Survey-Based Assessment of the Quality of Reporting Guidelines of Carotid Artery Stenosis.

BACKGROUND: No evaluation of the quality of different carotid guidelines using validated scales has been performed to date. The present study aims to analyze 3 carotid stenosis guidelines, apprizing their quality and reporting using validated tools. METHODS: A survey-based assessment of the quality of the European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) 2023, European Stroke Organisation (ESO) 2021, and the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) 2021 carotid stenosis guidelines, was performed by 43 vascular surgeons, cardiologists, neurologist or interventional radiologists using 2 validated appraisal tools for quality and reporting guidelines, the AGREE II instrument and the RIGHT statement. RESULTS: Using the AGREE II tool, the ESVS, SVS, and ESO guidelines had overall quality scores of 87.3%, 79.4%, and 82.9%, respectively (P = 0.001) The ESVS and ESO had better scores in the scope and purpose domain, and the SVS in the clarity of presentation domain. In the RIGHT statement, the ESVS, SVS, and ESO guidelines had overall quality scores of 84.0.7%, 74.3%, and 79.0%, respectively (P = 0.001). All 3 guidelines stood out for their methodology for search of evidence and formulating evidence-based recommendations. On the contrary, were negatively evaluated mostly in the cost and resource implications in formulating the recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: The 2023 ESVS carotid stenosis guideline was the best evaluated among the 3 guidelines, with scores over 5% higher than the other 2 guidelines. Efforts should be made by guideline writing committees to take the AGREE II and RIGHT statements into account in the development of future guidelines to produce high-quality recommendations.

Readmission After COVID-19 for Late Acute Venous Thrombosis; CASE SERIES and Systematic Review of the Literature.

OBJECTIVE: Assess heterogeneity within patients with resolved COVID-19 to broaden the vision about post-discharge thrombotic cases and postulate possible related mechanisms in search of better anticoagulation guidelines. This study details patients' characteristics, medical history, treatment, and outcomes of readmitted patients with late acute thrombosis through a systematic review of the literature and patients from our academic center database. METHODS: We extracted the records of patients readmitted for venous thrombosis complications after discharge from the database of the first 2000 patients admitted with COVID-19 in our academic center; we also performed a systematic review of the literature using the Medical Subject Headings terms "late thrombosis," "COVID-19," + "venous thrombosis" in PubMed and Google Scholar according to PRISMA guideline. RESULTS: The literature review found 20 patients suitable for review matching the inclusion criteria. These patients were added to those in our database, summing up a total of 26 patients. The median age was 50 years old, 76.9% were male, and most were overweight or had grade 1 obesity (n = 11, 42.3%). None had a previous thrombotic history, but 50% had an underlying comorbidity. Thrombotic events presented on a median of 20 days (range: 4-150 days) from discharge. Pulmonary embolisms occurred in 23 patients (88.46%), deep vein thrombosis in 4, mesenteric thrombosis, and cerebral venous thrombosis in 1, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study found that most patients readmitted for thrombotic events after COVID-19 discharge were middle-aged men with Venous Thrombo Embolism events.

Extensive deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism as a unique clinical manifestation of COVID-19 in a young healthy patient.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism have been described as complications in previously diagnosed COVID-19 patients, especially in those admitted in critical ill units, but, to our knowledge, there is no report of venous thromboembolism in an otherwise asymptomatic COVID-19 patient. METHODS: We report the case of a 22-year-old female, healthy patient with pulmonary embolism (Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index Score 22 points, low risk) and extensive proximal deep vein thrombosis as a unique clinical manifestation of the new coronavirus disease. RESULTS: The patient had no risk factors and no familial history of venous thromboembolism. All thrombophilia markers were negative. The patient was treated as first by an independent vascular team, performing vena cava filter placement and open thrombectomy. Her symptoms worsened, and after 3 weeks, she underwent US-enhanced thrombolysis and mechanical thrombectomy. She was isolated for 10 days and did not develop any other clinical manifestation of COVID-19 disease. During follow-up, she remained asymptomatic and complete patency of the venous system was achieved. Full oral anticoagulation was conducted for 6 months. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 appears to be a multi-symptomatic disease, and venous thromboembolism without any other previous described COVID-19 symptom could be considered one of its diverse clinical presentations and RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 tests emerge to be mandatory in patients with otherwise unexpected venous thrombosis.