Transcatheter Arterialization of Deep Veins in Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 20% of patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia have no revascularization options, leading to above-ankle amputation. Transcatheter arterialization of the deep veins is a percutaneous approach that creates an artery-to-vein connection for delivery of oxygenated blood by means of the venous system to the ischemic foot to prevent amputation. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, single-group, multicenter study to evaluate the effect of transcatheter arterialization of the deep veins in patients with nonhealing ulcers and no surgical or endovascular revascularization treatment options. The composite primary end point was amputation-free survival (defined as freedom from above-ankle amputation or death from any cause) at 6 months, as compared with a performance goal of 54%. Secondary end points included limb salvage, wound healing, and technical success of the procedure. RESULTS: We enrolled 105 patients who had chronic limb-threatening ischemia and were of a median age of 70 years (interquartile range, 38 to 89). Of the patients enrolled, 33 (31.4%) were women and 45 (42.8%) were Black, Hispanic, or Latino. Transcatheter arterialization of the deep veins was performed successfully in 104 patients (99.0%). At 6 months, 66.1% of the patients had amputation-free survival. According to Bayesian analysis, the posterior probability that amputation-free survival at 6 months exceeded a performance goal of 54% was 0.993, which exceeded the prespecified threshold of 0.977. Limb salvage (avoidance of above-ankle amputation) was attained in 67 patients (76.0% by Kaplan-Meier analysis). Wounds were completely healed in 16 of 63 patients (25%) and were in the process of healing in 32 of 63 patients (51%). No unanticipated device-related adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: We found that transcatheter arterialization of the deep veins was safe and could be performed successfully in patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia and no conventional surgical or endovascular revascularization treatment options. (Funded by LimFlow; PROMISE II study ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03970538.).

Quality of Life in Patients With Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia Treated With Revascularization.

BACKGROUND: In the BEST-CLI trial (Best Endovascular Versus Best Surgical Therapy for Patients With Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia), a prespecified secondary objective was to assess the effects of revascularization strategy on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). METHODS: Patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia were randomized to surgical bypass (Bypass) or endovascular intervention (Endo) in 2 parallel trials. Cohort 1 included patients with single-segment great saphenous vein; cohort 2 included those lacking suitable single-segment great saphenous vein. HRQoL was assessed over the trial duration using Vascular Quality-of-Life (VascuQoL), European Quality-of-Life-5D (EQ-5D), the Short Form-12 (SF-12) Physical Component Summary (SF-12 PCS), SF-12 Mental Component Summary (SF-12 MCS), Utility Index Score (SF-6D R2), and numeric rating scales of pain. HRQoL was summarized by cohort and compared within and between groups using mixed-model linear regression. RESULTS: A total of 1193 and 335 patients in cohorts 1 and 2 with a mean follow-up of 2.9 and 2.0 years, respectively, were analyzed. In cohort 1, HRQoL significantly improved from baseline to follow-up for both groups across all measures. For example, mean (SD) VascuQoL scores were 3.0 (1.3) and 3.0 (1.2) for Bypass and Endo at baseline and 4.7 (1.4) and 4.8 (1.5) over follow-up. There were significant group differences favoring Endo when assessed with VascuQoL (difference, -0.14 [95% CI, -0.25 to -0.02]; P=0.02), SF-12 MCS (difference, -1.03 [95% CI, -1.89 to -0.18]; P=0.02), SF-6D R2 (difference, -0.01 [95% CI, -0.02 to -0.001]; P=0.03), numeric rating scale pain at present (difference, 0.26 [95% CI, 0.03 to 0.49]; P=0.03), usual level during previous week (difference, 0.26 [95% CI, 0.04 to 0.48]; P=0.02), and worst level during previous week (difference, 0.29 [95% CI, 0.02 to 0.56]; P=0.04). There was no difference between treatment arms on the basis of EQ-5D (difference, -0.01 [95% CI, -0.03 to 0.004]; P=0.12) or SF-12 PCS (difference, -0.41 [95% CI, -1.2 to 0.37]; P=0.31). In cohort 2, HRQoL also significantly improved from baseline to the end of follow-up for both groups based on all measures, but there were no differences between Bypass and Endo on any measure. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia deemed eligible for either Bypass or Endo, revascularization resulted in significant and clinically meaningful improvements in HRQoL. In patients with an available single-segment great saphenous vein for bypass, but not among those without one, Endo was statistically superior on some HRQoL measures; however, these differences were below the threshold of clinically meaningful difference.

