A registry-based study of paclitaxel drug-coated balloon angioplasty for the treatment of in-stent restenosis of the femoral-popliteal artery.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to report the results of a prospective, single-arm, registry-based study assessing the safety and performance of a paclitaxel drug-coated balloon (DCB) for the treatment of superficial femoral artery (SFA) or popliteal artery in-stent restenosis (ISR) in a United States population. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, non-randomized, multi-center, single-arm, post-market registry of the IN.PACT Admiral DCB for the treatment of ISR lesions in the SFA or popliteal artery at 43 sites within the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) Registry from December 2016 to January 2020. Clinical outcomes were assessed at 12, 24, and 36 months. The primary endpoint was target lesion revascularization at 12 months. Secondary endpoints included technical success, target vessel revascularization, major limb amputation, and all-cause mortality. Results are presented as survival probabilities based on Kaplan-Meier survival estimates. RESULTS: Patients (N = 300) were 58% male, with a mean age of 68 ± 10 years. Diabetes was present in 56%, 80% presented with claudication, and 20% with rest pain. Lesions included ISR of the SFA in 68%, SFA-popliteal in 26%, and popliteal arteries in 7%. The mean lesion length was 17.8 ± 11.8 cm. Lesions were categorized as occlusions in 43% (mean occluded length, 16 ± 10 cm). TASC type was A (17%), B (29%), C (38%), and D (15%). Technical success was 99%. Re-stenting was performed in 5% and thrombolysis in 0.6% of patients. Kaplan-Meier estimates for freedom from target lesion revascularization were 90%, 72%, and 62% at 12, 24, and 36 months. Freedom from target vessel revascularization was 88%, 68%, and 59% and freedom from major target limb amputation was 99.6%, 98.9%, and 98.9%, respectively, at 12, 24, and 36 months. Survival was 95%, 89%, and 85% at 12, 24, and 36 months. CONCLUSIONS: This post-market registry-based study shows promising results in treating femoral-popliteal ISR with paclitaxel DCB in comparison to the results of plain balloon angioplasty reported in the literature. These results demonstrate the ability of the SVS VQI to conduct post-market evaluation of peripheral devices in partnership with industry and federal regulators.

Outcomes of carotid artery stenting in patients with radiation arteritis compared with those with atherosclerotic disease.

OBJECTIVE: Head and neck malignancies are often treated with radiotherapy (RT). Nearly 80% of patients who have undergone RT will develop carotid radiation arteritis to some degree and 29% will develop stenosis >50%. Surgery in a radiated neck has higher rates of complications, and carotid artery stenting (CAS) has become the primary therapy. The outcomes for CAS in patients with radiation arteritis have not been rigorously evaluated. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the differences in perioperative outcomes, restenosis rates, the need for reintervention, and freedom from mortality between RT patients and patients with atherosclerotic disease who had undergone CAS. METHODS: The national Vascular Quality Initiative CAS dataset from 2016 to 2019 comprised the sample for analyses (n = 7343). The primary independent variable was previous head and/or neck RT. The primary endpoint was the interval to mortality. The secondary endpoints were the cumulative incidence of restenosis (>50% and >70% by duplex ultrasound) and reintervention. We also examined the following secondary perioperative endpoints: myocardial infarction, in-hospital mortality (death before discharge), neurologic events, ipsilateral stroke, and contralateral stroke. Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox proportional hazard models were used to assess for mortality, and cumulative incidence function estimates were used for the nonfatal endpoints. RESULTS: Of the 7218 patients, 1199 (17%) had undergone prior RT. We found a significant difference in the 3-year estimates of mortality for those with and without prior RT (9.4% and 7.5%, respectively; P = .03). Furthermore, on adjusted analysis, we observed a 58% increase in the risk of mortality for those with prior RT (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.58; 95% confidence interval, 1.13-2.21). We did not observe any differences in the risk of perioperative complications (myocardial infarction, in-hospital mortality, ipsilateral or contralateral stroke), restenosis (>50% or >70%), or reintervention for the prior RT group compared with those without RT. CONCLUSIONS: The CAS patients with RT had significantly greater mortality at all time points compared with those without RT, even after adjusting for other covariates. No significant difference was found in the incidence of perioperative complications, reintervention, or restenosis between the two groups. The present study is unique because of the large sample size and length of follow-up. The results suggest that for this high-risk group, CAS provides the same patency as it does for atherosclerotic carotid stenosis and avoids potentially morbid cranial nerve injury and wound healing complications.

The effect of rurality on the risk of primary amputation is amplified by race.

OBJECTIVE: Primary amputation (ie, without attempted revascularization) is a devastating complication of peripheral artery disease. Racial disparities in primary amputation have been described; however, rural disparities have not been well investigated. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of rurality on risk of primary amputation and to explore the effect of race on this relationship. METHODS: The national Vascular Quality Initiative amputation data set was used for analyses (N = 6795). The outcome of interest was primary amputation. Independent variables were race/ethnicity (non-Latinx whites vs nonwhites) and rural residence. Multivariable logistic regression examined impact of rurality and race/ethnicity on primary amputation after adjustment for relevant covariates and included an interaction for race/ethnicity by rural status. RESULTS: Primary amputation occurred in 49% of patients overall (n = 3332), in 47% of rural vs 49% of urban patients (P = .322), and in 46% of whites vs 53% of nonwhites (P < .001). On multivariable analysis, nonwhites had a 21% higher odds of undergoing primary amputation overall (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.39). On subgroup analysis, rural nonwhites had two times higher odds of undergoing primary amputation than rural whites (AOR, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.53-2.78) and a 52% higher odds of undergoing primary amputation than urban nonwhites (AOR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.19-1.94). In the urban setting, nonwhites had a 21% higher odds of undergoing primary amputation than urban whites (AOR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.05-1.39). CONCLUSIONS: In these analyses, rurality was associated with greater odds for primary amputation in nonwhite patients but not in white patients. The effect of race on primary amputation was significant in both urban and rural settings; however, the effect was significantly stronger in rural settings. These findings suggest that race/ethnicity has a compounding effect on rural health disparities and that strategies to improve health of rural communities need to consider the particular needs of nonwhite residents to reduce disparities.

