An International, Expert-Based Delphi Consensus Document on Controversial Issues about TransCarotid Artery Revascularization (TCAR).

OBJECTIVE: TransCarotid Artery Revascularization (TCAR) has emerged as an alternative therapeutic modality to carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TFCAS) for the management of patients with carotid artery stenosis. However, certain issues regarding the indications and contraindications of TCAR remain unanswered or unresolved. The aim of this international, expert-based Delphi Consensus document was to attempt to provide some guidance on these topics. METHODS: A 3-Round Delphi Consensus process was performed including 29 experts. The aim of Round 1 was to investigate the differing views and opinions of the participants. Round 2 was carried out after the results from the literature on each topic were provided to the participants. During Round 3, the participants had the opportunity to finalize their vote. RESULTS: Most participants agreed that TCAR can/can probably/possibly be performed within 14 days of a cerebrovascular event, but it is best to avoid it in the first 48 hours. It was felt that TCAR cannot/should not replace TFCAS or CEA, as each procedure has specific indications and contraindications. Symptomatic patients >80 years should probably be treated with TCAR rather than with TFCAS. TCAR can/can probably be used for the treatment of restenosis following CEA/TFCAS. Finally, there is a need for a randomized controlled trial to provide better evidence for the unresolved issues. CONCLUSIONS: This Delphi Consensus document attempted to assist the decision-making of physicians/interventionalists/vascular surgeons involved in the management of carotid stenosis patients. Furthermore, areas requiring additional research were identified. Future studies and randomized controlled trials should provide more evidence to address the unanswered questions regarding TCAR.

Racial and Ethnic Survival Disparities in Pediatric Oncology Over Time: An Analysis of the SEER Registry.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Studies have demonstrated existing racial and ethnic disparities in multiple aspects of pediatric oncology. The purpose of this study was to examine how racial and ethnic disparities in mortality among pediatric oncology patients have changed over time. We examined mortality by race and ethnicity over time within the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registry. METHODS: Patients <20 years-old from 1975 to 2016 (n = 49,861) were selected for the analysis. Demographic characteristics, cancer diagnosis, and mortality data were extracted. Patients were divided by race and ethnicity: 1) non-Latino White, 2) Black, 3) Latino, and 4) Other Race. The interaction between race/ethnicity and decade was evaluated to better understand how disparities in mortality have changed over time. RESULTS: Unadjusted mortality among all cancers improved significantly, with 5-year mortality decreasing from the 1970s to the 2010s (log-rank: p < 0.001) for all race/ethnicity groups. However, improvements in mortality were not equal, with 5-year overall survival (OS) improving from 62.7 % in the 1970s to 87.5 % (Δ = 24.8 %) in the 2010s for White patients but only improving from 59.9 % to 80.8 % (Δ = 20.9 %) for Black patients (p < 0.01). The interaction between Race/Ethnicity and decade demonstrated that the Hazard Ratio (HR) for mortality worsened for Black [HR (95 % Confidence Interval): 1.10 (1.05-1.15) and Latino [1.11 (1.07-1.17)] patients compared to White, non-Latino patients. CONCLUSION: There has been a dramatic improvement in survival across pediatric oncology patients since 1975. However, the improvement has not been shared equally across racial/ethnic categories, with overall survival worsening over time for racial/ethnic minorities compared to White patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Temporal trends in pediatric cancer mortality: rare cancers lag behind more common cancers.

Temporal trends demonstrate improved survival for many types of common pediatric cancer. Studies have not examined improvement in very rare pediatric cancers or compared these improvements to more common cancers. In this cohort study of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registry, we examined patients from 1975 to 2016 who were 0-19 years of age at the time of diagnosis. Cancers were grouped by decade of diagnosis and 3 cancer frequency groups: Common, Intermediate, and Rare. Trends in mortality across decades and by cancer frequency were compared using Kaplan-Meier curves and adjusted Cox proportional hazards models. A total of 50,222 patients were available for analysis, with the top 10 cancers grouped as Common (67%), 13 cancers grouped with Intermediate (24%), and 37 cancers as Rare (9%). Rare cancers had higher rates of children who were older and Black. 5-year survival increased from 63% to 86% across all cancers from the 1970s to the 2010s. The hazard ratio (HR) for mortality decreased from the reference point of 1 in the 1970s to 0.27 (95% CI: 0.25-0.30) in the 2010s in Common cancers, while the HR only dropped to 0.60 (0.49-0.73) over that same period for rare cancers. Pediatric oncology patients have experienced dramatic improvement in mortality since the 1970s, with mortality falling by nearly 75% in common cancers. Unfortunately, rare pediatric cancers continue to lag behind more common and therefore better studied cancers, highlighting the need for a renewed focus on research efforts for children with these rare diseases.

