Benefits of early vascular provider involvement in wound care center management of patients with underlying arterial disease.

OBJECTIVES: Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) can reduce wound healing rates by ≤30%. Current literature suggests wound outcomes are improved when management is driven by vascular providers. However, whether this benefit is derived solely from early vascular provider involvement remains unclear. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed of 80 limbs with chronic wounds and underlying PAD seen at our institution's wound center between July 2022 and July 2023. Arterial disease was defined by the following criteria: (1) prior PAD diagnosis, (2) ankle-brachial-index of <0.9 or toe pressure of <70 mm Hg, or (3) absent peripheral pulses. Patients were divided into early (<6 week) vascular provider exposure (EVE; n = 45) or late/no vascular exposure (LNVE; n = 35). Providers included vascular surgeons and affiliated advanced practitioners. The primary outcome studied was overall time to wound healing. Statistical analysis included χ2 tests, t test, Pearson correlation, Kaplan-Meier analysis, and Cox regression modeling (variables included in a multivariate model if univariate effect on healing was associated at P < .1). RESULTS: Baseline demographic profiles were similar between groups with exception of lower baseline albumin (P = .037), more heart failure (P = .013), and more prior peripheral endovascular interventions (P = .013) in the EVE group. Although the initial wound locations and sizes were similar, EVE wounds had significantly higher WIfI wound scores (1.9 ± 0.1 vs 1.6 ± 0.1; P = .039). Although more LNVE patients developed radiographic osteomyelitis (31.8% vs 55.6%; P = .033), fewer underwent operative debridement or amputation (100% vs 63.2%; P = .008). On univariate analysis, healing time tended to be shorter in EVE, but not significantly (P = .089). When controlled for comorbidities, however, healing rates were nearly two-fold higher in EVE (hazard ratio, 2.42; 95% confidence interval, 1.21-4.84). LNVE wounds also took significantly longer to reach checkpoints including time to >75% granulation (P = .05), 15% weekly size decrease (P = .044), and epithelialization (P = .026). LNVE patients required more wound center visits (P = .024) and procedures (P = .005) with a longer time to intervention (P = .041). All EVE patients obtained ankle-brachial indices, with 90.9% of them available at their first wound care visit (P < .001). Although a slightly greater proportion of patients underwent a major amputation in EVE (15.6% vs 11.4%; P = .595), this difference did not attain significance; additionally, 100% of EVE patients had documented discussion of nonsalvageable limbs before amputation. CONCLUSIONS: Early exposure to vascular practitioners improves wound healing time, timeliness to intervention, and wound center and hospital resource use in patients with PAD. Further investigation into benefits of vascular involvement within community wound center models could significantly improve awareness and accessibility of arterial wound care in smaller/remote communities.

Surgical Specialty Impacts Quality of Operative Training in Carotid Endarterectomy.

BACKGROUND: Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is currently performed by multiple surgical specialties. The impact of surgical specialty and operative volume on post-CEA outcomes has been well described. However, it is unclear whether trainees of different surgical specialties have similar quality of operative training. METHODS: Data from Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education annual reports were collected and compared between graduating vascular surgery (VS) residents, VS fellows, and neurological surgery (NS) residents. Only cases reported as chief/senior/lead resident, surgeon junior, or surgeon fellow were included in analysis. Linear regression analysis was utilized to evaluate trends in case-mix and volume. RESULTS: From 2013 to 2022, total CEA case volume was higher among VS residents and fellows, compared to NS residents (52.8 ± 0.8 vs. 44.3 ± 1.4 vs. 12.9 ± 0.6, P < 0.0001). Additionally, VS residents and fellows performed other carotid operations including transfemoral or transcarotid artery stenting (11.1 ± 0.9 vs. 11.2 ± 0.8 vs. 0), carotid body tumor resection (0.7 ± 0.1 vs. 0.7 ± 0.0 vs. 0), and extracranial cervical bypass (6.7 ± 0.3 vs. 6.3 ± 0.3 vs. 0) that were not reported by the NS resident cohort (P < 0.0001 each). On linear regression analysis, total CEA procedures did not change for VS residents (R2 = 0.03, P = 0.62), decreased for VS fellows (-1.29 cases/yr, R2 = 0.75, P < 0.0001), and decreased among NS residents (-0.41 cases/yr, R2 = 0.44, P = 0.01) over the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Although residents of multiple surgical specialties are trained in CEA, vascular training offers significantly greater numbers and diversity of extracranial carotid cases. It also appears that CEA volume is decreasing among neurosurgical trainees. In light of recent reports on the volume-outcome effect in carotid surgery, these data may have implications for future practice patterns in the domain of extracranial carotid artery disease.