Geographic variation in amputation rates among patients with diabetes and/or peripheral arterial disease in the rural state of West Virginia identifies areas for improved care.

OBJECTIVE: Amputation is a devastating but preventable complication of diabetes and peripheral arterial disease (PAD). Multiple studies have focused on disparities in amputation rates based on race and socioeconomic status, but few focus on amputation trends in rural populations. The objective of this study was to identify the prevalence of major and minor amputation among patients admitted with diabetes and/or PAD in a rural, Appalachian state, and to identify geographic areas with higher than expected major and minor amputations using advanced spatial analysis while controlling for comorbidities and rurality. METHODS: Patient hospital admissions of West Virginia residents with diagnoses of diabetes and/or PAD and with or without an amputation procedure were identified from the West Virginia Health Care Authority State Inpatient Database from 2011 to 2016 using relevant International Classification of Diseases, 9th edition and 10the edition codes. Bayesian spatial hierarchical modeling was conducted to identify areas of high risk, while controlling for important confounders for amputation. RESULTS: Overall, there were 5557 amputations among 459,452 hospital admissions with diabetes and/or PAD from 2011 to 2016. The majority of the amputations were minor (61.7%; n = 3430), with a prevalence of 7.5 per 1000 and 40.4% (n = 2248) were major, with a prevalence of 4.9 per 1000. Geographic analysis found significant variation in risk for both major and minor amputation across the state, even after adjusting for the prevalence of risk factors. Analyses indicated an increased risk of amputation in the central and northeastern regions of West Virginia at the county level, although zip code-level patterns of amputation varied, with high-risk areas identified primarily in the northeastern and south central regions of the state. CONCLUSIONS: There is significant geographic variation in risk of amputation across West Virginia, even after adjusting for disease-related risk factors, suggesting priority areas for further investigation. The level of granularity obtained using advanced spatial analyses rather than traditional methods demonstrate the value of this approach, particularly when risk estimates are used to inform policy or public health intervention.

A Novel Quality of Life Instrument for Patients with an Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm.

OBJECTIVE: The surveillance and treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) may impact patient quality of life (QOL). A novel AAA specific QOL instrument was developed and validated to quantify the impact of AAA surveillance on QOL. METHODS: The study was performed in two phases: development (2011-2013) and validation (2013-2014) of a survey instrument. Content was informed by focus groups at three centres (22 patients) and two multidisciplinary physician focus groups (6 vascular surgeons, 7 primary care providers). Cognitive interviews (17 patients) ensured questions were understood as intended. The final survey was mailed to AAA patients at six US institutions. Patients were scored on two AAA specific domains of QOL: emotional impact (EIS) and behavioural change (BCS), range 0-100 with higher scores indicating worse quality of life. Test retest reliability and internal consistency were assessed. Discriminant validity was determined by comparing scores between patients under surveillance vs. those who had undergone AAA repair. Scores were externally validated by correlation with the Short Form (SF)-12. RESULTS: A total of 1,008 (73%) of 1,373 patients returned surveys: 351 (35%) were under surveillance, 657 (65%) had undergone repair (endovascular, 414; open, 179; unsure, 64). Median EIS was 11 (range 0-95; IQR 7-26). Median BCS was 13 (range 0-100; IQR 9-47). To test reliability, 337 patients repeated the survey after four weeks with no significant differences between scores over time. EIS and BCS demonstrated good internal consistency (Cronbach's Alpha 0.85 and 0.75 respectively). There was strong correlation between scores (r = 0.53) and both related moderately to SF-12 scores (r = 0.45 and r = 0.39, respectively). Patients under AAA surveillance had worse EIS than repair patients (22 vs. 13; p < .001). Patients with a higher perceived rupture risk had a worse EIS (45 vs. 12; p < .001) and BCS (30 vs. 13; p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: An AAA specific QOL instrument was successfully created and validated. The range of impact on QOL by AAA surveillance is broad. For most patients the impact is minimal, but for some, especially those with a greater perceived rupture risk, it is severe.

Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing Limitation in Peripheral Arterial Disease.

