Outcomes of Carotid Artery Stenting and Endarterectomy in Patients with Prior Contralateral Carotid Revascularization.

OBJECTIVES: Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) are available treatment options for stroke prevention in individuals with severe carotid stenosis. This study aims to compare the early postoperative outcomes in patients who underwent CEA or CAS after prior contralateral carotid revascularization. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of the Society of Vascular Surgery (SVS) Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) database, identifying patients who had prior carotid artery revascularization followed by a contralateral CEA or CAS between 2017 and 2023. Based on the sequence of the procedures performed, patients were categorized into four groups: 1) patients who had a prior unilateral CEA followed by a contralateral CEA (CEA-CEA); 2) patients who had a prior unilateral CAS followed by a contralateral CEA (CAS-CEA); 3) patients had a prior unilateral CAS followed by a contralateral CAS (CAS-CAS); and 4) patients had a prior unilateral CEA followed by a contralateral CAS (CEA-CAS). Univariate analysis (Pearson χ 2, Wilcoxon rank sum test) and multivariate logistic regression were employed to assess length of stay, rates of in-hospital stroke, myocardial infarction, new-onset arrhythmia, and 30-day mortality. RESULTS: A total of 20,761 patients with a history of prior unilateral carotid revascularization procedures were identified, of which 12,788 underwent contralateral CEA and another 7,973 underwent contralateral CAS. Compared to the CAS-CAS group, patients who underwent CEA followed by contralateral CAS (CEA-CAS group) were associated with higher rates of postoperative in-hospital stroke (1.8% vs. 1%, P = 0.003), new-onset arrhythmia (2% vs. 1.2%, P=0.006), and 30-day mortality (1.3% vs. 0.8%, P = 0.04). On multivariate analysis, preoperative use of statins and beta-blockers was associated with lower odds of in-hospital stroke (OR 0.42; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.29 - 0.69; P = 0.0002) and new-onset arrhythmia (OR 0.62; 95% CI 0.49 - 0.9; P = 0.01), respectively, after CAS. There were no significant differences in outcomes for CEA-CEA and CAS-CEA groups. CONCLUSION: Patients with prior CEA undergoing contralateral CAS had higher rates of in-hospital stroke, new-onset arrhythmia, and 30-day mortality. Beta-blockers may reduce postoperative arrhythmia rates in these patients, and established regimens should not be discontinued in the perioperative period; however, further prospective studies are needed to confirm this finding. Optimized medical treatment and appropriate imaging follow-up remain crucial for improvement outcomes.

Nutcracker syndrome (a Delphi consensus).

BACKGROUND: Nutcracker syndrome (NCS) describes the symptomatic compression of the left renal vein between the aorta and superior mesenteric artery. Whereas asymptomatic compression is a common radiological finding, patients with NCS can report a range of symptoms. There are no specific diagnostic criteria and interventions include a range of open surgical and endovascular procedures. Therefore, we wished to develop an international consensus document covering aspects of diagnosis, management, and follow-up for patients with NCS. METHODS: A three-stage modified Delphi consensus was performed. A steering committee developed 37 statements covering 3 categories for patients with NCS: diagnosis, management, and follow-up. These statements were reported individually by 20 international experts in the management of venous disease, using a 5-point Likert scale. Consensus was defined if ≥70% of respondents rated the statement between 1 and 2 (agreement) and between 4 and 5 (disagreement). Those statements without consensus were recirculated in a second round of voting. A third round of the questionnaire was performed with 14 additional statements to clarify diagnostic values of NCS. RESULTS: Responses were returned by 20 of 20 experts (100%) in round one and 17 of 20 (85%) in round two. Initial consensus was reached in 24 of 37 statements (65%) spread over all categories. Round two achieved a further consensus on 5 out of 10 statements (50%). No categories reported consensus on all statements. In round two consensus was reached in the category of follow-up (4/5 statements [80%]). The final round reached consensus on 5 out of 14 statements (36%). Experts agreed that imaging is obligated to confirm NCS. Experts did not agree on specific diagnostic cut-off values. There was a consensus that the first choice of operative treatment is left renal vein transposition and that the risk of stent migration outweighs the advantages of a percutaneous procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Consensus was achieved on most statements concerning the assessment and management of NCS. This Delphi consensus identified those areas in which further research is needed, such as antiplatelet therapy, endovascular treatment, and renal autotransplantation. A rare disease registry to improve data and reports of patient outcomes is warranted.

The Current State of Physician-Modified Endovascular Grafts in Complex Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms.