A composite risk assessment model for venous thromboembolism.

OBJECTIVE: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a preventable cause of hospitalization-related morbidity and mortality. VTE prevention requires accurate risk stratification. Federal agencies mandated VTE risk assessment for all hospital admissions. We have shown that the widely used Caprini (30 risk factors) and Padua (11 risk factors) VTE risk-assessment models (RAMs) have limited predictive ability for VTE when used for all general hospital admissions. Here, we test whether combining the risk factors from all 23 available VTE RAMs improves VTE risk prediction. METHODS: We analyzed data from the first hospitalizations of 1,282,014 surgical and non-surgical patients admitted to 1298 Veterans Affairs facilities nationwide between January 2016 and December 2021. We used logistic regression to predict VTE within 90 days of admission using risk factors from all 23 available VTE RAMs. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, and positive (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV) were used to quantify the predictive power of our models. The metrics were computed at two diagnostic thresholds that maximized (1) the value of sensitivity + specificity-1; and (2) PPV and were compared using McNemar's test. The Delong-Delong test was used to compare AUCs. RESULTS: After excluding those with missing data, 1,185,633 patients (mean age, 66 years; 93% male; and 72% White) were analyzed, of whom 33,253 (2.8%) had a VTE (deep venous thrombosis [DVT], n = 19,218, 1.6%; pulmonary embolism [PE], n = 10,190, 0.9%; PE + DVT, n = 3845, 0.3%). Our composite RAM included 102 risk factors and improved prediction of VTE compared with the Caprini RAM risk factors (AUC composite model: 0.74; AUC Caprini risk-factor model: 0.63; P < .0001). When the sum of sensitivity and specificity-1 was maximized, the composite model demonstrated small improvements in sensitivity, specificity and PPV; NPV was high in both models. When PPV was maximized, the PPV of the composite model was improved but remained low. The nature of the relationship between NPV and PPV precluded any further gain in PPV by sacrificing NPV and sensitivity. CONCLUSIONS: Using a composite of 102 risk factors from all available VTE RAMs, we improved VTE prediction in a large, national cohort of >1 million general hospital admissions. However, neither model has a sensitivity or PPV that permits it to be a reliable predictor of VTE. We demonstrate the limits of currently available VTE risk prediction tools; no available RAM is ready for widespread use in the general hospital population.

Impact of the type of anesthesia on adverse events during transcarotid artery revascularization.

OBJECTIVE: The use of local or regional anesthesia (LRA) is encouraged during transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) because the procedure is performed through a small incision. LRA permits neurologic evaluation during the procedure and may reduce periprocedural cardiac morbidity compared with general anesthesia (GA). There is limited and conflicting information regarding the preferred anesthesia to use during TCAR. We compared periprocedural clinical and technical complications, and intraprocedural performance metrics of TCAR performed under GA vs LRA. METHODS: Patient, lesion, physician, and procedural information was collected in a worldwide quality assurance program of consecutive TCAR procedures. A composite clinical adverse event rate (death, stroke, transient ischemic attack, myocardial infarction) and a composite technical adverse event rate (aborted procedure, conversion to carotid endarterectomy, bleeding, dissection, cranial-nerve injury, device failure) in the periprocedural period were computed. Four intraprocedural performance measures (flow-reversal time, fluoroscopy time, contrast volume, and skin-to-skin time) were recorded. Deidentified data were analyzed independently at the Center for Vascular Research, University of Maryland. Poisson regressions were used to assess the impact of anesthesia type on adverse event rates. Linear regressions were used to compare performance measures. RESULTS: A total of 27,043 TCARs were performed by 1456 physicians between 2012 and 2021. A majority of patients (83%) received GA, and this proportion increased over time (R2 = 0.74; P < .0001). Some physicians (33.4%) used LRA in some of their procedures; only 2.7% used LRA in all of their procedures. Clinical risk factors were more common in the LRA group (P < .0001) and anatomic risk factors in the GA group (P < .0001); these differences were adjusted for in subsequent analyses. LRA was more likely to be used by vascular surgeons and by physicians with higher prior transfemoral carotid stenting experience (P < .0001). When comparing GA vs LRA, clinical adverse events (1.49%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-1.8 vs 1.55%; 95% CI, 1.2-2.0; P = .78), technical adverse events (5.6%; 95% CI, 5.2-6.2 vs 5.3%; 95% CI, 4.5-6.3; P = .47), and intraprocedural performance measures did not differ by type of anesthesia. CONCLUSIONS: Almost two-thirds of physicians performed TCAR exclusively under GA, and the overall proportion of procedures performed under GA increased over time. A larger fraction of patients with severe medical risk factors received LRA vs GA, whereas a larger fraction of patients with anatomic risk-factors received GA. Periprocedural clinical and technical adverse events did not differ by type of anesthesia. Intraprocedural performance metrics that drive procedural cost were similar between groups; potential differences in procedural cost driven by anesthetic choice require further study.