BACKGROUND: Peripheral artery disease (PAD) is associated with a markedly increased risk of cardiovascular mortality and remains underrecognized and undertreated. New screening approaches are needed to prevent disability in patients with PAD. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of clinically stable cardiovascular patients who were referred for cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) due to a variety of cardiovascular complaints. Angiograms were assessed for patients who prematurely terminated CPET. Estimated functional capacity in metabolic equivalents was also obtained from monitored bicycle exercise at the visit. RESULTS: According to our analysis, 351 patients were unable to complete the CPET test due to some limiting factor. Of these patients, a total of 216 had available angiographic assessment conducted, of whom 42.6% were males, 57.4% were females, and the mean age was 67 years. A total of 135 patients with a similar gender distribution and a mean age of 53 years did not undergo angiography for various reasons including feasibility. Most patients who underwent assessment were found to have lesions. Across all patients, 284 arterial lesions were identified: 55 were iliac, 67 were femoral, and 162 were below the knee. PAD was diagnosed in 165 of these lesions. There was a significant difference observed in the VO2 max in patients with lesions depending on location of lesion. In all vessel groups, the existence of PAD was associated with a significantly reduced VO2 max during CPET testing. CONCLUSIONS: The data obtained in this study provides a preliminary understanding of the underlying effects of PAD and provides a basis for further utilization of CPET termination as a potential screening signal for further PAD investigation in appropriate patients.

Midterm outcomes of catheter-directed interventions for the treatment of acute pulmonary embolism.

Objective The hemodynamic benefits of catheter-directed thrombolysis for acute pulmonary embolism have not been clearly defined beyond the periprocedural period. The objective of this study is to report midterm outcomes of catheter-directed thrombolysis for treatment of acute pulmonary embolism. Methods Records of all patients undergoing catheter-directed thrombolysis for high- or intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism were retrospectively reviewed. Endpoints were clinical success, procedure-related complications, mortality, and longitudinal echocardiographic parameter improvement. Results A total of 69 patients underwent catheter-directed thrombolysis (mean age 59 ± 15 y, 56% male). Eleven had high-risk and 58 intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism. Baseline characteristics did not differ by pulmonary embolism subtype. Fifty-two percent of patients underwent ultrasound-assisted thrombolysis, 39% standard catheter-directed thrombolysis, and 9% other interventional therapy; 89.9% had bilateral treatment. Average treatment time was 17.7 ± 11.3 h with average t-Pa dose of 28.5 ± 19.6 mg. The rate of clinical success was 88%. There were two major (3%) and six minor (9%) periprocedural bleeding complications with no strokes. All echocardiographic parameters demonstrated significant improvement at one-year follow-up. Pulmonary embolism-related in-hospital mortality was 3.3%, and estimated survival was 81.2% at one year. Conclusions Catheter-directed thrombolysis is safe and effective for treatment of acute pulmonary embolism, with sustained hemodynamic improvement at one year. Further prospective large-scale studies are needed to determine comparative effectiveness of interventions for acute pulmonary embolism.

Contemporary outcomes of open and endovascular popliteal artery aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate contemporary practice and outcomes of open repair (OR) or endovascular repair (ER) for popliteal artery aneurysms (PAAs). METHODS: Consecutive patients with PAA treated at one institution from January 2006 to March 2014 were reviewed under an Institutional Review Board-approved protocol. Demographics, indications, anatomic characteristics, and outcomes were collected. Standard statistical methods were used. RESULTS: A total of 186 PAAs were repaired in 156 patients (110 ORs, 76 ERs) with a mean age of 71 ± 11 years, and most were male (96%). Mean follow-up was 34.9 ± 28.6 months for OR and 28.3 ± 25.8 months for ER (P = .12). Comorbidities were similar between groups. OR was used in more patients with PAA thrombosis (41.8% vs 5.3%; P < .001), acute ischemia (24.5% vs 9.2%; P = .010), and ischemic rest pain (34.5% vs 6.6%; P < .001). Mean tibial (Society for Vascular Surgery) runoff score was 5.0 for OR vs 3.3 for ER (P = .006). OR was associated with increased 30-day complications (22% vs 2.6%; P < .001) and mean postoperative stay (5.8 vs 1.6 days; P < .001). There was no difference in 30-day mortality (OR, 1.8%; ER, 0%; P = .56) or major amputation rate (OR, 3.7%; ER, 1.3%; P = .65). Primary, primary assisted, and secondary patency rates were similar at 3 years (OR, 79.5%, 83.7%, and 85%; ER, 73.2%, 76.3%, and 83%; P = NS). Among 130 patients presenting electively without acute ischemia or thrombosed PAA (63 ORs and 67 ERs), OR had better 3-year primary patency (88.3% vs 69.8%; P = .030) and primary assisted patency (90.2% vs 73.5%; P = .051) but similar secondary patency (90.2% vs 82%; P = .260). ER thrombosis was noted in 8 of 24 patients treated in 2006-2008 (33%; mean time to failure, 49 months) but in only 4 of 51 patients treated in 2009-2013 (7.8%; mean time to failure, 30 months), suggesting a steep learning curve. CONCLUSIONS: ER is a safe and durable option for PAA, with lower complication rates and a shorter length of stay. OR has superior primary patency in patients treated electively but no difference in midterm secondary patency and amputations.

Primary closure after carotid endarterectomy is not inferior to other closure techniques.