Surgery or Endovascular Therapy for Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) require revascularization to improve limb perfusion and thereby limit the risk of amputation. It is uncertain whether an initial strategy of endovascular therapy or surgical revascularization for CLTI is superior for improving limb outcomes. METHODS: In this international, randomized trial, we enrolled 1830 patients with CLTI and infrainguinal peripheral artery disease in two parallel-cohort trials. Patients who had a single segment of great saphenous vein that could be used for surgery were assigned to cohort 1. Patients who needed an alternative bypass conduit were assigned to cohort 2. The primary outcome was a composite of a major adverse limb event - which was defined as amputation above the ankle or a major limb reintervention (a new bypass graft or graft revision, thrombectomy, or thrombolysis) - or death from any cause. RESULTS: In cohort 1, after a median follow-up of 2.7 years, a primary-outcome event occurred in 302 of 709 patients (42.6%) in the surgical group and in 408 of 711 patients (57.4%) in the endovascular group (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59 to 0.79; P<0.001). In cohort 2, a primary-outcome event occurred in 83 of 194 patients (42.8%) in the surgical group and in 95 of 199 patients (47.7%) in the endovascular group (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.58 to 1.06; P = 0.12) after a median follow-up of 1.6 years. The incidence of adverse events was similar in the two groups in the two cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with CLTI who had an adequate great saphenous vein for surgical revascularization (cohort 1), the incidence of a major adverse limb event or death was significantly lower in the surgical group than in the endovascular group. Among the patients who lacked an adequate saphenous vein conduit (cohort 2), the outcomes in the two groups were similar. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; BEST-CLI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02060630.).

Characterization of long-term survival in Medicare patients undergoing arteriovenous hemodialysis access.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing arteriovenous (AV) access creation for hemodialysis often have significant comorbidities. Our goal was to quantify the long-term survival and associated risks factors for long-term mortality in these patients to aid in optimization of goals and expectations. METHODS: The Vascular Implant Surveillance and Interventional Outcomes Network Vascular Quality Initiative Medicare linked data was used to assess long-term survival in the HD registry. Demographics, comorbidities, and interventions were recorded. Because the majority of hemodialysis patients are provided Medicare, Medicare linkage was used to obtain survival data. Multivariable analysis was used to identify independent associations with mortality. RESULTS: There were 13,945 AV access patients analyzed including 10,872 (78%) AV fistulas and 3073 (22%) AV grafts. The median age was 67 years and 56% of patients were male. Approximately one-third had a prior AV access and 44.7% had prior tunneled dialysis catheters. Patients receiving an AV fistula, compared with AV grafts, were more often younger, male, White, obese, independently ambulatory, preoperatively living at home, and less often have a prior AV access and tunneled dialysis catheters (P < .05 for all). The 5-year mortality overall was 62.9% with 61.2% for AV fistulas and 68.8% for AV grafts (P < .001). On multivariable analysis for 5 year mortality, nonambulatory status (hazard ratio [HR], 1.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.53-1.83; P < .001), lower extremity access (HR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.35-2.05; P < .001), human immunodeficiency virus or acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (HR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.13-1.82; P < .001), White race (HR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.35-1.51; P < .001), congestive heart failure (HR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.26-1.41; P < .001), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (HR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.15-1.31; P < .001), and AV graft placement (HR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.02-1.23, P = .016) were most associated with poor survival. Factors associated with improved survival were never smoking (HR, .73; 95% CI, 0.67-0.79; P < .001), prior/quit smoking (HR, .78; 95% CI, 0.72-0.84; P < .001), preoperative home living (HR, .75; 95% CI, 0.68-0.83; P < .001), and hypertension (HR, .89; 95% CI, 0.8-0.99; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Long-term survival in Medicare patients undergoing AV access creation is poor with nearly two-thirds of patients having died at 5 years. There are many modifiable risk factors that may improve survival in these patients and give an opportunity for transplantation.