Physician modified endografts (PMEGs) for the treatment of complex abdominal aortic aneurysms and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms are a viable option. Other endovascular options include custom and off-the-shelf devices for fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic repair, parallel grafts, and in-situ laser fenestration. Limitations of these devices include time to development, strict anatomic criteria, and durability with regards to parallel grafts. PMEGs fill this void with perioperative and long-term outcomes similar to custom made devices. Post dissection aneurysms also present a unique role for PMEGs given the added complexity with fixing these aneurysms and have been reported with good outcomes. Lastly, we discuss the approach to preoperative planning and the operative component of PMEGs in this brief review.

Capsular contracture in breast reconstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Capsular contracture after implant-based breast reconstruction is not an uncommon problem and affects reconstruction outcomes. It can be influenced by various factors, such as the plane of implant placement, implant surface and implant type. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate how the abovementioned risk factors can affect capsular contracture rates. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. PubMed MEDLINE, EMBASE (OvidSP) and Cochrane Library were searched. Comparison groups included subpectoral versus prepectoral implant placement, smooth versus textured implants and saline versus silicone implants. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated for capsular contracture for each group. The level of evidence was evaluated using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. RESULTS: Twenty-three studies met the inclusion criteria. Sixteen studies compared subpectoral versus prepectoral implant placement, with no statistically significant differences in capsular contracture rates [OR, 1.21; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 0.75-1.95; P = 0.44]. Five studies compared smooth versus textured implants, with no statistically significant differences in capsular contracture rates (OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.50-1.93; P = 0.97). Two studies compared saline versus silicone implants for capsular contracture. Patients receiving saline implants had significantly lower capsular contracture rates than silicone implants (OR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.08-0.43; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Implant-based breast reconstruction using saline implants demonstrated reduced capsular contracture rates compared to silicone implants. However, no significant differences were observed in capsular contracture rates between subpectoral versus prepectoral implant placement and smooth versus textured implants.

Urological complications caused by inferior vena cava filters: a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Inferior vena cava (IVC) filters act in preventing pulmonary embolisms (PE). Various complications have been reported with their use. However, a credible urological complication rate, filter characteristics, and clinical presentation has yet to be summarized. Thus, we reported these complications in the form of a systematic review. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A search strategy was designed using PubMed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE on February 10th, 2022. The design of this search strategy did not include any language restrictions. The key words (and wildcard terms) used in the search strategy were urolog*, ureter*, bladder, kidney coupled with filter, inferior vena cava, and cava*. Inclusion criteria were: patients older than 18, with previous IVC filter placement, and urologic complication reported. Exclusion criteria were: patients younger than 18, no IVC filter placement, and no urologic complication reported. Other case series and reviews were excluded to avoid patient duplication. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Thirty-five articles were selected for full-text screening. Thirty-seven patient cases were reviewed, and the median age was 53 (range: 21-92 years old). Abdominal and or flank pain was reported in 16 (43%) patients, hematuria was seen in eight (22%) and two (5%) patients died due to acute renal failure resulting from the urologic complications of the IVC filter. Indications for IVC filter placement were recurrent pulmonary embolism (PE), contraindication to or noncompliance with anticoagulant therapy. The IVC filters were infrarenal in 29 (78.4%) patients, suprarenal in five (13.5%) patients, not reported in two patients, and misplaced into the right ovarian vein in one patient. Three or more imaging modalities were obtained in 19 patients (51%) for planning. IVC filter removal was not performed in 17 (45.9%) patients, endovascular retrieval occurred in nine (24.3%) patients, and open removal was performed in seven (18.9%) patients, and tissue interposition was performed in two (5.4%) patients. One patient did not have the management reported. CONCLUSIONS: Urological complications caused by IVC filters although rare, are likely underreported, require extensive workup, and pose surgical challenges. Due to their complex management, filter retrieval should be planned for as soon as feasible, and plans should be made as early as during the IVC filter implant. For those that do develop complications, clinical judgement must be exercised in management, and open surgical, endovascular or even conservative management strategies can be viable options and should be discussed in a multidisciplinary setting.