OBJECTIVE: Primary closure after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) has been much maligned as an inferior technique with worse outcomes than in patch closure. Our purpose was to compare perioperative and long-term results of different CEA closure techniques in a large institutional experience. METHODS: A consecutive cohort of CEAs between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2010, was retrospectively analyzed. Closure technique was used to divide patients into three groups: primary longitudinal arteriotomy closure (PRC), patch closure (PAC), and eversion closure (EVC). End points were perioperative events, long-term strokes, and restenosis ≥70%. Multivariate regression models were used to assess the effect of baseline predictors. RESULTS: There were 1737 CEA cases (bilateral, 143; mean age, 71.4 ± 9.3 years; 56.2% men; 35.3% symptomatic) performed during the study period with a mean clinical follow-up of 49.8 ± 36.4 months (range, 0-155 months). More men had primary closure, but other demographic and baseline symptoms were similar between groups. Half the patients had PAC, with the rest evenly distributed between PRC and EVC. The rate of nerve injury was 2.7%, the rate of reintervention for hematoma was 1.5%, and the length of hospital stay was 2.4 ± 3.0 days, with no significant differences among groups. The combined stroke and death rate was 2.5% overall and 3.9% and 1.7% in the symptomatic and asymptomatic cohort, respectively. Stroke and death rates were similar between groups: PRC, 11 (2.7%); PAC, 19 (2.2%); EVC, 13 (2.9%). Multivariate analysis showed baseline symptomatic disease (odds ratio, 2.4; P = .007) and heart failure (odds ratio, 3.1; P = .003) as predictors of perioperative stroke and death, but not the type of closure. Cox regression analysis demonstrated, among other risk factors, no statin use (hazard ratio, 2.1; P = .008) as a predictor of ipsilateral stroke and severe (glomerular filtration rate <30 mL/min/1.73 m(2)) renal insufficiency (hazard ratio, 2.6; P = .032) as the only predictor of restenosis ≥70%. Type of closure did not have any predictive value. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, baseline risk factors and statin use, but not the type of closure, affect perioperative and long-term outcomes after CEA.

A national survey of disease-specific knowledge in patients with an abdominal aortic aneurysm.

OBJECTIVE: Patient education is a fundamental responsibility of medical providers caring for patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA). We sought to evaluate and quantify AAA-specific knowledge in patients under AAA surveillance and in patients who have undergone AAA repair. METHODS: In 2013, 1373 patients from 6 U.S. institutions were mailed an AAA-specific quality of life and knowledge survey. Of these patients, 1008 (73%) returned completed surveys for analysis. The knowledge domain of the survey consisted of nine questions. An AAA knowledge score was calculated for each patient based on the proportion of questions answered correctly. The score was then compared according to sex, race, and education level. Surveillance and repaired patients were also compared. RESULTS: Among 1008 survey respondents, 351 were under AAA surveillance and 657 had AAA repair (endovascular repair, 414; open, 179; unknown, 64). The majority of patients (85%) reported that their "doctor's office" was their most important source of AAA information. The "Internet" and "other written materials" were each reported as the most important source of information 5% of the time with "other patients" reported 2% of the time. The mean AAA knowledge score was 47% (range 0%-100%; standard deviation, 23%) with a broad variation in percentage correct between questions. Thirty-two percent of respondents did not know that larger AAA size increases rupture risk, and 64% did not know that AAA runs in families. Only 15% of patients answered six or more of the nine questions correctly, and 23% of patients answered two or fewer questions correctly. AAA knowledge was significantly greater in men compared with women, whites compared with nonwhites, high school graduates compared with nongraduates, and surveillance compared with repaired patients. CONCLUSIONS: In a national survey of AAA-specific knowledge, patients demonstrated poor understanding of their condition. This may contribute to anxiety and uninformed decision making. The need for increased focus on education by vascular providers is a substantial unmet need.

Risk Factors for Long-Term Mortality and Amputation after Open and Endovascular Treatment of Acute Limb Ischemia.

BACKGROUND: Acute limb ischemia (ALI) is a highly morbid and fatal vascular emergency with little known about contemporary, long-term patient outcomes. The goal was to determine predictors of long-term mortality and amputation after open and endovascular treatment of ALI. METHODS: A retrospective review of ALI patients at a single institution from 2005 to 2011 was performed to determine the impact of revascularization technique on 5-year mortality and amputation. For each main outcome 2 multivariable models were developed; the first adjusted for preoperative clinical presentation and procedure type, the second also adjusted for postoperative adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: A total of 445 limbs in 411 patients were treated for ALI. Interventions included surgical thrombectomy (48%), emergent bypass (18%), and endovascular revascularization (34%). Mean age was 68 ± 15 years, 54% were male, and 23% had cancer. Most patients presented with Rutherford classification IIa (54%) or IIb (39%). The etiology of ALI included embolism (27%), in situ thrombosis (28%), thrombosed bypass grafts (32%), and thrombosed stents (13%). Patients treated with open procedures had significantly more advanced ischemia and higher rates of postoperative respiratory failure, whereas patients undergoing endovascular interventions had higher rates of technical failure. Rates of postprocedural bleeding and cardiac events were similar between both treatments. Excluding Rutherford class III patients (n = 12), overall 5-year mortality was 54% (stratified by treatment, 65% for thrombectomy, 63% for bypass, and 36% for endovascular, P < 0.001); 5-year amputation was 28% (stratified by treatment, 18% for thrombectomy, 27% for bypass, and 17% for endovascular, P = 0.042). Adjusting for comorbidities, patient presentation, AEs, and treatment method, the risk of mortality increased with age (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.04, P < 0.001), female gender (HR = 1.50, P = 0.031), cancer (HR = 2.19, P < 0.001), fasciotomy (HR = 1.69, P = 0.204) in situ thrombosis or embolic etiology (HR = 1.73, P = 0.007), cardiac AEs (HR = 2.25, P < 0.001), respiratory failure (HR = 2.72, P < 0.001), renal failure (HR = 4.70, P < 0.001), and hemorrhagic events (HR = 2.25, P = 0.003). Risk of amputation increased with advanced ischemia (Rutherford IIb compared with IIa, HR = 2.57, P < 0.001), thrombosed bypass etiology (HR = 3.53, P = 0.002), open revascularization (OR; HR = 1.95, P = 0.022), and technical failure of primary intervention (HR = 6.01, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: After the treatment of ALI, long-term mortality and amputation rates were greater in patients treated with open techniques; OR patients presented with a higher number of comorbidities and advanced ischemia, while also experiencing a higher rate of major postoperative complications. Overall, mortality rates remained high and were most strongly associated with baseline comorbidities, acuity of presentation, and perioperative AEs, particularly respiratory failure. Comparatively, amputation risk was most highly associated with advanced ischemia, thrombosed bypass, and failure of the initial revascularization procedure.