Special Report on the Consensus QIBA Profile for Objective Analytical Validation of Non-calcified and High-risk Plaque and Other Biomarkers using Computed Tomography Angiography.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Evidence is building in support of the clinical utility of atherosclerotic plaque imaging by computed tomography angiography (CTA). There is increasing organized activity to embrace non-calcified plaque (NCP) as a formally defined biomarker for clinical trials, and high-risk plaque (HRP) for clinical care, as the most relevant measures for the field to advance and worthy of community efforts to validate. Yet the ability to assess the quantitative performance of any given specific solution to make these measurements or classifications is not available. Vendors use differing definitions, assessment metrics, and validation data sets to describe their offerings without clinician users having the capability to make objective assessments of accuracy and precision and how this affects diagnostic confidence. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The QIBA Profile for Atherosclerosis Biomarkers by CTA was created by the Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers Alliance (QIBA) to improve objectivity and decrease the variability of noninvasive plaque phenotyping. The Profile provides claims on the accuracy and precision of plaque measures individually and when combined. RESULTS: Individual plaque morphology measurements are evaluated in terms of bias (accuracy), slope (consistency of the bias across the measurement range, needed for measurements of change), and variability. The multiparametric plaque stability phenotype is evaluated in terms of agreement with expert pathologists. The Profile is intended for a broad audience, including those engaged in discovery science, clinical trials, and patient care. CONCLUSION: This report provides a rationale and overview of the Profile claims and how to comply with the Profile in research and clinical practice. SUMMARY STATEMENT: This article summarizes objective means to validate the analytical performance of non-calcified plaque (NCP), other emerging plaque morphology measurements, and multiparametric histology-defined high-risk plaque (HRP), as outlined in the QIBA Profile for Atherosclerosis Biomarkers by CTA.

Cognitive impairment in asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis is associated with abnormal segments in the Circle of Willis.

OBJECTIVE: Our group has previously demonstrated that patients with asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis (ACAS) demonstrate cognitive impairment. One proposed mechanism for cognitive impairment in patients with ACAS is cerebral hypoperfusion due to flow-restriction. We tested whether the combination of a high-grade carotid stenosis and inadequate cross-collateralization in the Circle of Willis (CoW) resulted in worsened cognitive impairment. METHODS: Twenty-four patients with high-grade (≥70% diameter-reducing) ACAS underwent carotid duplex ultrasound, cognitive assessment, and 3D time-of-flight magnetic resonance angiography. The cognitive battery consisted of nine neuropsychological tests assessing four cognitive domains: learning and recall, attention and working memory, motor and processing speed, and executive function. Raw cognitive scores were converted into standardized T-scores. A structured interpretation of the magnetic resonance angiography images was performed with each segment of the CoW categorized as being either normal or abnormal. Abnormal segments of the CoW were defined as segments characterized as narrowed or occluded due to congenital aplasia or hypoplasia, or acquired atherosclerotic stenosis or occlusion. Linear regression was used to estimate the association between the number of abnormal segments in the CoW, and individual cognitive domain scores. Significance was set to P < .05. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 66.1 ± 9.6 years, and 79.2% (n = 19) were male. A significant negative association was found between the number of abnormal segments in the CoW and cognitive scores in the learning and recall (ß = -6.5; P = .01), and attention and working memory (ß = -7.0; P = .02) domains. There was a trend suggesting a negative association in the motor and processing speed (ß = -2.4; P = .35) and executive function (ß = -4.5; P = .06) domains that did not reach significance. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with high-grade ACAS, the concomitant presence of increasing occlusive disease in the CoW correlates with worse cognitive function. This association was significant in the learning and recall and attention and working memory domains. Although motor and processing speed and executive function also declined numerically with increasing abnormal segments in the CoW, the relationship was not significant. Since flow restriction at a carotid stenosis compounded by inadequate collateral compensation across a diseased CoW worsens cerebral perfusion, our findings support the hypothesis that cerebral hypoperfusion underlies the observed cognitive impairment in patients with ACAS.