The use of flaps for management of deep sternal wound complications: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Many options are available for reconstruction after deep sternal wound infections. However, these options have not been critically appraised. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the existing evidence on sternal rewiring versus flap reconstruction and pectoralis major muscle flaps (PMFs) versus greater omental flaps (GOFs). METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched. Outcomes of interest included mortality, treatment failure and length of hospital stay (LOS). RESULTS: Fourteen studies were included. Nine studies compared flaps to rewiring, reporting on 618 patients. Patients treated with flaps had significantly lower mortality compared with patient treated with rewiring (Risk ratio [RR] 0.42, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.23-0.77, P < 0.01). Flap patients had significantly lower treatment failure compared with those who were treated with rewiring (RR 0.22, 95% CI: 0.14-0.37, P < 0.01). No statistically significant differences were observed in LOS between patients treated with flaps compared those treated with rewiring (standard mean difference -0.84, 95% CI: -1.91 to 0.24, P = 0.13). Five studies compared PMF with GOF, reporting on 599 patients. No statistically significant differences were found in mortality (RR 0.63, 95% CI: 0.24-1.68, P = 0.36), LOS (standard mean difference -14.52, 95% CI: -42.00 to 12.96, P = 0.30) or treatment failure (RR 1.37, 95% CI: 0.31-6.07, P = 0.68) in patients treated with PMF compared with patients treated with GOF. CONCLUSIONS: Flap-based reconstruction demonstrated improved mortality and treatment outcomes compared to sternal rewiring. However, no significant differences were observed in outcomes between the PMF- and GOF-based reconstructions.

Impact of COVID-19 on patients undergoing scheduled procedures for chronic venous disease.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has drastically altered the medical landscape. Various strategies have been employed to preserve hospital beds, personal protective equipment, and other resources to accommodate the surges of COVID-19 positive patients, hospital overcapacities, and staffing shortages. This has had a dramatic effect on vascular surgical practice. The objective of this study is to analyze the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgical delays and adverse outcomes for patients with chronic venous disease scheduled to undergo elective operations. METHODS: The Vascular Surgery COVID-19 Collaborative (VASCC) was founded in March 2020 to evaluate the outcomes of patients with vascular disease whose operations were delayed. Modules were developed by vascular surgeon working groups and tested before implementation. A data analysis of outcomes of patients with chronic venous disease whose surgeries were postponed during the COVID-19 pandemic from March 2020 through February 2021 was performed for this study. RESULTS: A total of 150 patients from 12 institutions in the United States were included in the study. Indications for venous intervention were: 85.3% varicose veins, 10.7% varicose veins with venous ulceration, and 4.0% lipodermatosclerosis. One hundred two surgeries had successfully been completed at the time of data entry. The average length of the delay was 91 days, with a median of 78 days. Delays for venous ulceration procedures ranged from 38 to 208 days. No patients required an emergent intervention due to their venous disease, and no patients experienced major adverse events following their delayed surgeries. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions may be safely delayed for patients with venous disease requiring elective surgical intervention during the COVID-19 pandemic. This finding supports the American College of Surgeons' recommendations for the management of elective vascular surgical procedures. Office-based labs may be safe locations for continued treatment when resources are limited. Although the interventions can be safely postponed, the negative impact on quality of life warrants further investigation.

Vacuum-assisted closure therapy for the management of deep sternal wound complications: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Vacuum-assisted closure (VAC) therapy has become a popular treatment option for wound healing. The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the use of VAC therapy as a bridge before the definitive treatment for the management of deep sternal wound complications. METHODS: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis were performed in PubMed and Embase. Outcomes of interest included mortality, treatment failure, length of hospital stay (LOS), length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay and cost of treatment. RESULTS: Twenty-two studies involving 1980 patients were included in the quantitative synthesis of this meta-analysis. Patients treated with VAC had significantly lower overall mortality [1738 patients; Risk ratio [RR] = 0.36 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.25, 0.51)], treatment failure [1210 patients; RR = 0.26 (95% CI: 0.19, 0.37)], LOS [498 patients; (standard mean difference = -0.44 (95% CI: -0.81, -0.07)] and ICU stay [309 patients; (standard mean difference = -0.34 (95% CI: -0.67, -0.01)] compared to that of non-VAC patients. VAC therapy was associated with reduced cost of treatment per patient compared with that of non-VAC therapies (reductions of 3600 USD, 6000 USD and 8983 USD in the reported studies). CONCLUSIONS: VAC therapy as an adjunct in the definitive treatment of patients with deep sternal wound complications was associated with lower mortality, treatment failure, LOS, ICU stay and cost of treatment when compared with a non-VAC approach. Randomised controlled trials would be essential to confirm these findings.

Morbidity and Long-Term Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Advanced Carotid Body Tumor Resection.