Comparative effectiveness of endovascular versus surgical revascularization for acute lower extremity ischemia.

OBJECTIVE: Thrombolysis and open surgical revascularization are current options for the treatment of acute limb ischemia (ALI). Despite the several randomized controlled trials comparing the two options, no single treatment can yet be recommended as a universal initial management of ALI. The purpose of this study was to evaluate contemporary endovascular and surgical revascularization for ALI. METHODS: Consecutive patients with ALI treated with endovascular revascularization (ER) or open revascularization (OR) between 2005 and 2011 were identified and reviewed. Procedural success and outcomes were compared between the two groups. Limb salvage and survival were assessed by time-to-event methods, including Kaplan-Meier estimation and competing-risks regression models. RESULTS: A total of 154 limbs were treated in 147 patients in the ER group, compared with 326 limbs in 296 patients in the OR group. The mean follow-up was 14 ± 18.5 months. The majority of patients presented with Rutherford II ischemia (83% for OR, 90% for ER). In Rutherford II patients, technical success was achieved in 90.7% of the OR group vs 79.9% of the ER group (P = .002), with amputation rates of 10.0% vs 7.2% (P = .35) at 30 days and 16.3% vs 13.0% (P = .37) at 1 year, respectively. In Rutherford II patients with failed bypass graft, technical success rate was 95.0% (OR) vs 75.0% (ER) (P = .001), whereas the amputation rate was 6.3% vs 15.38% (P = .13) at 30 days and 24.1% vs 23.1% (P = .90) at 1 year, respectively. The overall 30-day mortality rate was 13.2% (OR) and 5.4% (ER) (P = .012). Overall amputation rates were 13.5% (OR) vs 6.5% (ER) at 30 days (P = .023) and 19.6% (OR) vs 13.0% (ER) at 1 year (P = .074). The primary patency rate was 57% (OR) and 51% (ER) at 1 year (P = .74). Predictors of limb loss by life-table analysis included coronary artery disease (hazard ratio [HR], 2.0; P = .007) and Rutherford category III (HR, 19.0; P < .001). Predictors of death by life-table analysis included age (HR, 1.03; P < .001), end-stage renal disease (HR, 7.28; P < .001), cancer (HR, 1.65; P = .005), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (HR, 1.61; P = .005). CONCLUSIONS: In patients presenting with class II ALI, ER or surgical OR resulted in comparable limb salvage rates. Although technical success is higher with OR for patients presenting with failed bypass grafts, the amputation rates are comparable. Overall mortality rates are significantly higher at 30 days and 1 year in the OR group.

Revascularization of asymptomatic carotid stenosis is not appropriate in patients on dialysis.

OBJECTIVE: Outcomes of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) or carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) for asymptomatic disease in patients on dialysis are not well characterized, with questionable stroke prevention and survival. This study reports outcomes of carotid revascularization in asymptomatic dialysis patients in the United States. METHODS: Using United States Renal Data System (USRDS) databases, we identified all dialysis patients who underwent CEA or CAS for asymptomatic disease from 2005 to 2008. CEA and CAS were identified by Current Procedural Terminology (American Medical Association, Chicago, Ill) codes, and symptom status and comorbidities by International Classification of Diseases-9th Revision, Clinical Modification codes. Primary outcomes were stroke, cardiac complications, and death at 30 days and at 1 and 3 years. Predictors of death were identified using multivariate regression models. RESULTS: Of 738,561 dialysis patients, 2131 asymptomatic patients underwent carotid revascularization (1805 CEA, 326 CAS). The mortality rate was 4.7% at 30 days (4.6% CEA, 4.9% CAS; P = .807). Kaplan-Meier estimates of survival were 75.1% at 1 year (75.9% CEA, 70.7% CAS) and 43.4% at 3 years (43.7% CEA, 41.6% CAS). The stroke rate was 6.5% at 30 days (6.4% CEA, 6.9% CAS; P = .774) and 13.6% at 1 year (13.3% CEA, 15.0% CAS; P = .490). Cardiac complications occurred in 22.0% of patients (3.3% myocardial infarction) at 30 days (22.2% CEA, 20.6% CAS; P = .525). The combined stroke or death rate was 10.2% at 30 days (10.1% CEA, 10.9% CAS; P = .490) and 33.5% at 1 year (32.2% CEA, 39.6% CAS; P = .025). Age >70 years at the time of surgery and increased time on dialysis were predictive of death, whereas a history of renal transplant was a protective factor. CONCLUSIONS: Patients on dialysis have high perioperative and long-term stroke or death rates after CEA or CAS for asymptomatic stenosis, with a median survival that is less than recommended by current guidelines. As a result, carotid intervention in these patients appears to be inappropriate.