Why selective screening for asymptomatic carotid stenosis is currently appropriate: a special report.

INTRODUCTION: Two of the main reasons recent guidelines do not recommend routine population-wide screening programs for asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis (AsxCS) is that screening could lead to an increase of carotid revascularization procedures and that such mass screening programs may not be cost-effective. Nevertheless, selective screening for AsxCS could have several benefits. This article presents the rationale for such a program. AREAS COVERED: The benefits of selective screening for AsxCS include early recognition of AsxCS allowing timely initiation of preventive measures to reduce future myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, cardiac death and cardiovascular (CV) event rates. EXPERT OPINION: Mass screening programs for AsxCS are neither clinically effective nor cost-effective. Nevertheless, targeted screening of populations at high risk for AsxCS provides an opportunity to identify these individuals earlier rather than later and to initiate a number of lifestyle measures, risk factor modifications, and intensive medical therapy in order to prevent future strokes and CV events. For patients at 'higher risk of stroke' on best medical treatment, a prophylactic carotid intervention may be considered.

Ability of Caprini and Padua risk-assessment models to predict venous thromboembolism in a nationwide Veterans Affairs study.

OBJECTIVE: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a preventable complication of hospitalization. Risk-stratification is the cornerstone of prevention. The Caprini and Padua are two of the most commonly used risk-assessment models (RAMs) to quantify VTE risk. Both models perform well in select, high-risk cohorts. Although VTE RAMs were designed for use in all hospital admissions, they are mostly tested in select, high-risk cohorts. We aim to evaluate the two RAMs in a large, unselected cohort of patients. METHODS: We analyzed consecutive first hospital admissions of 1,252,460 unique surgical and non-surgical patients to 1298 Veterans Affairs facilities nationwide between January 2016 and December 2021. Caprini and Padua scores were generated using the Veterans Affairs' national data repository. We determined the ability of the two RAMs to predict VTE within 90 days of admission. In secondary analyses, we evaluated prediction at 30 and 60 days, in surgical vs non-surgical patients, after excluding patients with upper extremity deep vein thrombosis, in patients hospitalized ≥72 hours, after including all-cause mortality in a composite outcome, and after accounting for prophylaxis in the predictive model. We used area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs) as the metric of prediction. RESULTS: A total of 330,388 (26.4%) surgical and 922,072 (73.6%) non-surgical consecutively hospitalized patients (total N = 1,252,460) were analyzed. Caprini scores ranged from 0 to 28 (median, 4; interquartile range [IQR], 3-6); Padua scores ranged from 0-13 (median, 1; IQR, 1-3). The RAMs showed good calibration and higher scores were associated with higher VTE rates. VTE developed in 35,557 patients (2.8%) within 90 days of admission. The ability of both models to predict 90-day VTE was low (AUCs: Caprini, 0.56; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.56-0.56; Padua, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.58-0.59). Prediction remained low for surgical (Caprini, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.53-0.54; Padua, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.56-0.57) and non-surgical patients (Caprini, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.58-0.59; Padua, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.59-0.60). There was no clinically meaningful change in predictive performance in any of the sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Caprini and Padua RAM scores have low ability to predict VTE events in a cohort of unselected consecutive hospitalizations. Improved VTE RAMs must be developed before they can be applied to a general hospital population.