Endovascular therapy versus bypass for chronic limb-threatening ischemia in a real-world practice.

OBJECTIVE: The recent Best Endovascular vs Best Surgical Therapy in Patients with Critical Limb Ischemia (BEST-CLI) study showed that bypass was superior to endovascular therapy (ET) in patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) deemed suitable for either approach who had an available single-segment great saphenous vein (GSV). However, the superiority of bypass among those lacking GSV was not established. We aimed to examine comparative treatment outcomes from a real-world CLTI population using the Vascular Quality Initiative-Medicare-linked database. METHODS: We queried the Vascular Quality Initiative-Medicare-linked database for patients with CLTI who underwent first-time lower extremity revascularization (2010-2019). We performed two one-to-one propensity score matchings (PSMs): ET vs bypass with GSV (BWGSV) and ET vs bypass with a prosthetic graft (BWPG). The primary outcome was amputation-free survival. Secondary outcomes were freedom from amputation and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Three cohorts were queried: BWGSV (N = 5279, 14.7%), BWPG (N = 2778, 7.7%), and ET (N = 27,977, 77.6%). PSM produced two sets of well-matched cohorts: 4705 pairs of ET vs BWGSV and 2583 pairs of ET vs BWPG. In the matched cohorts of ET vs BWGSV, ET was associated with greater hazards of death (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.34, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.25-1.43; P < .001), amputation (HR = 1.30, 95% CI, 1.17-1.44; P < .001), and amputation/death (HR = 1.32, 95% CI, 1.24-1.40; P < .001) up to 4 years. In the matched cohorts of ET vs BWPG, ET was associated with greater hazards of death up to 2 years (HR = 1.11, 95% CI, 1.00-1.22; P = .042) but not amputation or amputation/death. CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world multi-institutional Medicare-linked PSM analysis, we found that BWGSV is superior to ET in terms of OS, freedom from amputation, and amputation-free survival up to 4 years. Moreover, BWPG was superior to ET in terms of OS up to 2 years. Our study confirms the superiority of BWGSV to ET as observed in the BEST-CLI trial.

Long-term functional outcomes of upper extremity civilian vascular trauma.

OBJECTIVE: Civilian analyses of long-term outcomes of upper extremity vascular trauma (UEVT) are limited. Our goal was to evaluate the management of UEVT in the civilian trauma population and explore the long-term functional consequences. METHODS: A retrospective review and analysis was performed of patients with UEVT at an urban Level 1 trauma center (2001-2022). Management and long-term functional outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: There were 150 patients with UEVT. Mean age was 34 years, and 85% were male. There were 42% Black and 27% White patients. Mechanism was penetrating in 79%, blunt in 20%, and multifactorial in 1%. Within penetrating trauma, mechanism was from firearms in 30% of cases. Of blunt injuries, 27% were secondary to falls, 13% motorcycle collisions, 13% motor vehicle collisions, and 3% crush injuries. Injuries were isolated arterial in 62%, isolated venous in 13%, and combined in 25% of cases. Isolated arterial injuries included brachial (34%), radial (27%), ulnar (27%), axillary (8%), and subclavian (4%). The majority of arterial injuries (92%) underwent open repair with autologous vein bypass (34%), followed by primary repair (32%), vein patch (6.6%), and prosthetic graft (3.3%). There were 23% that underwent fasciotomies, 68% of which were prophylactic. Two patients were managed with endovascular interventions; one underwent covered stent placement and the other embolization. Perioperative reintervention occurred in 12% of patients. Concomitant injuries included nerves (35%), bones (17%), and ligaments (16%). Intensive care unit admission was required in 45%, with mean intensive care unit length of stay 1.6 days. Mean hospital length of stay was 6.7 days. Major amputation and in-hospital mortality rates were 1.3% and 4.6% respectively. The majority (72%) had >6-month follow-up, with a median follow-up period of 197 days. Trauma readmissions occurred in 19%. Many patients experienced chronic pain (56%), as well as motor (54%) and sensory (61%) deficits. Additionally, 41% had difficulty with activities of daily living. Of previously employed patients (57%), 39% experienced a >6-month delay in returning to work. Most patients (82%) were discharged with opioids; of these, 16% were using opioids at 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: UEVT is associated with long-term functional impairments and opioid use. It is imperative to counsel patients prior to discharge and ensure appropriate follow-up and therapy.