Contemporary outcomes of intact and ruptured visceral artery aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: The treatment outcomes of ruptured visceral artery aneurysms (rVAAs) have been sparsely characterized, with no clear comparison between different treatment modalities. The purpose of this paper was to review the perioperative and long-term outcomes of open and endovascular interventions for intact visceral artery aneurysms (iVAAs) and rVAAs. METHODS: This was a retrospective review of all treated VAAs at one institution from 2003 to 2013. Patient demographics, aneurysm characteristics, management, and subsequent outcomes (technical success, mortality, reintervention) and complications were recorded. RESULTS: The study identified 261 patients; 181 patients were repaired (77 ruptured, 104 intact). Pseudoaneurysms were more common in rVAAs (81.8% vs 35.3% for iVAAs; P < .001). The rVAAs were smaller than the iVAAs (20.7 mm vs 27.5 mm; P = .018), and their most common presentation was abdominal pain; 29.7% were hemodynamically unstable. Endovascular intervention was the initial treatment modality for 67.4% (75.3% for rVAAs, 61.5% for iVAAs). The perioperative complication rate was higher for rVAAs (13.7% vs 1% for iVAAs; P = .003), as was mortality at 30 days (13% vs 0% for iVAAs; P = .001), 1 year (32.5% for rVAAs vs 4.1% for iVAAs; P < .001), and 3 years (36.4% for rVAAs vs 8.3% for iVAAs; P < .001). Lower 30-day mortality was noted with endovascular repair for rVAAs (7.4% vs 28.6% open; P = .025). Predictors of mortality for rVAAs included age (odds ratio, 1.04; P = .002), whereas endovascular repair was protective (odds ratio, 0.43; P = .037). Mean follow-up was 26.2 months, and Kaplan-Meier estimates of survival were higher for iVAAs at 3 years (88% vs 62% for rVAAs; P = .045). The 30-day reintervention rate was higher for rVAAs (7.7% vs 19.5% for iVAAs; P = .019) but was similar between open and endovascular repair (8.2% vs 15%; P = NS). CONCLUSIONS: rVAAs have significant mortality. Open and endovascular interventions are equally durable for elective repair of VAAs, but endovascular interventions for rVAAs result in lower morbidity and mortality. Aggressive treatment of pseudoaneurysms is electively recommended at diagnosis regardless of size.

Long-term clinical outcomes and cardiovascular events after carotid endarterectomy.

BACKGROUND: Long-term atherosclerotic adverse events are anticipated in patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA); however, their incidence and risk predictors remain unknown. METHODS: A consecutive cohort of CEAs between 1/1/2000-12/31/2007 was analyzed. End points were any stroke, coronary event (myocardial infarction, coronary bypass, or stenting), vascular interventions for critical limb ischemia, aortic aneurysm or carotid disease, and death. Survival analysis and Cox regression models were used to identify clinical predictors. RESULTS: A total of 1,136 CEAs (bilateral, 89; mean age, 71.2 ± 9.2 years; 56.5% male; 36.3% symptomatic, and 3.9% combined with coronary bypass) were performed during the study period with a mean clinical follow-up of 60 months (0-155 months). The postoperative combined stroke and/or death rate was 2.7% and 1.9% for asymptomatic and 4.1% for symptomatic patients. Five and 10-year risks of the end points were 7.2% and 16.1% for stroke, 18.4% and 31.5% for coronary interventions, 20.6% and 28.5% for major vascular interventions, and 25.8% and 50.1% for death. Statins conferred a significant protective effect for stroke (hazard ratio [HR], 0.53; P = 0.016) and death (HR, 0.66; P < 0.0001). Baseline vascular disease predicted future vascular interventions: aortic aneurysm (HR, 1.90; P = 0.003), peripheral arterial disease (HR, 2.03; P < 0.0001), and contralateral internal carotid artery (ICA) stenosis ≥50% (HR, 4.61; P < 0.0001). Renal insufficiency predicted worse outcomes for all other end points (HR, 2.21; P = 0.023 for stroke; HR, 1.62; P = 0.008 for coronary events; HR, 2.38; P < 0.0001 for death). CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing CEA continue to derive long-term low stroke rate benefit but still sustain major coronary events and require vascular interventions, indicating a need for more intensive medical treatment and rigorous follow-up.

Outcomes of endovascular lower extremity interventions depend more on indication than physician specialty.