An exercise stress test for contrast-enhanced duplex ultrasound assessment of lower limb muscle perfusion in patients with peripheral arterial disease.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to develop a standardized contrast-enhanced duplex ultrasound (CE-DUS) protocol to assess lower-extremity muscle perfusion before and after exercise and determine relationships of perfusion with clinical and functional measures. METHODS: CE-DUS (EPIQ 5G, Philips) was used before and immediately after a 10-minute, standardized bout of treadmill walking to compare microvascular perfusion of the gastrocnemius muscle in older (55-82 years) patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD) (n = 15, mean ankle-brachial index, 0.78 ± 0.04) and controls (n = 13). Microvascular blood volume (MBV) and microvascular flow velocity (MFV) were measured at rest and immediately following treadmill exercise, and the Modified Physical Performance Test (MPPT) was used to assess mobility function. RESULTS: In the resting state (pre-exercise), MBV in patients with PAD was not significantly different than normal controls (5.17 ± 0.71 vs 6.20 ± 0.83 arbitrary units (AU) respectively; P = .36); however, after exercise, MBV was ∼40% lower in patients with PAD compared with normal controls (5.85 ± 1.13 vs 9.53 ± 1.31 AU, respectively; P = .04). Conversely, MFV was ∼60% higher in patients with PAD compared with normal controls after exercise (0.180 ± 0.016 vs 0.113 ± 0.018 AU, respectively; P = .01). There was a significant between-group difference in the exercise-induced changes in both MBV and MFV (P ≤ .05). Both basal and exercise MBV directly correlated with MPPT score in the patients with PAD (r = 0.56-0.62; P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: This standardized protocol for exercise stress testing of the lower extremities quantifies calf muscle perfusion and elicits perfusion deficits in patients with PAD. This technique objectively quantifies microvascular perfusion deficits that are related to reduced mobility function and could be used to assess therapeutic efficacy in patients with PAD.

Effect of junctional reflux on the venous clinical severity score in patients with insufficiency of the great saphenous vein (JURY study).

OBJECTIVE: Effective treatment options are available for chronic venous insufficiency associated with superficial venous reflux. Although many patients with C2 and C3 disease based on the CEAP (Clinical-Etiological-Anatomical-Pathophysiological) classification have combined great saphenous vein (GSV) and saphenofemoral junction (SFJ) reflux, some may not have concomitant SFJ reflux. Several payors have determined that symptom severity in patients without SFJ reflux does not warrant treatment. In patients planned for venous ablation, we tested whether Venous Clinical Severity Scores (VCSS) are equivalent in those with GSV reflux alone compared with those with both GSV and SFJ reflux. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted at 10 centers. Inclusion criteria were: candidate for endovenous ablation as determined by treating physician; 18 to 80 years of age; GSV reflux with or without SFJ reflux on ultrasound; and C2 or C3 disease. Exclusion criteria were prior deep vein thrombosis; prior vein ablation on the index limb; ilio-caval obstruction; and renal, hepatic, or heart failure requiring prior hospitalization. An a priori sample size was calculated. We used multiple linear regression (adjusted for patient characteristics) to compare differences in VCSS scores of the two groups at baseline, and to test whether scores were equivalent using a priori equivalence boundaries of +1 and -1. In secondary analyses, we tested differences in VCSS scores in patients with C2 and C3 disease separately. RESULTS: A total of 352 patients were enrolled; 64.2% (n = 226) had SFJ reflux, and 35.8% (n = 126) did not. The two groups did not differ by major clinical characteristics. The mean age of the cohort was 53.9 ± 14.3 years; women comprised 74.2%; White patients 85.8%; and body mass index was 27.8 ± 6.1 kg/m2. The VCSS scores in patients with and without SFJ reflux were found to be equivalent; SFJ reflux was not a significant predictor of VCSS score; and mean VCSS scores did not differ significantly (6.4 vs 6.6, respectively, P = .40). In secondary subset analyses, VCSS scores were equivalent between C2 patients with and without SFJ reflux, and VCSS scores of C3 patients with SFJ reflux were lower than those without SFJ reflux. CONCLUSIONS: Symptom severity is equivalent in patients with GSV reflux with or without SFJ reflux. The absence of SFJ reflux alone should not determine the treatment paradigm in patients with symptomatic chronic venous insufficiency. Patients with GSV reflux who meet clinical criteria for treatment should have equivalent treatment regardless of whether or not they have SFJ reflux.

Risk factors and treatment interventions associated with incomplete thrombus resolution and pulmonary hypertension after pulmonary embolism.