Recent evaluation by nephrologists is associated with decreased incidence of tunneled dialysis catheter being used at the time of first arteriovenous access creation.

OBJECTIVE: Late primary care provider (PCP) or nephrologist evaluation of patients with progressive kidney disease may be associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Among patients undergoing initial arteriovenous (AV) access creation, we aimed to study the relationship of recent PCP and nephrologist evaluations with perioperative morbidity and mortality. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of patients from 2014 to 2022 who underwent initial AV access creation at an urban, safety-net hospital. Univariable and multivariable analyses identified associations of PCP and nephrologist evaluations <1 year and <3 months before surgery, respectively, with hemodialysis initiation via tunneled dialysis catheters (TDCs), 90-day readmission, and 90-day mortality. RESULTS: Among 558 patients receiving initial AV access, mean age was 59.7 ± 14 years, 59% were female gender, and 60.6% were Black race. Recent PCP and nephrology evaluations occurred in 386 (69%) and 362 (65%) patients, respectively. On multivariable analysis, unemployed and uninsured statuses were associated with decreased likelihood of PCP evaluation (unemployment: odds ratio [OR], 0.51; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.34-0.77; uninsured status: OR, 0.05; 95% CI, 0.01-0.45) and nephrologist evaluation (unemployment: OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.43-0.91; uninsured status: OR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.06-0.83) (all P < .05). Social support was associated with increased likelihood of PCP evaluation (OR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.07-3.08) (all P < .05). Hemodialysis was initiated with TDCs in 304 patients (55%). Older age (OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.96-0.99), obesity (OR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.25-0.58), and nephrologist evaluation (OR, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.08-0.19) were independently associated with decreased hemodialysis initiation with TDCs in patients receiving an initial AV access (all P < .05). Ninety-day readmission occurred in 270 cases (48%). Cirrhosis (OR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.03-6.03; P = .04), coronary artery disease (OR, 2.31; 95% CI, 1.5-3.57), prosthetic AV access (OR, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.04-3.26), and impaired ambulation (OR, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.15-2.66) were independently associated with increased readmission (all P < .05). Older age (OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.97-0.99), prior TDC (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.45-0.94), and unemployment (OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.39-0.86) were associated with decreased readmission (all P < .05). Ninety-day mortality occurred in 1.6% of patients. Neither PCP nor nephrologist evaluation was associated with readmission or mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Recent nephrology evaluation was associated with reduced hemodialysis initiation with TDCs among patients undergoing initial AV access creation. Unemployed and uninsured statuses posed barriers to accessing nephrology care.

Characterization of cardiovascular serious adverse events after bypass or endovascular revascularization for limb-threatening ischemia in the BEST-CLI trial.

