit of TCAR compared with TFCAS in real-world practice. These results need to be confirmed by a clinical trial.
Display omitted
The evidence supporting management decisions of visceral artery aneurysms (VAAs) is sparse. Practice guidelines are needed to help patients and surgeons choose between endovascular and open surgery ...approaches.
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane databases, and Scopus for studies of patients with VAAs. Studies were selected and appraised by pairs of independent reviewers. Meta-analysis was performed when appropriate.
We included 80 observational studies that were mostly noncomparative. Data were available for 2845 aneurysms, comprising 1279 renal artery, 775 splenic artery, 359 hepatic artery, 226 pancreaticoduodenal and gastroduodenal arteries, 95 superior mesenteric artery, 87 celiac artery, 15 jejunal, ileal and colic arteries, and 9 gastric and gastroepiploic arteries. Differences in mortality between open and endovascular approaches were not statistically significant. The endovascular approach was used more often by surgeons. The endovascular approach was associated with shorter hospital stay and lower rates of cardiovascular complications but higher rates of reintervention. Postembolization syndrome rates ranged from 9% (renal) to 38% (splenic). Coil migration ranged from 8% (splenic) to 29% (renal). Otherwise, access site complication were low (<5%). Pseudoaneurysms tended to have higher mortality and reintervention rates.
This systematic review provides event rates for outcomes important to patients with VAAs. Despite the low certainty warranted by the evidence, these rates along, with surgical expertise and anatomic feasibility, can help patients and surgeons in shared-decision making.
As open abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair (OAR) rates decline in the endovascular era, the endorsement of minimum volume thresholds for OAR is increasingly controversial, as this may affect ...credentialing and training. The purpose of this analysis was to identify an optimal centre volume threshold that is associated with the most significant mortality reduction after OAR, and to determine how this reflects contemporary practice.
This was an observational study of OARs performed in 11 countries (2010 – 2016) within the International Consortium of Vascular Registry database (n = 178 302). The primary endpoint was post-operative in hospital mortality. Two different methodologies (area under the receiving operating curve optimisation and Markov chain Monte Carlo procedure) were used to determine the optimal centre volume threshold associated with the most significant mortality improvement.
In total, 154 912 (86.9%) intact and 23 390 (13.1%) ruptured AAAs were analysed. The majority (63.1%; n = 112 557) underwent endovascular repair (EVAR) (OAR 36.9%; n = 65 745). A significant inverse relationship between increasing centre volume and lower peri-operative mortality after intact and ruptured OAR was evident (p < .001) but not with EVAR. An annual centre volume of between 13 and 16 procedures per year was associated with the most significant mortality reduction after intact OAR (adjusted predicted mortality < 13 procedures/year 4.6% 95% confidence interval 4.0% – 5.2% vs. ≥ 13 procedures/year 3.1% 95% CI 2.8% – 3.5%). With the increasing adoption of EVAR, the mean number of OARs per centre (intact + ruptured) decreased significantly (2010 – 2013 = 35.7; 2014 – 2016 = 29.8; p < .001). Only 23% of centres (n = 240/1 065) met the ≥ 13 procedures/year volume threshold, with significant variation between nations (Germany 11%; Denmark 100%).
An annual centre volume of 13 – 16 OARs per year is the optimal threshold associated with the greatest mortality risk reduction after treatment of intact AAA. However, in the current endovascular era, achieving this threshold requires significant re-organisation of OAR practice delivery in many countries, and would affect provision of non-elective aortic services. Low volume centres continuing to offer OAR should aim to achieve mortality results equivalent to the high volume institution benchmark, using validated data from quality registries to track outcomes.