BACKGROUND: Residual pulmonary vascular occlusion (RPVO) affects one half of patients after a pulmonary embolism (PE). The relationship between the risk factors and therapeutic interventions for the development of RPVO and chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension is unknown. METHODS: This retrospective review included PE patients within a 26-month period who had baseline and follow-up imaging studies (ie, computed tomography [CT], ventilation/perfusion scans, transthoracic echocardiography) available. We collected the incidence of RPVO, percentage of pulmonary artery occlusion (%PAO), baseline CT %PAO, most recent CT %PAO, and difference between the baseline and most recent %PAO on CT (Δ%PAO). RESULTS: A total of 354 patients had imaging reports available; 197 with CT and 315 with transthoracic echocardiography. The median follow-up time was 144 days (interquartile range [IQR], 102-186 days). RPVO was present in 38.9% of the 354 patients. The median Δ%PAO was -10.0% (IQR, -32% to -1.2%). Fewer patients with a provoked PE developed RPVO (P ≤ .01), and the initial troponin level was lower in patients who developed RPVO (P = .03). The initial thrombus was larger in the patients who received advanced intervention vs anticoagulation (baseline CT %PAO: median, 61.2%; [IQR, 27.5%-75.0%] vs median, 12.5% [IQR, 2.5%-40.0%]; P ≤ .0001). Catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT; median Δ%PAO, -47.5%; IQR, -63.7% to -8.7%) and surgical pulmonary embolectomy (SPE; median Δ%PAO, -42.5; IQR, -68.1% to -18.7%) had the largest thrombus reduction compared with anticoagulation (P = .01). Of the 354 patients, 76 developed pulmonary hypertension; however, only 14 received pulmonary hypertension medications and 12 underwent pulmonary thromboendarterectomy. Cancer (odds ratio [OR], 1.7) and planned prolonged anticoagulation (>1 year; OR, 2.20) increased the risk of RPVO. In contrast, the risk was lower for men (OR, 0.61), patients with recent surgery (OR, 0.33), and patients treated with SPE (OR, 0.42). A larger Δ%PAO was found in men (coefficient, -8.94), patients with a lower body mass index (coefficient, -0.66), patients treated with CDT (coefficient, -18.12), and patients treated with SPE (coefficient, -21.69). A lower Δ%PAO was found in African-American patients (coefficient, 7.31). CONCLUSIONS: The use of CDT and SPE showed long-term benefit in thrombus reduction.

An international, multispecialty, expert-based Delphi Consensus document on controversial issues in the management of patients with asymptomatic and symptomatic carotid stenosis.

OBJECTIVE: Despite the publication of various national/international guidelines, several questions concerning the management of patients with asymptomatic (AsxCS) and symptomatic (SxCS) carotid stenosis remain unanswered. The aim of this international, multi-specialty, expert-based Delphi Consensus document was to address these issues to help clinicians make decisions when guidelines are unclear. METHODS: Fourteen controversial topics were identified. A three-round Delphi Consensus process was performed including 61 experts. The aim of Round 1 was to investigate the differing views and opinions regarding these unresolved topics. In Round 2, clarifications were asked from each participant. In Round 3, the questionnaire was resent to all participants for their final vote. Consensus was reached when ≥75% of experts agreed on a specific response. RESULTS: Most experts agreed that: (1) the current periprocedural/in-hospital stroke/death thresholds for performing a carotid intervention should be lowered from 6% to 4% in patients with SxCS and from 3% to 2% in patients with AsxCS; (2) the time threshold for a patient being considered "recently symptomatic" should be reduced from the current definition of "6 months" to 3 months or less; (3) 80% to 99% AsxCS carries a higher risk of stroke compared with 60% to 79% AsxCS; (4) factors beyond the grade of stenosis and symptoms should be added to the indications for revascularization in AsxCS patients (eg, plaque features of vulnerability and silent infarctions on brain computed tomography scans); and (5) shunting should be used selectively, rather than always or never. Consensus could not be reached on the remaining topics due to conflicting, inadequate, or controversial evidence. CONCLUSIONS: The present international, multi-specialty expert-based Delphi Consensus document attempted to provide responses to several unanswered/unresolved issues. However, consensus could not be achieved on some topics, highlighting areas requiring future research.

Transforming the Future of Surgeon-Scientists.