OBJECTIVE: Cardiovascular complications after revascularization to treat chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) are a major concern that guides treatment. Our goal was to assess periprocedural cardiac and vascular serious adverse events (SAEs) in the Best Endovascular vs Best Surgical Therapy in Patients with CLTI (BEST-CLI) trial. METHODS: BEST-CLI was a prospective randomized trial comparing surgical (OPEN) and endovascular (ENDO) revascularization for patients with CLTI. Thirty-day SAEs, classified as cardiac or vascular, were analyzed. Adverse events are defined as serious when they affect safety in the trial, require prolonged hospitalization, result in significant disability or incapacitation, are life-threatening, or result in death. Interventions were analyzed in a per protocol fashion. RESULTS: In the BEST-CLI trial, 850 OPEN and 896 ENDO interventions were evaluated. Forty (4.7%) and 34 (3.8%) patients experienced at least one cardiac SAE after OPEN and ENDO intervention, respectively (P = .35). Overall, there were 53 cardiac SAEs (0.06 per patient) after OPEN and 40 (0.045 per patient) after ENDO interventions. Cardiac SAEs in the OPEN arm were classified as related to ischemia (50.9%), arrhythmias (17%), heart failure (15.1%), arrest (13.2%), and heart block (3.8%); in the ENDO arm, they were classified as ischemia (47.5%), heart failure (17.5%), arrhythmias (15%), arrest (15%), and heart block (5%). Approximately half of SAEs were classified as severe for both OPEN and ENDO. SAEs were definitely or probably related to the procedure in 30.2% and 25% in the OPEN and ENDO arms, respectively (P = .2). Vascular SAEs occurred in 58 (6.8%) and 86 (9.6%) of patients after OPEN and ENDO revascularization, respectively (P = .19). In total, there were 59 (0.07 per patient) and 87 (0.097 per patient) vascular SAEs after OPEN and ENDO procedures. Vascular SAEs in the OPEN arm were classified as distal ischemia/infection (44.1%), bleeding (16.9%), occlusive (15.3%), thromboembolic (15.3%), cerebrovascular (5.1%), and other (3.4%); in the ENDO arm, they were distal ischemia/infection (40.2%), occlusive (31%), bleeding (12.6%), thromboembolic (8%), cerebrovascular (1.1%), and other (4.6%). SAEs were classified as severe for OPEN in 45.8% and ENDO in 46%. SAEs were definitely or probably related to the procedure in 23.7% and 35.6% in the OPEN and ENDO arms (P = .35), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing OPEN and ENDO revascularization experienced similar degrees of cardiac and vascular SAEs. The majority were not related to the index intervention, but approximately half were severe.

Long-term outcomes of autologous vein bypass for repair of upper and lower extremity major arterial trauma.

OBJECTIVE: Autologous vein is the preferred bypass conduit for extremity arterial injuries owing to superior patency and low infection risk; however, long-term data on outcomes in civilians are limited. Our goal was to assess short- and long-term outcomes of autologous vein bypass for upper and lower extremity arterial trauma. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of patients with major extremity arterial injuries (2001-2019) at a level I trauma center. Demographics, injury and intervention details, and outcomes were recorded. Primary outcomes were primary patency at 1 year and 3 years. Secondary outcomes were limb function at 6 months, major amputation, and mortality. Multivariable analysis determined risk factors for functional impairment. RESULTS: There were 107 extremity arterial injuries (31.8% upper and 68.2% lower) treated with autologous vein bypass. Mechanism was penetrating in 77% of cases, of which 79.3% were due to firearms. The most frequently injured vessels were the common and superficial femoral (38%), popliteal (30%), and brachial arteries (29%). For upper extremity trauma, concomitant nerve and orthopedic injuries were found in 15 (44.1%) and 11 (32.4%) cases, respectively. For lower extremities, concomitant nerve injuries were found in 10 (13.7%) cases, and orthopedic injuries in 31 (42.5%). Great saphenous vein was the conduit in 96% of cases. Immediate intraoperative bypass revision occurred in 9.3% of patients, most commonly for graft thrombosis. The in-hospital return to operating room rate was 15.9%, with graft thrombosis (47.1%) and wound infections (23.5%) being the most common reasons. The median follow-up was 3.6 years. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed 92% primary patency at 1 year and 90% at 3 years. At 6 months, 36.1% of patients had functional impairment. Of patients with functional impairment at 6 months, 62.9% had concomitant nerve and 60% concomitant orthopedic injuries. Of those with nerve injury, 91.7% had functional impairment, compared with 17.8% without nerve injury (P < .001). Of patients with orthopedic injuries, 51.2% had functional impairment, vs 25% of those without orthopedic injuries (P = .01). On multivariable analysis, concomitant nerve injury (odds ratio, 127.4; 95% confidence interval, 17-957; P <. 001) and immediate intraoperative revision (odds ratio, 11.03; 95% confidence interval, 1.27-95.55; P = .029) were associated with functional impairment. CONCLUSIONS: Autologous vein bypass for major extremity arterial trauma is durable; however, many patients have long-term limb dysfunction associated with concomitant nerve injury and immediate intraoperative bypass revision. These factors may allow clinicians to identify patients at higher risk for functional impairment, to outline patient expectations and direct rehabilitation efforts toward improving functional outcomes.