BACKGROUND: The reported risk of a cranial nerve (CN) injury is up to 1 in 4 patients in large registries of carotid body tumor (CBT) resection. Functional outcome for this population is unknown. METHODS: We evaluated consecutive patients who underwent CBT resection from November 2013 through October 2020. Demographics, intraoperative details, complications, and outcomes were recorded from the medical record. Permanent CN nerve injury was defined as deficits lasting >6 months. Frequency statistics, averages, chi-squared test, and multiple logistic regression were completed for primary end points of complications and disease-free survival. Patient-reported outcomes were gathered via telephone survey of patients conducted in September 2021. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients presented with CBTs and the following Shamblin classes: I (n = 7; 14%), II (n = 36; 69%), and III (n = 9; 17%). Head and neck oncology and vascular surgery jointly did 52% of CBT resections, including 6 of 9 Shamblin III cases. Eight patients (15.3%, all Shamblin II or III) suffered a total of 12 CN injuries - 8 CN XII (5 temporary and 3 permanent), 3 CN X (all permanent), and 1 CN XI (permanent). Seven of the CN injury subgroup had preoperative embolization and 5 were joint oncology/vascular cases. In addition, 4 separate carotid injuries required repair. Notably, all patients had disease-free survival postoperatively at a mean follow-up of 6 months. Patient-reported outcomes obtained in 70.6% of patients 1 year or more from index operation demonstrated that two-thirds of patients live without any permanent functional deficits, and the majority of those with continued deficits rate the symptoms as daily but mild in severity. CONCLUSIONS: In a series of complex CBT patients treated with preoperative embolization capabilities and multidisciplinary surgical approach, disease-free survival was achieved in all patients despite a high rate of iatrogenic CN injuries, most commonly CN XII. Patient-reported outcomes survey results indicate that injuries identified on clinical exam underreport patients' true postoperative CN deficits - especially branches of CN X. This data support the practice of aggressive primary resection of CBTs while providing guidance for expected functional outcomes due to CN injury risk.

Atherectomy to treat femoropopliteal atherosclerotic disease.

Atherectomy as an endovascular modality to treat peripheral arterial disease has gained traction over the past 10 years. Unlike most other available technologies, atherectomy works by physically debulking atherosclerotic plaque via a variety of mechanisms being the femoropopliteal segment the most targeted one. The aims of this review were to detail the types of atherectomy available, existing evidence available for atherectomy use in the femoropopliteal segment as compared to other interventions, critical appraisal of its current use and the possible influences on its indication. Future steps regarding atherectomy usage and data presentation are also described.

Nutcracker phenomenon secondary to superior mesenteric artery syndrome.

Superior mesenteric artery (SMA) syndrome, compression of the duodenum due to a decreased angle between the aorta and SMA, has a wide range of clinical presentations making it difficult to diagnose. Compression of the left renal vein is known as Nutcracker syndrome. We present the case of a 26-year-old male with a delayed diagnosis of SMA syndrome and Nutcracker phenomenon due to the patient's history of chronic pancreatitis. As a result of his obstruction and aspiration pneumonia, he was diagnosed with septic shock. The patient was treated for septic shock and maintained on an enteric diet with improvement in the body mass index and complete resolution of SMA syndrome symptoms.

Comparison Study of Iliac Branch Endoprosthesis when Used on and off Label.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to compare how instructions for use (IFU) affected perioperative and intermediate term outcomes for common iliac artery aneurysms (CIAA) treated with the Gore Excluder iliac branch endoprosthesis (IBE). METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed of all patients treated at two affiliated academic centers from September 2016 to May 2020. Outcomes were compared between IFU and nonIFU IBE cases. Criteria for nonIFU included: (1) use with a nonGore aortic endoprosthesis (n = 10), (2) isolated IBE (n = 3), and (3) requiring nondedicated covered stents for additional extension into a more suitable landing zone in the ipsilateral internal iliac artery or one of its branches (n = 11). Perioperative and intermediate term data were collected for both groups. The primary end points were free from the major adverse event (MAE) at 30 days and primary effectiveness at 1 year. RESULTS: A total of 51 CIAA (39 patients) were treated with an IBE. Overall, 15 patients were treated under IFU and 24 under nonIFU. The IFU group mean age was older (72 vs. 67 years, P = 0.03), and males (97%) were primarily treated. Comorbidities were similar except nonIFU had more patients with previous endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair on presentation (0 vs. 4 cases, P = 0.04). Procedure (178 vs. 264 min, P = 0.02) and fluoroscopy (52 vs. 74 min, P = 0.04) times were longer in the nonIFU group. Technical success was 100% for both groups, and there was no difference in device related reintervention at 30 days (0 vs. 1, P = 0.44). There was no MAE in either group at 30 days. Intervention for any endoleak was similar between the groups (2 vs. 3, P = 0.94). Percent CIAA sac regression was similar between the groups (19% vs. 18%, P = 0.21). There was no difference for primary effectiveness at 1 year (93% vs. 92%, P = 0.85). There was one death per group at one year not related to an aortic or iliac cause. CONCLUSIONS: In properly selected patients with complex anatomy, IBE can be used with nondedicated aortic and internal iliac components with good early term outcomes.