Definition and Perception of Autonomy in Vascular Surgery Training.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of data evaluating operative autonomy within vascular surgery. This study aims to determine where discrepancies exist in the definition of autonomy between trainees and attending faculty. METHODS: An Institutional Review Board-approved, anonymous survey was e-mailed to vascular trainees and attending faculty at all Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-approved vascular surgery training programs in the United States. Data were compared using chi-square statistical analysis. RESULTS: One-hundred forty-nine responses from vascular surgery trainees (n = 89) and faculty (n = 60) were obtained. The most highly ranked preoperative skill by trainees was Case Planning, at all post-graduate year-levels. Although a majority of trainees believe this skill is expected of them, only 36.1% of attendings responded that they expect all trainee levels to perform this task. Draping/positioning was ranked as the second most important intraoperative task for all post-graduate year-levels by attendings; however, only 32.8% of attendings expect trainees to perform this. Exposure of Critical Structures was ranked as the most important intraoperative task by both trainees and attendings at the Chief and Fellow level. However, responses by both trainees and attendings showed that this is expected <70% of the time. When asked about double-scrubbing independently of other tasks, most trainees assessed double-scrubbing as inherently important to autonomy at all levels of training and within all regions. Only 44.3% of attendings responded that they expect all trainees to double-scrub. Additionally, most trainees in all regions responded that they spend <25% of cases double-scrubbed. CONCLUSIONS: These responses show a discrepancy between the skills that both trainees and attendings deem important to autonomy versus what is being expected of trainees in reality.

Symptomatic peripheral artery disease increases risk of perioperative mortality following open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: Peripheral artery disease (PAD) is associated with worse survival following abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. However, little is known about the impact of PAD and sex on outcomes following open infrarenal AAA repair (OAR). METHODS: All elective open infrarenal AAA cases were queried from the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative from 2003 to 2022. PAD was defined as history of non-cardiac arterial bypass, non-coronary percutaneous vascular intervention (PVI), or non-traumatic major amputation. Cohorts were stratified by sex and history of PAD. Multivariable logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards models were constructed to assess the primary endpoints: 30-day and 5-year mortality, respectively. RESULTS: Of 4910 patients who underwent elective OAR, 3421 (69.7%) were men without PAD, 298 (6.1%) were men with PAD, 1098 (22.4%) were women without PAD, and 93 (1.9%) were women with PAD. Men with PAD had prior bypass (45%), PVI (62%), and amputation (6.7%). Women with PAD had prior bypass (32%), PVI (76%), and amputation (5.4%). Thirty-day mortality was significantly higher in men with PAD compared with men without PAD (4.4% vs 1.7%; P = .001) and in women with PAD compared with women without PAD (7.5% vs 2.4%; P = .01). After risk adjustment, when compared with men without PAD, women with PAD had nearly four times the odds of 30-day mortality (odds ratio, 3.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.55-9.64; P = .004) and men with PAD had almost three times the odds of 30-day mortality (odds ratio, 2.77; 95% CI, 1.42-5.40; P = .003). Five-year survival was 87.8% in men without PAD, 77.8% in men with PAD, 85% in women without PAD, and 76.2% in women with PAD (P < .001). After risk adjustment, only men with PAD had an increased hazard of death at 5 years (hazard ratio, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.07-2.17; P = .019) compared with men without PAD. CONCLUSIONS: PAD is a potent risk factor for increased perioperative mortality in both men and women following OAR. In women, this equates to nearly four times the odds of perioperative mortality compared with men without PAD. Future study evaluating risk/benefit is needed to determine if women with PAD reflect a high-risk cohort that may benefit from a more conservative OAR threshold for treatment.

Celiac Artery Coverage During TEVAR for Dissection and Acute Aortic Injury is Not Associated with Worse Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Studies have previously identified increased morbidity and mortality with celiac artery coverage during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for aneurysmal disease. This study aimed to delineate the risks associated with celiac artery coverage in all patients undergoing TEVAR for dissection, trauma, or aneurysmal disease. METHODS: Using the Vascular Quality Initiative database, we identified all patients undergoing TEVAR from 2012 to 2020 and categorized them based on the underlying pathology (aneurysm, dissection, or acute/trauma). Patients were excluded if their endograft was deployed distal to aortic zone 6 or if they had any preoperative/operative celiac revascularization procedure. Univariate, regression, and Kaplan-Meier analysis were performed for all 3 groups, focusing on postoperative complications and survival. RESULTS: There were 8,265 patients who underwent TEVAR over the 8-year study period with 142 (1.7%) having celiac artery coverage during their index procedure. Of those patients, the celiac artery was covered during TEVAR in 1.2% of patients with dissection, 1.3% with aneurysm, and 0.7% with trauma. On unadjusted analysis, celiac artery coverage in TEVAR for aneurysmal disease was associated with increased in-hospital mortality (16% vs. 5%, P < 0.001), 30-day mortality (33% vs. 23%, P = 0.029), any postoperative complication (excluding death) (42% vs. 25%, P < 0.001), and postoperative bowel complication (3% vs. 0.7%, P = 0.003). There were no differences in outcomes for patients treated with celiac coverage versus those without celiac coverage during TEVAR for dissection or trauma on univariate analysis. After risk adjustment, celiac artery coverage remained predictive of worse postoperative outcomes in patients with aneurysmal disease: in-hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR] = 3.6, confidence interval [CI] 1.8-6.9), 30-day death (OR = 1.6, CI 1.0-2.4), any postoperative complication (OR 2.2, CI 1.4-3.5), and bowel-specific postoperative complication (3.3, CI 1.0-10.8). There were no differences in patient outcomes for those treated with celiac coverage versus those without celiac coverage during TEVAR for dissection or trauma on multivariate analysis. Kaplan-Meier curves show a significant difference in overall survival based on pathology, specifically lower survival rates for patients with celiac coverage treated for aneurysmal disease. Cox regression analysis showed that celiac artery coverage for aneurysmal disease was associated with significantly increased hazard ratio affecting overall survival (hazard ratio = 2.6, P < 0.001), but there was no impact on survival in patients who underwent TEVAR with celiac coverage for dissection or trauma. CONCLUSIONS: Celiac artery coverage for patients with aneurysmal disease was correlated with a significant increase in postoperative morbidity, mortality, and lowers overall survival. However, for patients with dissection or acute/traumatic aortic pathology, celiac artery coverage does not portend worse outcomes.