Polyvascular disease is common in patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy and lower extremity bypass and is associated with worse outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Polyvascular disease is strongly associated with increased risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. However, its prevalence in patients undergoing carotid and lower extremity surgical revascularization and its impact on outcomes are unknown. METHODS: The Vascular Quality Initiative was queried for carotid endarterectomy (CEA) or infrainguinal lower extremity bypass (LEB), 2013-2019. Polyvascular disease was defined as presence of atherosclerotic occlusive disease in more than one arterial bed: carotid, coronary, and infrainguinal. Primary outcomes were (1) composite perioperative myocardial infarction (MI) or death and (2) 5-year survival. Patient characteristics and perioperative outcomes were evaluated using the χ2 test and multivariable logistic regression. Survival was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards multivariable models. RESULTS: Polyvascular disease was identified in 47% of CEA (39.0% in 2 arterial beds, 7.6% in 3 arterial beds; n = 93,736) and 47% of LEB (41.0% in 2 arterial beds, 5.7% in 3 arterial beds; n = 25,223). For both CEA and LEB, patients with polyvascular disease had more comorbidities including hypertension, congestive heart disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, smoking, diabetes mellitus, and end-stage renal disease (P < .0001). Perioperative MI/death rates increased with increasing number of vascular beds affected following CEA (0.9% in 1 bed vs 1.5% in 2 beds vs 2.7% in 3 beds; P < .001) and LEB (2.2% in 1 bed vs 5.3% in 2 beds vs 6.6% in 3 beds; P < .001). Polyvascular disease was associated independently with perioperative MI/death after CEA (odds ratio, 1.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.40-1.81;P < .0001) and LEB (odds ratio, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.52-2.08; P < .0001). Five-year survival was decreased in patients with polyvascular disease after CEA (82% in 3 beds vs 88% in 2 beds vs 92% in 1 bed; P < .01) and LEB (72% in 3 beds vs 75% in 2 beds vs 84% in 1 bed; P < .01) in a dose-dependent manner, with the lowest 5-year survival observed in those with three arterial beds involved. Polyvascular disease was independently associated with 5-year mortality after CEA (hazard ratio, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.24-1.40; P = .0001) and LEB (hazard ratio, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.20-1.41; P = .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Polyvascular disease is common in patients undergoing CEA and LEB and is associated with a higher risk of perioperative MI/death and decreased long-term survival. After revascularization, patients with polyvascular disease should be considered for more aggressive cardioprotective medications and closer follow-up.

Investigator attitudes on equipoise and practice patterns in the BEST-CLI trial.