OBJECTIVE: Outcomes of endovascular lower extremity interventions (eLEIs) have been recently linked to provider specialty; however, the indication for intervention was not examined. We sought to compare outcomes between specialties performing eLEI for different indications, in a recent statewide inpatient discharge dataset. METHODS: The Florida hospital discharge data from 2005 to 2009 were reviewed for patients with LEI during hospitalization. We assigned provider specialty as interventional radiology (IR), interventional cardiology (IC), or vascular surgery (VS) based on provider-associated procedures. Clinical indication was claudication or critical limb ischemia (CLI). We limited our analysis to patients without concomitant open surgery during hospitalization. We compared mortality, length of stay (LOS), major use of intensive care unit (ICU), discharge disposition, and total charges between specialties with regression models, both unadjusted and adjusted for demographic and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 15,398 patients (47% with CLI) had an eLEI. Clinical indication was significantly associated with provider type (P < .001) and outcomes. VS and IR were more likely than IC to treat CLI patients (VS 59%, IR 65%, IC 26%; P < .001). IC performed the majority of procedures on claudicants (VS 30%, IC 57%, IR 13%; P < .001), while VS performed the majority of procedures on CLI patients (VS 50%, IC 23%, IR 27%; P < .001). Adjusted analyses demonstrated no difference in mortality rates between the three specialties (odds ratio [OR] VS: reference, IR: 1.24, IC: 0.79; P = NS for both). However, compared with VS, IR-treated patients were less likely to be discharged home (OR, 0.74; P < .001), LOS was longer (ß, 1.16 days; P < .001), major ICU use was more common (OR, 1.49; P < .001), and total charges were higher (ß, $341; P = .001). CLI predicted poorer results for all outcomes: death (OR, 4.19; P < .001), discharge home (OR, 0.50; P < .001), increased LOS (ß, 3.26 days; P < .001), major ICU use (OR, 1.95; P < .001), and total charges (ß, $18,730; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of eLEI done by VS are for CLI, whereas the majority of patients treated by IC are claudicants. Although provider specialty does correlate with several clinical results, the clinical indication for eLEI is a stronger predictor of adverse outcomes. Future analyses of eLEI should adjust for clinical indication.

Endovascular strategies for treatment of embolizing thoracoabdominal aortic lesions.

OBJECTIVE: Aortic sources of peripheral and visceral embolization remain challenging to treat. The safety of stent graft coverage continues to be debated. This study reports the outcomes of stent coverage of these complex lesions. METHODS: Hospital records were retrospectively reviewed for patients undergoing aortic stenting between 2006 and 2013 for visceral and peripheral embolic disease. Renal function, method of coverage, and mortality after stent grafting were reviewed. RESULTS: Twenty-five cases of embolizing aortic lesions treated with an endovascular approach were identified. The mean age was 65 ± 13 years (range, 45-87 years), and 64% were female. Sixteen (64%) patients presented with peripheral embolic events, six with concomitant renal embolization. Five patients presented with abdominal or flank pain, and two were discovered incidentally. Three patients had undergone an endovascular procedure for other indications within the preceding 6 months of presentation. Nineteen patients had existing chronic kidney disease (stage II or higher), but only three had stage IV disease. Of the eight patients tested, four had a diagnosed hypercoagulable state. Eight of the patients had lesions identified in multiple aortic segments, and aortic aneurysm disease was present in 24%. Coverage of both abdominal and thoracic sources occurred in eight patients, whereas 17 had only one segment covered. Minimal intraluminal catheter and wire manipulation was paired with the use of intravascular ultrasound in an effort to reduce embolization and contrast use. Intravascular ultrasound was used in the majority of cases and transesophageal echo in 28% of patients. Two patients with stage IV kidney disease became dialysis-dependent within 3 months of the procedure. No other patients had an increase in their postoperative or predischarge serum creatinine levels. No embolic events were precipitated during the procedure, nor were there any recurrent embolic events detected on follow-up. The 1-year mortality rate was 25%. CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular coverage of atheroembolic sources in the aorta is feasible and is safe and effective in properly selected patients. It does not appear to worsen renal function when performed with the use of specific technical strategies.

Limited survival in dialysis patients undergoing intact abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: Elective abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair in suitable candidates is a standard modality. The outcomes of AAA repair in patients with end-stage renal disease on dialysis are not well characterized, and there is questionable survival advantage in such patients with limited life expectancy. We sought to describe outcomes after AAA repair in U.S. dialysis patients. METHODS: The United States Renal Data System was used to collect data on intact asymptomatic AAA repair procedures in dialysis patients in the United States between 2005 and 2008. Endovascular AAA repair (EVAR) and open aortic repair (OAR) were identified by Current Procedural Terminology codes. Primary outcomes were perioperative (30-day) mortality and long-term survival. Predictors of mortality were identified by multivariate regression models. RESULTS: A total of 1557 patients were identified who had undergone elective AAA repair: 261 OAR and 1296 EVAR. The 30-day mortality was 11.3% (EVAR, 10.3%; OAR, 16.1%; P = .010), with increased age associated with increased mortality (odds ratio, 1.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-1.07; P = .001). Kaplan-Meier survival estimates were 66.5% at 1 year (EVAR, 66.2%; OAR, 68%) and 37.4% at 3 years (EVAR, 36.8%; OAR, 40%; P = .33). Median survival was 25.3 months after EVAR and 27.4 months after OAR. Women had a higher mortality rate at 1 year (38.7%) compared with men (32.0%) (P = .015). There was no significant mortality difference at 1 year in comparing type of procedure in both men (EVAR, 31.6%; OAR, 34%; P = .55) and women (EVAR, 39.3%; OAR, 36%; P = .60). A Cox proportional hazards model demonstrated that male gender (hazard ratio [HR], 0.75; 95% CI, 0.62-0.92; P = .005), increased time on dialysis (HR for each year on dialysis, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.75-0.83; P < .001), kidney transplantation history (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.43-0.88; P = .008), and diagnosis of hypertension (HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.48-0.75; P < .001) were protective against mortality. Increased age (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01-1.03; P < .001) and diabetes diagnosis (HR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.13-1.71; P = .002) predicted increased mortality. CONCLUSIONS: AAA patients on dialysis have high perioperative and 1-year mortality rates after EVAR or OAR, particularly diabetics, women, and the elderly. This raises questions about the indications for intact AAA repair in dialysis patients, in whom the size threshold may need to be raised. Dialysis patients may be best served by deferring repair of AAA until AAAs reach large size or become symptomatic, especially if OAR is required, given the higher perioperative mortality compared with EVAR.