OBJECTIVE: To create a blueprint for surgical department leaders, academic institutions, and funding agencies to optimally support surgeon-scientists. BACKGROUND: Scientific contributions by surgeons have been transformative across many medical disciplines. Surgeon-scientists provide a distinct approach and mindset toward key scientific questions. However, lack of institutional support, pressure for increased clinical productivity, and growing administrative burden are major challenges for the surgeon-scientist, as is the time-consuming nature of surgical training and practice. METHODS: An American Surgical Association Research Sustainability Task Force was created to outline a blueprint for sustainable science in surgery. Leaders from top NIH-sponsored departments of surgery engaged in video and in-person meetings between January and April 2023. A strength, weakness, opportunities, threats analysis was performed, and workgroups focused on the roles of surgeons, the department and institutions, and funding agencies. RESULTS: Taskforce recommendations: (1) SURGEONS: Growth mindset : identifying research focus, long-term planning, patience/tenacity, team science, collaborations with disparate experts; Skill set : align skills and research, fill critical skill gaps, develop team leadership skills; DEPARTMENT OF SURGERY (DOS): (2) MENTORSHIP: Chair : mentor-mentee matching/regular meetings/accountability, review of junior faculty progress, mentorship training requirement, recognition of mentorship (eg, relative value unit equivalent, awards; Mentor: dedicated time, relevant scientific expertise, extramural funding, experience and/or trained as mentor, trusted advisor; Mentee : enthusiastic/eager, proactive, open to feedback, clear about goals; (3) FINANCIAL SUSTAINABILITY: diversification of research portfolio, identification of matching funding sources, departmental resource awards (eg, T-/P-grants), leveraging of institutional resources, negotiation of formalized/formulaic funds flow investment from academic medical center toward science, philanthropy; (4) STRUCTURAL/STRATEGIC SUPPORT: Structural: grants administrative support, biostats/bioinformatics support, clinical trial and research support, regulatory support, shared departmental laboratory space/equipment; Strategic: hiring diverse surgeon-scientist/scientists faculty across DOS, strategic faculty retention/ recruitment, philanthropy, career development support, progress tracking, grant writing support, DOS-wide research meetings, regular DOS strategic research planning; (5) COMMUNITY AND CULTURE: Community: right mix of faculty, connection surgeon with broad scientific community; Culture: building research infrastructure, financial support for research, projecting importance of research (awards, grand rounds, shoutouts); (6) THE ROLE OF INSTITUTIONS: Foundation: research space co-location, flexible start-up packages, courses/mock study section, awards, diverse institutional mentorship teams; Nurture: institutional infrastructure, funding (eg, endowed chairs), promotion friendly toward surgeon-scientists, surgeon-scientists in institutional leadership positions; Expectations: RVU target relief, salary gap funding, competitive starting salaries, longitudinal salary strategy; (7) THE ROLE OF FUNDING AGENCIES: change surgeon research training paradigm, offer alternate awards to K-awards, increasing salary cap to reflect market reality, time extension for surgeon early-stage investigator status, surgeon representation on study section, focused award strategies for professional societies/foundations. CONCLUSIONS: Authentic recommitment from surgeon leaders with intentional and ambitious actions from institutions, corporations, funders, and society is essential in order to reap the essential benefits of surgeon-scientists toward advancements of science.

Recent advances and controversial issues in the optimal management of asymptomatic carotid stenosis.

OBJECTIVE: The optimal management of patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis (AsxCS) is enduringly controversial. We updated our 2021 Expert Review and Position Statement, focusing on recent advances in the diagnosis and management of patients with AsxCS. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was performed up to August 1, 2023, using PubMed/PubMed Central, EMBASE and Scopus. The following keywords were used in various combinations: "asymptomatic carotid stenosis," "carotid endarterectomy" (CEA), "carotid artery stenting" (CAS), and "transcarotid artery revascularization" (TCAR). Areas covered included (i) improvements in best medical treatment (BMT) for patients with AsxCS and declining stroke risk, (ii) technological advances in surgical/endovascular skills/techniques and outcomes, (iii) risk factors, clinical/imaging characteristics and risk prediction models for the identification of high-risk AsxCS patient subgroups, and (iv) the association between cognitive dysfunction and AsxCS. RESULTS: BMT is essential for all patients with AsxCS, regardless of whether they will eventually be offered CEA, CAS, or TCAR. Specific patient subgroups at high risk for stroke despite BMT should be considered for a carotid revascularization procedure. These patients include those with severe (≥80%) AsxCS, transcranial Doppler-detected microemboli, plaque echolucency on Duplex ultrasound examination, silent infarcts on brain computed tomography or magnetic resonance angiography scans, decreased cerebrovascular reserve, increased size of juxtaluminal hypoechoic area, AsxCS progression, carotid plaque ulceration, and intraplaque hemorrhage. Treatment of patients with AsxCS should be individualized, taking into consideration individual patient preferences and needs, clinical and imaging characteristics, and cultural, ethnic, and social factors. Solid evidence supporting or refuting an association between AsxCS and cognitive dysfunction is lacking. CONCLUSIONS: The optimal management of patients with AsxCS should include BMT for all individuals and a prophylactic carotid revascularization procedure (CEA, CAS, or TCAR) for some asymptomatic patient subgroups, additionally taking into consideration individual patient needs and preference, clinical and imaging characteristics, social and cultural factors, and the available stroke risk prediction models. Future studies should investigate the association between AsxCS with cognitive function and the role of carotid revascularization procedures in the progression or reversal of cognitive dysfunction.