OBJECTIVES: There has been significant variability in practice patterns and equipoise regarding treatment approach for chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI). We aimed to assess treatment preferences of Best Endovascular vs Best Surgical Therapy in Patients with CLTI (BEST-CLI) investigators prior to and following the trial. METHODS: An electronic 60-question survey was sent to 1180 BEST-CLI investigators in 2022, after trial conclusion and before announcement of results. Investigators' preferences were assessed across clinical scenarios for both open (OPEN) and endovascular (ENDO) revascularization strategies. Vascular surgeon (VS) surgical and ENDO preferences were compared with a 2010 survey administered to prospective investigators before trial funding. RESULTS: For the 2022 survey, the response rate was 20.2% and was comprised of VSs (76.3%), interventional cardiologists (11.4%) and interventional radiologists (11.6%). The majority (72.6%) were in academic practice and 39.1% were in practice for >20 years. During initial CLTI work-up, 65.8%, 42.6%, and 55.9% of respondents always or usually ordered an arterial duplex, computed tomography angiography, and vein mapping, respectively. The most common practice distribution between ENDO and OPEN procedures was 70/30. Postoperatively, a majority reported performing routine duplex surveillance of vein bypass (99%), prosthetic bypass (81.9%), and ENDO interventions (86%). A minority reported always or usually using the wound, ischemia, and foot infection (WIfI) criteria (25.8%), GLASS (8.3%), and a risk calculator (14.8%). More than one-half (52.9%) agreed that the statement "no bridges are burned with an ENDO-first approach" was false. Intervention choice was influenced by availability of the operating room or ENDO suite, personal schedule, and personal skill set in 30.1%, 18.0%, and 45.9% of respondents, respectively. Most respondents reported routinely using paclitaxel-coated balloons (88.1%) and stents (67.5%); however, 73.3% altered practice when safety concerns were raised. Among surgeons, 17.8%, 2.9%, and 10.3% reported performing >10 annual alternative autogenous vein bypasses, composite vein composite vein bypasses, and bypasses to pedal targets, respectively. Among all interventionalists, 8%, 24%, and 8% reported performing >10 annual radial access procedures, pedal or tibial access procedures, and pedal loop revascularizations. The majority (89.1%) of respondents felt that CLTI teams improved care; however, only 23.2% had a defined team. The effectiveness of the teamwork at institutions was characterized as highly effective in 42.5%. When comparing responses by VSs to the 2010 survey, there were no changes in preferred treatment based on Inter-Society Consensus for the Management of Peripheral Arterial Disease (TASC) II classification or conduit preference. In 2022, OPEN surgery was preferred more for a popliteal occlusion. For clinical scenarios, there were no differences except a decreased proportion of respondents who felt there was equipoise for major tissue loss for major tissue loss (43.8% vs 31.2%) and increased ENDO choice for minor tissue loss (17.6% vs 30.8%) (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: There is a wide range of practice patterns among vascular specialists treating CLTI. The majority of investigators in BEST-CLI had experience in both advanced OPEN and ENDO techniques and represent a real-world sample of technical expertise. Over the course of the decade of the BEST-CLI trial, there was overall similar equipoise among VSs.