Contemporary outcomes of endovascular interventions for acute limb ischemia.

OBJECTIVE: Thrombolysis as a treatment for acute limb ischemia (ALI) has become a first-line therapy based on studies published over 2 decades ago. The purpose of this study was to assess outcomes of patients treated for ALI using contemporary thrombolytic agents and endovascular techniques. METHODS: Consecutive patients with ALI of the lower extremities treated between 2005 and 2011 were identified, and their records were retrospectively reviewed. All patients were treated with tissue plasminogen activator delivered via catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) and/or pharmacomechanical thrombolysis (PMT), with other adjunctive endovascular or surgical interventions. Procedural success, thrombolysis duration, and 30-day and long-term outcomes were obtained for the whole series and were also compared between the CDT and PMT groups. Limb salvage and survival were assessed using time-to-event methods, including Kaplan-Meier estimation and Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: A total of 154 limbs were treated in 147 patients presenting with ALI (Rutherford class I, 9.7%; class IIa, 70.1%; class IIb, 20.1%). The mean follow-up was 15.20 months (range, 0.56-56.84 months). Indications for intervention included embolization (14.3%), thrombosed bypass (36.4%), thrombosed stent (26.6%), native artery thrombosis (24.0%), and thrombosed popliteal aneurysm (3.2%). Technical success was achieved in 83.8% of cases, with a 30-day mortality rate of 5.2%. Procedural complications included systemic bleeding (5.2%), access site hematoma (4.5%), acute renal failure (1.9%), and distal embolization (9.7%). The mean runoff score decreased from 13.42 preintervention to 7.43 postintervention. Adjuvant revascularization procedures were required in 89.0% of patients and were endovascular (68.8%), hybrid (9.1%), or open (11.0%). Only 3.2% of patients required a fasciotomy. The overall rate of major amputation was 15.0% (18.1% for CDT only, 11.3% for PMT; P = NS). Predictors of limb loss by Cox proportional hazards models included end-stage renal disease (hazard ratio [HR], 8.563; P < .001) and poor pedal outflow, with an incremental protective effect for improved pedal outflow (HR, 0.205; P < .001 for one pedal outflow vessel; HR, 0.074; P < .001 for ≥ two pedal outflow vessels). Gender, smoking, diabetes, Rutherford score, runoff score, thrombosed popliteal aneurysm, and PMT were not significant predictors of limb loss. The use of PMT was a significant predictor of technical success (odds ratio, 2.67; P = .046). CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular therapy with thrombolysis using tissue plasminogen activator remains an effective treatment option for patients presenting with mild or moderate lower extremity ALI, with equal benefit derived with CDT or PMT. Patients with end-stage renal disease or poor pedal outflow have an increased risk of limb loss and may benefit from alternative revascularization strategies.

Endoscopic versus open saphenous vein graft harvest for lower extremity bypass in critical limb ischemia.

OBJECTIVE: Endoscopic vein harvest (EVH) has been demonstrated to improve early morbidity when compared with conventional open vein harvest (OVH) technique for infrainguinal bypass surgery. However, recent literature suggests conflicting results regarding mid- and long-term patency with EVH. The purpose of this study is to compare graft patency between harvest techniques specifically in patients with critical limb ischemia. METHODS: This retrospective study compared two groups of patients (EVH = 39 and OVH = 49) undergoing lower extremity revascularization from January 2009 to December 2011. Outcome measures included patency rates, postoperative complications, and wound infection. Graft patency was assessed using Kaplan-Meier curves. RESULTS: Both groups were matched for demographics and indications for bypass (critical limb ischemia). Median follow-up was 22 months. There was a significant reduction in the incidence of wound infection at the vein harvest site in the EVH group (OVH = 20%; EVH = 0%; P < .001), nevertheless, the difference was not significant when only the anastomotic sites were included (OVH = 12.2%; EVH = 15.4%; P = .43). The hospital length of stay was comparable between the two groups (EVH = 8.73 ± 9.69; OVH = 6.35 ± 3.28; P = .26) with no significant difference in the recovery time. Primary graft patency rate was 43.2% in the EVH group and 69.4% in the OVH group (P = .007) at 3 years. The most common reason for loss of primary patency was graft occlusion (61.5%) in the OVH group and vein graft stenosis (54.5%) in the EVH group. The average number of vascular reinterventions per bypass graft was significantly lower in the OVH group compared with the EVH group (OVH = 0.37; EVH = 1.28; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate inferior primary patency when using the technique of EVH. Additionally, we identified a significantly higher rate of reintervention in the EVH cohort as well as a higher rate of vein graft body stenosis. However, EVH was associated with a decreased rate of wound complications with similar limb salvage and secondary patency rates when compared to OVH. EVH should therefore be selectively utilized in patients at high risk for wound complications.