Growing Deficit in New Cancer Diagnoses 2 Years Into the COVID-19 Pandemic: A National Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: Large decreases in cancer diagnoses were seen early in the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the evolution of these deficits since the end of 2020 and the advent of widespread vaccination is unknown. METHODS: This study examined data from the Veterans Health Administration (VA) from 1 January 2018 through 28 February 2022 and identified patients with screening or diagnostic procedures or new cancer diagnoses for the four most common cancers in the VA health system: prostate, lung, colorectal, and bladder cancers. Monthly procedures and new diagnoses were calculated, and the pre-COVID era (January 2018 to February 2020) was compared with the COVID era (March 2020 to February 2022). RESULTS: The study identified 2.5 million patients who underwent a diagnostic or screening procedure related to the four cancers. A new cancer was diagnosed for 317,833 patients. During the first 2 years of the pandemic, VA medical centers performed 13,022 fewer prostate biopsies, 32,348 fewer cystoscopies, and 200,710 fewer colonoscopies than in 2018-2019. These persistent deficits added a cumulative deficit of nearly 19,000 undiagnosed prostate cancers and 3300 to 3700 undiagnosed cancers each for lung, colon, and bladder. Decreased diagnostic and screening procedures correlated with decreased new diagnoses of cancer, particularly cancer of the prostate (R = 0.44) and bladder (R = 0.27). CONCLUSION: Disruptions in new diagnoses of four common cancers (prostate, lung, bladder, and colorectal) seen early in the COVID-19 pandemic have persisted for 2 years. Although reductions improved from the early pandemic, new reductions during the Delta and Omicron waves demonstrate the continued impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer care.

Prediction of bleeding in patients being considered for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (pulmonary embolism and deep vein thrombosis) is an important preventable cause of in-hospital death. Prophylaxis with low doses of anticoagulants reduces the incidence of venous thromboembolism but can also cause bleeding. It is, therefore, important to stratify the risk of bleeding for hospitalized patients when considering pharmacologic prophylaxis. The IMPROVE (international medical prevention registry on venous thromboembolism) and Consensus risk assessment models (RAMs) are the two tools available for such patients. Few studies have evaluated their ability to predict bleeding in a large, unselected cohort of patients. We assessed the ability of the IMPROVE and Consensus bleeding RAMs to predict bleeding within 90 days of hospitalization in a comprehensive analysis encompassing all hospitalized patients, regardless of surgical vs nonsurgical status. METHODS: We analyzed consecutive first hospital admissions of 1,228,448 unique surgical and nonsurgical patients to 1298 Veterans Affairs facilities nationwide between January 2016 and December 2021. IMPROVE and Consensus scores were generated using data from a repository of their common electronic medical records. We assessed the ability of the two RAMs to predict bleeding within 90 days of admission. We used area under the receiver operating characteristic curves to determine the prediction of bleeding by each RAM. RESULTS: Of 1,228,448 hospitalized patients, 324,959 (26.5%) were surgical and 903,489 (73.5%) were nonsurgical. Of these patients, 68,372 (5.6%) had a bleeding event within 90 days of admission. The Consensus RAM scores ranged from -5.60 to -1.21 (median, -4.93; interquartile range, -5.60 to -4.93). The IMPROVE RAM scores ranged from 0 to 22 (median, 3.5; interquartile range, 2.5-5). Both showed good calibration, with higher scores associated with higher bleeding rates. The ability of both RAMs to predict 90-day bleeding was low (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.61 for the IMPROVE RAM and 0.59 for the Consensus RAM). The predictive ability was also low at 30 and 60 days for surgical and nonsurgical patients, patients receiving prophylactic, therapeutic, or no anticoagulation, and patients hospitalized for ≥72 hours. Prediction was also low across different bleeding outcomes (ie, any bleeding, gastrointestinal bleeding, nongastrointestinal bleeding, and bleeding or death). CONCLUSIONS: In this large, unselected, nationwide cohort of surgical and nonsurgical hospital admissions, increasing IMPROVE and Consensus bleeding RAM scores were associated with increasing bleeding rates. However, both RAMs had low ability to predict bleeding at 0 to 90 days after admission. Thus, the currently available RAMs require modification and rigorous reevaluation before they can be applied universally.