Successful endovascular salvage of a maldeployed iliac limb extension during complex aortic reconstruction.

PURPOSE: The worst complication during cannulation of the contralateral gate during complex endovascular aortic repair is deployment of the limb extension behind the main graft body. CASE REPORT: A patient with a 5.7 cm juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm was taken to the operating room for fenestrated endovascular aortic repair and iliac branch device. Percutaneous femoral access was used to deploy a Gore Iliac Branch Endoprosthesis, followed by a physician modified Cook Alpha thoracic stent graft with four fenestrations. Next a Gore Excluder was deployed to bridge the fenestrated component to the iliac branch and native left common iliac artery creating distal seal. Due to the severe tortuosity, a buddy wire technique, using a stiff lunderquist wire, was used to cannulate the contralateral gate. Unfortunately, after cannulation, the limb was advanced over the buddy lunderquist wire instead of the luminal wire. We used a backtable modified guide catheter to provide the necessary pushability to navigate wires between the aberrantly deployed limb extension and the iliac branch device. Using through-and-through access, we then successfully deployed a parallel flared limb in the correct plane. CONCLUSION: Careful communication, wire marking, and attention to intraoperative flow can minimize risks of complication, but knowledge of bail out techniques remains imperative.

Prognostication of Asymptomatic Penetrating Aortic Ulcers: A Modern Approach.

BACKGROUND: Literature detailing the natural history of asymptomatic penetrating aortic ulcers (PAUs) is sparse and lacks long-term follow-up. This study sought to determine the rate of asymptomatic PAU growth over time and adverse events from asymptomatic PAU. METHODS: A cohort of patients with asymptomatic PAU from 2005 to 2020 was followed. One ulcer was followed per patient. Primary end points were change in size over time and the composite of symptoms, radiographic progression, rupture, and intervention; cumulative incidence function estimated the incidence of the composite outcome. Ulcer size and rate of change were modeled using a linear mixed-effects model. Patient and anatomic factors were evaluated as potential predictors of the outcomes. RESULTS: There were 273 patients identified. The mean age was 75.5±9.6 years; 66.4% were male. The majority of ulcers were in the descending thoracic aorta (53.9%), followed by abdominal aorta (41.4%) and aortic arch (4.8%). Fusiform aneurysmal disease was present in 21.6% of patients at a separate location; 2.6% had an associated intramural hematoma; 23.6% had at least 1 other PAU. Symptoms developed in 1 patient who ruptured; 8 patients (2.9%) underwent an intervention for PAU (1 for rupture, 2 for radiographic progression, 5 for size/growth) at a median of 3.1 years (interquartile range, 1.0-6.5) after diagnosis. Five- and 10-year cumulative incidence of the primary outcome, adjusted for competing risk of death, was 3.6% (95% CI, 1.6%-6.9%) and 6.5% (95% CI, 3.1%-11.4%), respectively. For 191 patients with multiple computed tomography scans (760 total computed tomographies) with a median radiographic follow-up of 3.50 years (interquartile range, 1.20-6.63 years), mean initial ulcer width, ulcer depth, and total diameter were 13.6 mm, 8.5 mm, and 31.4 mm, respectively. A small but statistically significant change over time was observed for ulcer width (0.23 mm/y) and total diameter (0.24 mm/y); ulcer depth did not significantly change over time. Hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, initial ulcer width >20 mm, thrombosed PAU, and associated saccular aneurysm were associated with larger changes in ulcer size over time; however, the magnitude of difference was small, ranging from 0.4 to 1.9 mm/y. CONCLUSIONS: Asymptomatic PAU displayed minimal growth and infrequent complications including rupture. Asymptomatic PAU may be conservatively managed with serial imaging and risk factor modification.

Trends in Female Authorship in High Impact Surgical Journals Between 2008 and 2018.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluates the distribution of authorship by sex over the last 10 years among the top 25 surgical journals. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Despite an increase in women entering surgical residency, there remains a sex disparity in surgical leadership. Scholarly activity is the foundation for academic promotion. However, few studies have evaluated productivity by sex in surgical literature. METHODS: Original research in the 25 highest-impact general surgery/subspecialty journals were included (1/2008-5/2018). Journals with <70% identified author sex were excluded. Articles were categorized by sex of first, last, and overall authorship. We examined changes in proportions of female first, last, and overall authorship over time, and analyzed the correlation between these measurements and journal impact factor. RESULTS: There were 71,867 articles from 19 journals included. Sex was successfully predicted for 87.3% of authors (79.1%-92.5%). There were significant increases in the overall percentage of female authors (ß = 0.55, P < 0.001), female first authors (ß = 0.97, P < 0.001), and female last authors (ß = 0.53, P < 0.001) over the study period. Notably, all cardiothoracic subspecialty journals did not significantly increase the proportion of female last authors over the study period. There were no correlations between journal impact factor and percentage of overall female authors (rs = 0.39, P = 0.09), female first authors (rs = 0.29, P = 0.22), or female last author (rs = 0.35, P = 0.13). CONCLUSIONS: This study identifies continued but slow improvement in female authorship of high-impact surgical journals during the contemporary era. However, the improvement was more apparent in the first compared to senior author positions.