Endovascular experience at an academic office-based procedure center.

OBJECTIVE: The number of office-based procedure centers with the capability of performing a wide range of endovascular procedures has substantially increased over the past decade. This shift in practice settings has occurred faster in the private sector as compared to the academic environment. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of endovascular procedures performed at a dedicated academic outpatient procedural center. METHODS: We reviewed the clinical data of 400 patients who underwent 499 endovascular procedures in a university-based, academic outpatient procedure center between November 2013 and December 2016. Outcomes analyzed included procedure-related complications, limb loss, mortality, and emergency department visits or hospital admissions that occurred within 30 days following the procedure. RESULTS: The 400 patients had a mean age of 65 ± 13 years with slightly more females (51%; n = 203) as compared to males (49%; n = 197). Most patients (71%; 284) were Caucasian while 80 (20%) were African-Americans. Associated comorbidities included hypertension (86%), diabetes mellitus (51%), chronic kidney disease (42%), and obesity (mean body mass index of 29 ± 6). Based on anesthetic risk, most were ASA class 3 (81%), while ASA 1 and 2 comprised 17% and ASA 4 only 2%. Medicare beneficiaries accounted for 254 (64%) of our patients. Pre-operative studies included mainly duplex ultrasound (62%) and other noninvasive arterial studies (57%).The mean procedural time was 58 min (range, 7 to 200) with an overall technical success rate of 97%. There were no deaths. Complications developed in 10 patients following the 483 procedures (2.1%) being hospitalized with four of them transferred directly to the emergency room. The reasons for these hospitalizations included acute limb ischemia, arterial pseudoaneurysm, deep vein thrombosis, congestive heart failure, myocardial infarction, and lower extremity pain not vascular in origin. Financial reimbursement at the office-based center was higher than that seen with hospital-based procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular procedures performed in an academic office-based procedure center are safe and associated with good clinical outcomes. A small minority of patients have subsequent ER visits or hospital admissions. Academic institutions should consider adding an office-based procedure center based on today's competitive healthcare market.

Embolic protection devices for carotid artery stenting: A network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Carotid artery stenting (CAS) is an alternative treatment option for patients at high risk for carotid endarterectomy (CEA) but has been correlated with increased risk for distal embolization and periprocedural stroke despite the use of adjunctive embolic protection devices (EPD). This study compared four types of EPDs and their intra and periprocedural related complications. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was conducted in PubMed/Medline to identify studies that investigated the outcomes of CAS with adjuvant use of EPDs, including Proximal Balloon (PB), Distal Filter (DF), and Distal Balloon (DB) strategy. Continuous flow reversal performed via transcarotid approach by a commercially available device as an embolic protection strategy was intentionally excluded based on its distinct procedural characteristics and lack of availability outside of the United States. This network meta-analysis was performed according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. RESULTS: Overall, 45 studies, consisting of 7600 participants satisfied the predetermined search criteria and were included in this network meta-analysis. Overall, 13 studies provided data regarding the number of patients with new ischemic lesions detected in the DW-MRI. DF (OR: 3.15; 95% CI: 1.54-6.44; p = 0.002) and DB (OR: 2.28; 95% CI: 1.58-3.29; p < 0.001) were associated with higher odds of new ischemic lesions compared to PB on DW-MRI imaging. No statistical difference was identified between DB versus DF groups (OR: 1.48; 95% CI: 0.73-2.59; p = 0.317). 36 and 27 studies reported on periprocedural stroke and transient ischemic attack (TIA) rates, respectively, showing similar odds of neurologic adverse events between all three groups. CONCLUSIONS: PB deployment during CAS is superior to DF and DB in preventing distal embolization phenomena. However, no statistically significant difference in TIA and stroke rate was found among any of the analyzed EPD groups. Further research is warranted to investigate the association of embolic phenomena on imaging after CAS with clinically significant neurologic deficits.