Objective To assess the three year clinical outcomes and cost effectiveness of a strategy of endovascular repair (if aortic morphology is suitable, open repair if not) versus open repair for patients ...with suspected ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm.Design Randomised controlled trial.Setting 30 vascular centres (29 in UK, one in Canada), 2009-16.Participants 613 eligible patients (480 men) with a clinical diagnosis of ruptured aneurysm, of whom 502 underwent emergency repair for rupture.Interventions 316 patients were randomised to an endovascular strategy (275 with confirmed rupture) and 297 to open repair (261 with confirmed rupture).Main outcome measures Mortality, with reinterventions after aneurysm repair, quality of life, and hospital costs to three years as secondary measures.Results The maximum follow-up for mortality was 7.1 years, with two patients in each group lost to follow-up by three years. After similar mortality by 90 days, in the mid-term (three months to three years) there were fewer deaths in the endovascular than the open repair group (hazard ratio 0.57, 95% confidence interval 0.36 to 0.90), leading to lower mortality at three years (48% v 56%), but by seven years mortality was about 60% in each group (hazard ratio 0.92, 0.75 to 1.13). Results for the 502 patients with repaired ruptures were more pronounced: three year mortality was lower in the endovascular strategy group (42% v 54%; odds ratio 0.62, 0.43 to 0.88), but after seven years there was no clear difference between the groups (hazard ratio 0.86, 0.68 to 1.08). Reintervention rates up to three years were not significantly different between the randomised groups (hazard ratio 1.02, 0.79 to 1.32); the initial rapid rate of reinterventions was followed by a much slower mid-term reintervention rate in both groups. The early higher average quality of life in the endovascular strategy versus open repair group, coupled with the lower mortality at three years, led to a gain in average quality adjusted life years (QALYs) at three years of 0.17 (95% confidence interval 0.00 to 0.33). The endovascular strategy group spent fewer days in hospital and had lower average costs of −£2605 (95% confidence interval −£5966 to £702) (about €2813; $3439). The probability that the endovascular strategy is cost effective was >90% at all levels of willingness to pay for a QALY gain.Conclusions At three years, compared with open repair, an endovascular strategy for suspected ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm was associated with a survival advantage, a gain in QALYs, similar levels of reintervention, and reduced costs, and this strategy was cost effective. These findings support the increasing use of an endovascular strategy, with wider availability of emergency endovascular repair.Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN48334791; ClinicalTrials NCT00746122.
Patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) require revascularization to improve limb perfusion and thereby limit the risk of amputation. It is uncertain whether an initial strategy of ...endovascular therapy or surgical revascularization for CLTI is superior for improving limb outcomes.
In this international, randomized trial, we enrolled 1830 patients with CLTI and infrainguinal peripheral artery disease in two parallel-cohort trials. Patients who had a single segment of great saphenous vein that could be used for surgery were assigned to cohort 1. Patients who needed an alternative bypass conduit were assigned to cohort 2. The primary outcome was a composite of a major adverse limb event - which was defined as amputation above the ankle or a major limb reintervention (a new bypass graft or graft revision, thrombectomy, or thrombolysis) - or death from any cause.
In cohort 1, after a median follow-up of 2.7 years, a primary-outcome event occurred in 302 of 709 patients (42.6%) in the surgical group and in 408 of 711 patients (57.4%) in the endovascular group (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% confidence interval CI, 0.59 to 0.79; P<0.001). In cohort 2, a primary-outcome event occurred in 83 of 194 patients (42.8%) in the surgical group and in 95 of 199 patients (47.7%) in the endovascular group (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.58 to 1.06; P = 0.12) after a median follow-up of 1.6 years. The incidence of adverse events was similar in the two groups in the two cohorts.
Among patients with CLTI who had an adequate great saphenous vein for surgical revascularization (cohort 1), the incidence of a major adverse limb event or death was significantly lower in the surgical group than in the endovascular group. Among the patients who lacked an adequate saphenous vein conduit (cohort 2), the outcomes in the two groups were similar. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; BEST-CLI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02060630.).
Cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) is increasingly used in the preoperative assessment of patients undergoing major surgery. The objective of this study was to investigate whether CPET can ...identify patients at risk of reduced survival after abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair.
Prospectively collected data from consecutive patients who underwent CPET before elective open or endovascular AAA repair (EVAR) at two tertiary vascular centres between January 2007 and October 2012 were analysed. A symptom-limited maximal CPET was performed on each patient. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression modelling was used to identify risk factors associated with reduced survival.
The study included 506 patients with a mean age of 73.4 (range 44–90). The majority (82.6%) were men and most (64.6%) underwent EVAR. The in-hospital mortality was 2.6%. The median follow-up was 26 months. The 3-year survival for patients with zero or one sub-threshold CPET value ( V˙O2 at AT<10.2 ml kg−1 min−1, peak V˙O2<15 ml kg−1 min−1 or V˙E/V˙CO2 at AT>42) was 86.4% compared with 59.9% for patients with three sub-threshold CPET values. Risk factors independently associated with survival were female sex hazard ratio (HR)=0.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.22–0.85, P=0.015, diabetes (HR=1.95, 95% CI 1.04–3.69, P=0.039), preoperative statins (HR=0.58, 95% CI 0.38–0.90, P=0.016), haemoglobin g dl−1 (HR=0.84, 95% CI 0.74–0.95, P=0.006), peak V˙O2<15 ml kg−1 min−1 (HR=1.63, 95% CI 1.01–2.63, P=0.046), and V˙E/V˙CO2 at AT>42 (HR=1.68, 95% CI 1.00–2.80, P=0.049).