Simultaneous treatment of common carotid lesions increases the risk of stroke and death after carotid artery stenting.

BACKGROUND: Tandem carotid artery lesions that involve simultaneous internal carotid artery (ICA) and common carotid artery (CCA) stenoses present a complex clinical problem. Some studies have shown that the addition of a retrograde proximal intervention to treat a CCA lesion during a carotid endarterectomy (CEA) increases the risk of stroke and death. However, the stroke and death risks associated with a totally endovascular approach to tandem lesions is unknown and is the subject of this study. METHODS: Vascular Study Group of New England data for the years 2005 to 2020 were queried for carotid artery stenting (CAS) procedures. Emergent and bilateral procedures, procedures for indications other than atherosclerosis, patients with prior ipsilateral CAS, ICA lesions with stenosis of less than 50%, and transcarotid procedures were excluded. The cohort was divided into tandem and isolated lesion groups. The primary outcome was the composite of stroke and death. Predictors of stroke or death were determined with multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: There were 2016 carotid arteries stented in 1950 patients-1881 (96%) with isolated lesions and 135 (4%) with tandem lesions. The mean patient age was 69.6 ± 9.0 years. Tandem lesions were more likely to be present in women (50.4% vs 33.0%; P < .001) and in patients with a prior carotid endarterectomy (45.9% vs 35.4%; P = .014). Other covariates were similar between the groups. Symptomatic lesions accounted for 42.3% of cases (isolated, 42.2% vs tandem, 43.0%; P = .86). Arteries in the tandem group more often required multiple stents to treat the ICA lesion (9.6% vs 5.2%; P = .027). ICA neuroprotection had similar outcomes in both groups (tandem: success 94.1%, failure 3.7%; isolated: success 96.3%, failure 1.8%; P = .29). The tandem group experienced a higher 30-day mortality (2.2% vs 0.6%; P = .039), more perioperative neurologic events (stroke or transient ischemic attack) (8.1% vs 2.0%; P < .001), and a higher incidence of stroke or death (5.9% vs 1.9%; P = .002). Predictors of the primary outcome in the multivariable model included treatment of tandem lesions (odds ratio [OR], 3.10; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.39-6.89; P = .006), symptomatic lesions (OR, 2.24; 95% CI, 1.21-4.17; P = .010), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR, 2.14; 95% CI, 1.17-3.92; P = .014), general anesthesia (OR, 3.34; 95% CI, 1.35-8.26; P = .009), and advancing age (OR, 1.05 per year; 95% CI, 1.01-1.09; P = .006). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of endovascular treatment of tandem CCA lesions with CAS is associated with a three-fold increase in perioperative stroke and death and should be avoided if possible.

Early vascular surgery response to the COVID-19 pandemic: Results of a nationwide survey.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has had major implications for the United States health care system. This survey study sought to identify practice changes, to understand current personal protective equipment (PPE) use, and to determine how caring for patients with COVID-19 differs for vascular surgeons practicing in states with high COVID-19 case numbers vs in states with low case numbers. METHODS: A 14-question online survey regarding the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on vascular surgeons' current practice was sent to 365 vascular surgeons across the country through REDCap from April 14 to April 21, 2020, with responses closed on April 23, 2020. The survey response was analyzed with descriptive statistics. Further analyses were performed to evaluate whether responses from states with the highest number of COVID-19 cases (New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and California) differed from those with lower case numbers (all other states). RESULTS: A total of 121 vascular surgeons responded (30.6%) to the survey. All high-volume states were represented. The majority of vascular surgeons are reusing PPE. The majority of respondents worked in an academic setting (81.5%) and were performing only urgent and emergent cases (80.5%) during preparation for the surge. This did not differ between states with high and low COVID-19 case volumes (P = .285). States with high case volume were less likely to perform a lower extremity intervention for critical limb ischemia (60.8% vs 77.5%; P = .046), but otherwise case types did not differ. Most attending vascular surgeons worked with residents (90.8%) and limited their exposure to procedures on suspected or confirmed COVID-19 cases (56.0%). Thirty-eight percent of attending vascular surgeons have been redeployed within the hospital to a vascular access service or other service outside of vascular surgery. This was more frequent in states with high case volume compared with low case volume (P = .039). The majority of vascular surgeons are reusing PPE (71.4%) and N95 masks (86.4%), and 21% of vascular surgeons think that they do not have adequate PPE to perform their clinical duties. CONCLUSIONS: The initial response to the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in reduced elective cases, with primarily only urgent and emergent cases being performed. A minority of vascular surgeons have been redeployed outside of their specialty; however, this is more common among states with high case numbers. Adequate PPE remains an issue for almost a quarter of vascular surgeons who responded to this survey.

Addition of common carotid intervention increases the risk of stroke and death after carotid artery stenting for asymptomatic patients.