A systematic review of the outcomes of percutaneous treatment modalities for pathologic saphenous and perforating veins.

OBJECTIVE: Minimally invasive techniques have been increasingly used to treat pathologic perforator veins (PVs). The goal of the present study was to summarize the current literature and determine the outcomes of treating PVs with or without the great saphenous vein/small saphenous vein using endovenous laser ablation (EVLA), radiofrequency ablation (RFA), and ultrasound-guided sclerotherapy (USGS). METHODS: A systematic review of the literature on the percutaneous treatment of PVs (35 studies) was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses) guidelines. Studies reported up to March 2020 were included. The incidence of several end points at different follow-up periods were calculated according to the availability of data within 3 to 12 months after the index procedure. RESULTS: Of the 35 studies, 15 (n = 1677) had reported on EVLA with or without sclerotherapy and/or microphlebectomy, 12 (n = 1477) had investigated the outcomes of RFA ablation with/without sclerotherapy, and 8 (n = 331) had investigated USGS alone. All techniques were safe in terms of periprocedural adverse events, with only a few complications occurring in each group. Immediate procedural success (within 30 days) was 95% in the EVLA group, 91% in the RFS group, and 58% to 70% in the USGS group. At 12 months of follow-up, the occlusion rates were 89%, 77%, and 83% in the EVLA, RFA, and USGS groups, respectively. The 12-month pooled estimate of ulcer healing between the EVLA and RFA groups was similar, although no direct comparisons were performed. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of PVs with percutaneous techniques, such as EVLA, RFA, and USGS, is safe and associated with high technical success. EVLA and RFA exhibited the most favorable outcomes. Additional research is needed to validate these results, which were based on the limited level of evidence available to better determine the most optimal treatment approach for lower limb pathologic PVs.

The American Venous Forum, American Vein and Lymphatic Society and the Society for Vascular Medicine expert opinion consensus on lymphedema diagnosis and treatment.

BACKGROUND: Lymphedema imposes a significant economic and social burden in modern societies. Controversies about its risk factors, diagnosis, and treatment permeate the literature. The goal of this study was to assess experts' opinions on the available literature on lymphedema while following the Delphi methodology. METHODS: In December of 2019, the American Venous Forum created a working group tasked to develop a consensus statement regarding current practices for the diagnosis and treatment of lymphedema. A panel of experts was identified by the working group. The working group then compiled a list of clinical questions, risk factors, diagnosis and evaluation, and treatment of lymphedema. Fifteen questions that met the criteria for consensus were included in the list. Using a modified Delphi methodology, six questions that received between 60% and 80% of the votes were included in the list for the second round of analysis. Consensus was reached whenever >70% agreement was achieved. RESULTS: The panel of experts reached consensus that cancer, infection, chronic venous disease, and surgery are risk factors for secondary lymphedema. Consensus was also reached that clinical examination is adequate for diagnosing lymphedema and that all patients with chronic venous insufficiency (C3-C6) should be treated as lymphedema patients. No consensus was reached regarding routine clinical practice use of radionuclide lymphoscintigraphy as a mandatory diagnostic tool. However, the panel came to consensus regarding the importance of quantifying edema in all patients (93.6% in favor). In terms of treatment, consensus was reached favoring the regular use of compression garments to reduce lymphedema progression (89.4% in favor, 10.6% against; mean score of 79), but the use of Velcro devices as the first line of compression therapy did not reach consensus (59.6% in favor vs 40.4% against; total score of 15). There was agreement that sequential pneumatic compression should be considered as adjuvant therapy in the maintenance phase of treatment (91.5% in favor vs. 8.5% against; mean score of 85), but less so in its initial phases (61.7% in favor vs. 38.3% against; mean score of 27). Most of the panel agreed that manual lymphatic drainage should be a mandatory treatment modality (70.2% in favor), but the panel was split in half regarding the proposal that reductive surgery should be considered for patients with failed conservative treatment. CONCLUSION: This consensus process demonstrated that lymphedema experts agree on the majority of the statements related to risk factors for lymphedema, and the diagnostic workup for lymphedema patients. Less agreement was demonstrated on statements related to treatment of lymphedema. This consensus suggests that variability in lymphedema care is high even among the experts. Developers of future practice guidelines for lymphedema should consider this information, especially in cases of low-level evidence that supports practice patterns with which the majority of experts disagree.