CPET variables are independent predictors of reduced survival after elective AAA repair and can identify a cohort of patients with reduced survival at 3 years post-procedure. CPET is a potentially useful adjunct for clinical decision-making in patients with AAA.
The Society for Vascular Surgery® pursued development of clinical practice guidelines for the management of traumatic thoracic aortic injuries with thoracic endovascular aortic repair. In formulating ...clinical practice guidelines, the Society selected a panel of experts and conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. They used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methods (GRADE) to develop and present their recommendations. The systematic review included 7768 patients from 139 studies. The mortality rate was significantly lower in patients who underwent endovascular repair, followed by open repair, and nonoperative management (9%, 19%, and 46%, respectively, P < .01). Based on the overall very low quality of evidence, the committee suggests that endovascular repair of thoracic aortic transection is associated with better survival and decreased risk of spinal cord ischemia, renal injury, graft, and systemic infections compared with open repair or nonoperative management (Grade 2, Level C). The committee was also surveyed on a variety of issues that were not specifically addressed by the meta-analysis. On these select matters, the majority opinions of the committee suggest urgent repair following stabilization of other injuries, observation of minimal aortic defects, selective (vs routine) revascularization in cases of left subclavian artery coverage, and that spinal drainage is not routinely required in these cases.
The executive summary of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions coronary artery revascularization guideline provides ...the top 10 items readers should know about the guideline. In the full guideline, the recommendations replace the 2011 coronary artery bypass graft surgery guideline and the 2011 and 2015 percutaneous coronary intervention guidelines. This summary offers a patient-centric approach to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with significant coronary artery disease undergoing coronary revascularization, as well as the supporting documentation to encourage their use.
A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2019 to September 2019, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, CINHL Complete, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through May 2021, were also considered. Structure: Recommendations from the earlier percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass graft surgery guidelines have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians in caring for patients undergoing coronary revascularization. This summary includes recommendations, tables, and figures from the full guideline that relate to the top 10 take-home messages. The reader is referred to the full guideline for graphical flow charts, supportive text, and tables with additional details about the rationale for and implementation of each recommendation, and the evidence tables detailing the data considered in the development of this guideline.
The aim of our study was to determine the incidence, characteristics, and clinical outcomes of patients with the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) infection who had presented with and been treated for ...acute limb ischemia (ALI) during the 2020 coronavirus pandemic.
We performed a single-center, observational cohort study. The data from all patients who had tested positive for COVID-19 and had presented with ALI requiring urgent operative treatment were collected in a prospectively maintained database. For the present series, successful revascularization of the treated arterial segment was defined as the absence of early (<30 days) re-occlusion or major amputation or death within 24 hours. The primary outcomes were successful revascularization, early (≤30 days) and late (≥30 days) survival, postoperative (≤30 days) complications, and limb salvage.
We evaluated the data from 20 patients with ALI who were positive for COVID-19. For the period from January to March, the incidence rate of patients presenting with ALI in 2020 was significantly greater than that for the same months in 2019 (23 of 141 16.3% vs 3 of 163 1.8%; P < .001). Of the 20 included patients, 18 were men (90%) and two were women (10%). Their mean age was 75 ± 9 years (range, 62-95 years). All 20 patients already had a diagnosis of COVID-19 pneumonia. Operative treatment was performed in 17 patients (85%). Revascularization was successful in 12 of the 17 (70.6%). Although successful revascularization was not significantly associated with the postoperative use of intravenous heparin (64.7% vs 83.3%; P = .622), no patient who had received intravenous heparin required reintervention. Of the 20 patients, eight (40%) had died in the hospital. The patients who had died were significantly older (81 ± 10 years vs 71 ± 5 years; P = .008). The use of continuous postoperative systemic heparin infusion was significantly associated with survival (0% vs 57.1%; P = .042).
In our preliminary experience, the incidence of ALI has significantly increased during the COVID-19 pandemic in the Italian Lombardy region. Successful revascularization was lower than expected, which we believed was due to a virus-related hypercoagulable state. The use of prolonged systemic heparin might improve surgical treatment efficacy, limb salvage, and overall survival.
PDF