BACKGROUND: A recent review of Vascular Study Group of New England data suggested that simultaneous endovascular treatment of tandem carotid lesions (TCAL: common carotid artery + internal carotid artery) is associated with a fourfold increase in perioperative neurologic events and death. However, given the small cohort, the effect of symptomatic status could not be evaluated. This study sought to determine the risk of simultaneous TCAL stenting in cohorts stratified by symptom status. METHODS: Vascular Quality Initiative data (2005-2020) were queried for carotid stenting procedures (CAS). Emergent and bilateral procedures, patients with prior ipsilateral CAS, internal carotid artery lesions with stenosis <50%, and hybrid transcarotid procedures were excluded. The cohort was stratified by symptomatic status. The primary outcome was the composite of perioperative stroke and death. Predictors of stroke/death were determined with multivariable logistic regression for symptomatic and asymptomatic patients with TCAL forced into the models. RESULTS: There were 18,886 carotid arteries stented (18,441 patients): 18,077 (96%) with isolated carotid artery lesions and 809 (4%) with TCAL. Mean age was 70.0 ± 9.7. Symptomatic lesions were present in 58.9% of cases (isolated carotid artery lesions: 59.1% vs TCAL: 52.5%; P < .001). More TCAL arteries had a prior carotid endarterectomy (38.3% vs 23.8%; P < .001). TCAL had a higher perioperative stroke/death (3.4% vs 1.8%; P = .026) for asymptomatic lesions, but not symptomatic lesions (4.5% vs 3.7%; P = .41). TCAL were independently associated with stroke/death in asymptomatic patients (odds ratio, 1.85; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-3.33; P = .039) but not symptomatic patients (odds ratio, 1.22; 95% confidence interval, 0.76-1.97; P = .42). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of endovascular treatment of common carotid artery lesions with CAS is associated with almost double the risk of perioperative stroke/death in asymptomatic patients and should be avoided if possible. Treatment of TCAL is not associated with an increased risk of stroke/death for symptomatic lesions.

Thoracic aortic remodeling with endografting after a decade of thoracic endovascular aortic repair experience.

OBJECTIVE: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) results have been studied in short-term time frames. This study aimed to evaluate midterm and long-term outcomes of TEVAR, emphasizing postoperative aortic remodeling and need for reintervention. METHODS: This is an institutional retrospective review of TEVAR for isolated descending thoracic aortic aneurysms. Data were collected from 2004 to 2018. Primary outcomes studied included aneurysm sac remodeling, freedom from reintervention, and all-cause mortality. Other outcomes studied include endoleak rates, neurologic complication rates, and any overall postoperative complication rates. RESULTS: During the study period, 219 patients underwent TEVAR for descending thoracic aortic aneurysms. The median effect of TEVAR on sac diameter was a 0.7-cm decrease in size (interquartile range, -1.4 to 0.0 cm). During the study period, 80% (n = 147) of patients experienced aneurysm sac regression or stability. Perioperative neurologic complications occurred in 16% (n = 34) of patients. Significant predictors of sac growth were endoleak (odds ratio [OR], 65; P < .001), preoperative carotid-subclavian bypass (OR, 8; P = .003), and graft oversizing <20% (OR, 15; P = .046). Every 1-mm increase in aortic diameter at the proximal TEVAR landing zone led to an increased odds of endoleak (OR, 2; P = .049). Access complications (OR, 8) and subclavian artery coverage (OR, 6) significantly increased the odds of reintervention, whereas every percentage of graft oversizing protected against reintervention (OR, 0.005). Life-table analysis revealed an overall survival of 78% (71%-83%) at median follow-up. At 3 years, survival was 88% (80%-93%) for those with aneurysm sac stability or regression, whereas it was 70% (49%-84%) for those with aneurysm sac growth (P = .0402). Cox proportional hazards model showed that the only protective factor for mortality was percentage oversizing, with every 1% of oversizing having a hazard ratio (HR) of <.001 (P = .032). This was counterbalanced by the fact that patients with graft oversizing >30% had an increased odds of mortality with HR >10 (P = .049). Other significant factors that increased the odds of mortality included endoleak (HR, 3.6; P = .033), diabetes (HR, 4.1; P = .048), age (every 1-year increase in age; HR, 1.2; P = .002), year of surgery (every year subsequent to 2004; HR, 1.3; P = .012), and peripheral artery disease (HR, 5.2; P = .041). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients (80%) experience sac stability or regression after TEVAR, which offers a clear survival advantage. Endoleaks are predictive of sac growth, conferring increased mortality. Rigorous surveillance is necessary to prevent future aortic events through reintervention.

Sex-related outcomes after open type IV thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: Although outcomes after infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery are worse in women, sex-specific differences in outcomes after open type IV thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) surgery are undefined. The goal of this study was to define sex-based disparities in short- and long-term outcomes after open type IV TAAA surgery. METHODS: All open type IV TAAA repairs performed during 27 years were evaluated using a single institutional database. Charts were retrospectively evaluated for major adverse events (in-hospital death, other major in-hospital complication) and long-term complications (graft- and aortic-related events and death). Univariate analyses were performed using the Fisher's exact test for categorical variables and Wilcoxon rank-sum testing for continuous variables. Logistic multivariable regression was used for the in-hospital end points death and major complication, and survival analyses were performed with Cox proportional hazards modeling and Kaplan-Meier techniques. RESULTS: During the 27-year study period, 234 patients had an open type IV TAAA repair; 85 were female and 149 were male. There were 26 (17.5%) men and 16 (18.8%) women who suffered a major in-hospital complication/death. There were eight (3.4%) in-hospital deaths, all occurring in men. Unadjusted survival at 5 years was 67.9% for women and 58.4% for men. Multivariable analyses revealed no sex-based difference in combined major in-hospital events and death (female: odds ratio [OR], 1.8; confidence interval [CI], 0.83-4.0; P = .13) or any complication (OR, 1.0; CI, 0.55-1.8; P = .99). However, women were less likely than men to be discharged to home (OR, 0.28; CI, 0.13-0.60; P = .001) and had decreased survival compared with men after discharge (hazard ratio, 2.1; CI, 1.2-3.5; P = .008). CONCLUSIONS: No sex-based differences were found for the in-hospital outcomes of death or major complication after open type IV TAAA repair. However, women are less likely than men to be discharged home. Among those who survive the index operation, female sex portends decreased survival following discharge after repair.

Hybrid and Total Endovascular Approaches to Tandem Carotid Artery Lesions Have Similar Short- and Long-Term Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Addition of ipsilateral proximal endovascular intervention (PEI, common carotid/innominate) increases the risk of perioperative stroke/death for both carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid stenting (CAS). However, these approaches have not been directly compared and is the subject of this study. METHODS: VQI (2005-2020) was queried for CEA and CAS with PEI, excluding emergent, bilateral, and repeat procedures, patients with prior ipsilateral CAS, ICA lesions with stenosis<50%, and transcarotid ICA stents. Primary outcome were the composite of perioperative stroke/death and long-term stroke/reintervention/death. Operative approach was evaluated with logistic regression, adjusted propensity scores, symptomatic status, and stenosis>70%. Long-term outcomes were compared with Kaplan-Meier Analysis. RESULTS: There were 1,433 patients (795 endovascular;638 hybrid); mean age 69.8±9.4 years. Patients undergoing hybrid procedures were more likely to be female (49.4% vs. 37.5%; P < 0.001), less likely to have diabetes (29.5% vs. 38.2%; P P< 0.001), less likely to have a prior ipsilateral CEA (3.8% vs. 32.2%; P< 0.001), less likely to be symptomatic (34.6% vs. 52.8%; P < 0.001), and less likely to have >70% stenosis (77.3% vs. 95.6%%; P < 0.001). Perioperative stroke/death was 3.6% for hybrid and 3.9% for endovascular approaches (P = 0.77). In the multivariable model, hybrid operative approach (compared to the total endovascular approach) was not significantly associated with stroke/death (OR 1.29; 95%CI: 0.55-3.07; P = 0.56). For the 981 patients with long-term follow-up (556 endovascular; 425 hybrid), 1-year freedom from stroke/reintervention/death was 94.0% (95%CI: 90.9%-96.0%) for hybrid approach vs. 92.3% (95%CI: 89.5%-94.4%) for endovascular approach (P = 0.27). CONCLUSION: Although simultaneous repair of tandem carotid lesions portends worse outcomes when compared to CEA or CAS alone, there was no difference in short or long-term stroke and death rates with a hybrid or totally endovascular approach.  Therefore, it is reasonable to use either approach in the select patients who require simultaneous repair of both lesions.

Single Center Outcomes of Carotid Artery Stenting in Veterans with Prior Head and Neck Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients meeting criteria for intervention of carotid stenosis with a history of prior cervical radiation or neck dissection are considered "high risk" for carotid endarterectomy. This is a well-established indication for carotid artery stenting (CAS). The long-term outcomes of CAS in this population are less frequently published in the literature but are poor. The purpose of this study was to review long-term results of CAS in veteran patients with a prior history of treatment for head and/or neck cancer. METHODS: This is a retrospective review of a veteran patient population from 1998 to 2016. All patients at our institution with a prior history of treatment for head and/or neck cancer who underwent CAS were included in the analysis. During this time period, 44 patients met inclusion criteria and were treated with 57 carotid stenting interventions. The Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to determine survival and primary patency. The secondary aims were to analyze early outcomes and to identify predictive risk factors for mortality and reintervention. RESULTS: The mean follow-up was 42.9 ± 36.6 months. The cumulative survival at 1, 5, and 10 years was 91%, 67%, and 48%, respectively. The primary patency at 1, 5, and 10 years was 95%, 86%, and 86%, respectively. The reintervention rate was 11% (n = 6) with an assisted primary patency rate of 100%. No neurologic events occurred within 30 days. There were 3 strokes in late follow-up and no stroke-related deaths. Eighteen patients (41%) died during the follow-up period, 15 of whom died during the first 5 years of follow-up. Ten (66%) of those patients died of recurrent or active index cancer. On univariate analysis, tumor, node, metastasis stage IV was significantly associated with death (P = 0.02). Multivariate models were not statistically significant for predicting mortality or reintervention CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of the results in this series, CAS can be performed in these patients with low long-term rates of neurologic events and need for reintervention. However, the survival of patients with head and neck cancer undergoing CAS in this cohort is poor, which is consistent with other published series of patients undergoing CAS for head/neck cancer with at least 5-year follow-up. In this specific patient population, a more critical analysis of the patient's overall prognosis, especially as related to cancer, should be undertaken before offering CAS.

Incidence of and risk factors for postoperative urinary retention in men after carotid endarterectomy.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to determine the incidence of postoperative urinary retention (POUR) in men after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and to identify preventable risk factors for the development of this complication. METHODS: All male patients who underwent CEA from 2014 to June 2018 were identified. Exclusions included CEA with concomitant cardiac surgery, baseline dialysis, and indwelling or straight catheterization. POUR was the primary end point, defined as inability to void requiring catheterization within 24 hours postoperatively or after removal of a preoperatively placed Foley catheter. POUR was further classified as mild (single catheterization), moderate (multiple catheterizations), or severe (catheterization prolonging discharge or discharge with catheter). Logistic regression assessed for POUR risk factors. RESULTS: There were 294 male patients who underwent CEA during the study period; 82 (28.2%) developed POUR. Of these, 48 (57.8%) were mild, 15 (18.1%) were moderate, and 20 (24.1%) were severe. At baseline, POUR was associated with older age, peripheral artery disease (PAD), chronic kidney disease, diabetes, ambulation deficit, prior urinary retention, and statin and chronic tamsulosin use. Overall, 31.6% (93) of the cohort had a Foley catheter placed before the procedure, and this was protective against POUR (no Foley vs Foley, 31.8% vs 20.4%; P = .043). Independent risk factors for POUR included prior urinary retention (odds ratio [OR], 3.4 [1.6-7.3]; P = .002), diabetes (OR, 2.1 [1.1-3.7]; P = .016), PAD (OR, 2.3 [1.1-5.2]; P = .036), and age (per year: OR, 1.1 [1.02-1.10]; P < .001). Preoperative Foley catheter placement remained protective (OR, 0.4 [0.2-0.7]; P = .003). Preoperative Foley catheter placement was not associated with urinary tract infection (preoperative Foley catheter: 0% vs 1%; P = .54). However, POUR was associated with an increased risk for urinary tract infections (10% vs 1%; P = .001), which was highest in severe POUR (20% vs 1%; P = .001). POUR was also associated with a discharge to rehabilitation (16% vs 4%; P = .002), with highest rates in the moderate and severe POUR cohorts (20% each). CONCLUSIONS: POUR is common in men undergoing CEA, and almost a quarter of those with POUR have a discharge delay or are discharged with a Foley catheter. Preoperative Foley catheterization is protective against POUR and should be considered in older patients, diabetics, patients with PAD, and those with a history of urinary retention.

Gender-based discrimination is prevalent in the integrated vascular trainee experience and serves as a predictor of burnout.

OBJECTIVE: Trainee burnout is on the rise and negative training environments may contribute. In addition, as the proportion of women entering vascular surgery increases, identifying factors that challenge recruitment and retention is vital as we grow our workforce to meet demand. This study sought to characterize the learning environment of vascular residents and to determine how gender-based discrimination and bias (GBDB) affect the clinical experience. METHODS: A survey was developed to evaluate the trainee experience; demographics and a two-item burnout index were also included. The instrument was sent electronically to all integrated (0 + 5) vascular surgery residents in the United States. Univariate analyses were performed and predictors of burnout identified. RESULTS: A total of 284 integrated vascular residents were invited to participate and 212 (75%) completed the survey. Participants were predominantly male (64%) and white (56%), with a median age of 30 years (interquartile range, 28-32 years). Seventy-nine percent of respondents endorsed some form of negative workplace experience and 30% met high-risk criteria for burnout. More than a third (38%) of residents endorsed personally experiencing GBDB, with a significant difference between men and women (14% vs 80%; P < .001). Women were more likely than men to report witnessing GBDB (76% vs 56%; P = .003). Patients and nurses were the most frequently cited sources of GBDB (80% and 64%, respectively), with vascular surgery attendings cited by 41% of trainees. One in four female resident respondents indicated being sexually harassed during the course of training; this was significantly higher than for male residents (25% vs 1%; P < .001). Nearly half (46%) of trainees who witnessed or experienced GBDB thought that quality of patient care, job satisfaction, personal well-being, and personal risk of burnout were directly affected as a result of GBDB. GBDB was predictive of burnout (odds ratio, 1.9; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-3.5; P = .04), as were longer work hours (>80 h/wk; odds ratio, 2.8; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-7.1; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: GBDB was experienced by 38% of integrated trainees, with women significantly more affected than men. GBDB is predictive of burnout, and this has significant implications for our specialty in the recruitment and retention of female physicians. Resources addressing these issues are needed to maintain a diverse workforce and to promote physician well-being.

The removal of all proximal aneurysmal aortic tissue does not affect anastomotic degeneration after open juxtarenal aortic aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: For the open treatment of juxtarenal aortic aneurysms (JRAAs), some argue for the removal of all proximal aneurysmal aortic tissue to prevent future degeneration, whereas others deem it unnecessary. This study sought to compare perioperative and long-term outcomes of two different approaches to treatment of JRAAs. METHODS: Patients who underwent open JRAA repair from 2007 to 2015 at our institution were reviewed and stratified by operative technique: plication of the aneurysm cuff with graft sewn up to the renal arteries (PLI) vs a beveled anastomosis with left renal artery bypass (LRB). Patients who underwent additional mesenteric bypasses were excluded. Primary outcomes included death, anastomotic degeneration, and decline in renal function. Univariate and Kaplan-Meier analyses were performed. RESULTS: There were 199 patients identified, 56% PLI (n = 112) and 44% LRB (n = 87). The majority were male (68%), white (89%), and smokers (58%). Mean age was 71.5 ± 8.5 years. LRB patients were more likely to have chronic kidney disease (29% vs 13%; P = .01) and larger juxtarenal diameters (median, 25 mm vs 28 mm; P = .001). LRB patients had longer postoperative length of stay (median, 8 days vs 7 days; P = .003) and longer operative times (median, 4.7 hours vs 3.7 hours; P < .001). Overall 30-day mortality was 2% (n = 4), with no difference between cohorts. There were no differences in perioperative complications except for the development of acute kidney injury, which was more common in LRB patients (47% vs 23%; P < .001). During 3-year follow-up, there was no difference in anastomotic aneurysmal degeneration or sac growth. In the long term, LRB patients were more likely to develop an occluded left renal artery (20% vs 0%; P = .004) and right renal artery stenosis (29% vs 3%; P = .002). However, neither group was more likely to have a decline in renal function (PLI, 23%; LRB, 25%; P = .84). There was no difference in 5-year mortality (P = .72). CONCLUSIONS: The more complex technique involving LRB was not protective against long-term anastomotic degeneration, decline in renal function, or mortality. In addition, LRB led to longer length of stay and operative times, with increased risk of perioperative acute kidney injury. In an era when fewer open aortic repairs are being performed, it is reasonable to consider the PLI technique in the treatment of JRAAs, particularly in patients with baseline chronic kidney disease.

Surgeon specialty significantly affects outcome of asymptomatic patients after carotid endarterectomy.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluates the impact of surgical specialty, specifically vascular surgery (VS) versus non-VS (NVS; namely, cardiac surgery, thoracic surgery, general surgery, or neurosurgery) on perioperative carotid endarterectomy (CEA) outcomes stratified by symptom status on presentation. METHODS: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Vascular Procedure Targeted database was queried for elective asymptomatic or symptomatic CEA (excluding concomitant CEA and cardiac surgery) from 2011 to 2016. Data were stratified by VS versus NVS and symptom presentation. Primary end points were 30-day stroke and stroke/death; secondary end points included perioperative complications. Multivariable logistic regression determined predictors of all assessed primary outcomes and propensity-weight analysis was used to confirm results. RESULTS: Overall, 21,060 CEA (12,671 [59%] asymptomatic) were identified with 19,687 (93%) done by VS. In the asymptomatic CEA cohort, VS had lower unadjusted stroke (1.3% vs 2.4%; P = .021) and stroke/death (1.7% vs 3.2%; P = .006) rates. In addition, VS had fewer deaths (0.6% vs 1.3%; P = .033) and pulmonary complications (1.6% vs 2.7%; P = .036). After risk adjustment, the NVS asymptomatic cohort predicted stroke (odds ratio [OR], 1.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-3.1; P = .032), driven by neurosurgery (OR, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.3-7.2; P = .008). This NVS cohort also predicted stroke/death (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.1-2.9; P = .013), driven by neurosurgery (OR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.1-5.7; P = .035). After propensity weighting, these differences persisted (stroke: OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.1-3.3; P = .030; stroke/death: OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.2-3.0; P = .011). Among symptomatic CEA, there was no difference between VS and NVS in unadjusted primary end points of stroke (3.1% vs 4.2%; P = .106) or stroke/death (3.8% vs 4.6%; P = .275). However, in this cohort, VS had fewer major complications (12.7% vs 15.5%; P = .029). CONCLUSIONS: This study identifies the VS specialty as having significantly better outcomes after CEA in patients presenting with asymptomatic disease than NVS specialty, as evidenced by lower rates of stroke and stroke death, which persisted after risk adjustment and propensity weighting. This difference in stroke and stroke/death was not apparent in the symptomatic cohort; however, NVS did have increased unadjusted rates of major complications. Although this finding may reflect multiple factors, including higher operative volume, training, or technical approach, these differences in 30-day CEA outcomes may be crucial for the proper interpretation of ongoing national outcome trials such as CREST2.

Arteriovenous Access superficialization: A New Technique and Review of Options.

BACKGROUND: Up to 30% of autogenous cephalic vein arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) are too deep for reliable cannulation. Techniques to superficialize these AVFs have been described previously. This study describes a new surgical technique for AVF superficialization and provides a review of the alternative techniques. METHODS: The path of the fistula is marked using ultrasound, and transverse incisions are made along this path. The underlying tissue is separated from the dermis over this area to expose the fistula outflow vein. The mobilized vein is then elevated and "trapped" directly under the dermis by closing the superficial fascia and adipose tissue beneath it. RESULTS: Between March 2016 and February 2019, 23 patients underwent superficialization using this technique at two centers. The mean time between AVF creation and superficialization was 6.3 months, and the time to first use for hemodialysis after superficialization was 38.8 ± 27.9 days. The average presuperficialization depth was 7.1 ± 2.4 mm and average postsuperficialization depth was 3.7 ± 2.7 mm (P = 0.002). Sixteen fistulas were successfully accessed for a cannulation rate of 89%. 94.7% of fistulas remained patent at last visit, with only one thrombosed 8-10 weeks after superficialization. CONCLUSIONS: This technique appears to be both safe and effective, and results in a vein that is immediately subdermal without major contour deformity. Early outcomes are comparable to those alternative methods described in the literature.