Medicare billing and utilization trends in vascular surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Within the past decade, Medicare Part B reimbursements for various surgical procedures have been declining, whereas health care expenses continue to increase. As a result, hospitals may increase service charges to offset losses in revenue, which may disproportionately affect underinsured patients. Our analysis aimed to characterize Medicare billing and utilization trends across common vascular surgical procedures. METHODS: The 2017 to 2021 Medicare Physician and Other Practitioners by Provider and Service dataset was queried for Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes for common vascular surgery procedures. The average charges, reimbursements, charge-to-reimbursement ratios, and service counts were calculated for the most common interventions performed by vascular surgeons. Data was stratified by care setting, facility (inpatient and outpatient hospital) vs non-facility locations. All monetary values were adjusted to the 2021 United States dollars to account for inflation. RESULTS: For facility settings, the mean charge billed to Medicare Part B increased from $3708 to $3952 (6.6%) from 2017 to 2021, with the average charge-to-reimbursement ratio increasing from 7.2 to 8.6. There were 17 of the 19 facility procedures that had a decline in reimbursements, decreasing from an average of $558 to $499 (-10.4%). Stab phlebectomy had the largest individual decrease in facility reimbursement (-53.5%), followed by above-knee amputation (-11.3%) and below-knee amputation (-11.0%). Both non-facility charges (-10.8%) and reimbursements (-12.2%) declined over the study period. Procedural utilization remained stable from 2017 to 2019. Tibial and femoral-popliteal atherectomy had increases of 45.9% and 33.7%, respectively, in overall procedural utilization when performed in non-facility settings from 2017 to 2019. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis of vascular surgery procedures billed to Medicare Part B from 2017 to 2021 demonstrates an increase in charges, a decline in reimbursements, and a resultant increase in charge-to-reimbursement ratios for facility care settings. In contrast, non-facility charges have decreased in the face of declining reimbursements. These markups in submitted charges in facility locations may serve as an additional barrier to accessing care for patients who are underinsured.

Higher stroke risk after carotid endarterectomy and transcarotid artery revascularization is associated with relative surgeon volume ratio.

OBJECTIVE: Adoption of transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) by surgeons has been variable, with some still performing traditional carotid endarterectomy (CEA), whereas others have shifted to mostly TCAR. Our goal was to evaluate the association of relative surgeon volume of CEA to TCAR with perioperative outcomes. METHODS: The Vascular Quality Initiative CEA and carotid artery stent registries were analyzed from 2021 to 2023 for symptomatic and asymptomatic interventions. Surgeons participating in both registries were categorized in the following CEA to CEA+TCAR volume percentage ratios: 0.25 (majority TCAR), 0.26 to 0.50 (more TCAR), 0.51 to 0.75 (more CEA), and 0.76 to 1.00 (majority CEA). Primary outcomes were rates of perioperative ipsilateral stroke, death, cranial nerve injury, and return to the operating room for bleeding. RESULTS: There were 50,189 patients who underwent primary carotid revascularization (64.3% CEA and 35.7% TCAR). CEA patients were younger (71.1 vs 73.5 years, P < .001), with more symptomatic cases, less coronary artery disease, diabetes, and lower antiplatelet and statin use (all P < .001). TCAR patients had lower rates of smoking, obesity, and dialysis or renal transplant (all P < .001). Postoperative stroke after CEA was significantly impacted by the operator CEA to TCAR volume ratio (P = .04), with surgeons who perform majority TCAR and more TCAR having higher postoperative ipsilateral stroke (majority TCAR odds ratio [OR]: 2.15, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.16-3.96, P = .01; more TCAR OR: 1.42, 95% CI: 1.02-1.96, P = .04), as compared with those who perform majority CEA. Similarly, postoperative stroke after TCAR was significantly impacted by the CEA to TCAR volume ratio (P = .02), with surgeons who perform majority CEA and more CEA having higher stroke (majority CEA OR: 1.51, 95% CI: 1.00-2.27, P = .05; more CEA OR: 1.50, 95% CI: 1.14-2.00, P = .004), as compared with those who perform majority TCAR. There was no association between surgeon ratio and perioperative death, cranial nerve injury, and return to the operating room for bleeding for either procedure. CONCLUSIONS: The relative surgeon CEA to TCAR ratio is significantly associated with perioperative stroke rate. Surgeons who perform a majority of one procedure have a higher stroke rate in the other. Surgeons offering both operations should maintain a balanced practice and have a low threshold to collaborate as needed.

Secondary interventions following open vs endovascular revascularization for chronic limb threatening ischemia in the BEST-CLI trial.

OBJECTIVES: Patients undergoing revascularization for chronic limb-threatening ischemia experience a high burden of target limb reinterventions. We analyzed data from the Best Endovascular versus Best Surgical Therapy in Patients with Critical Limb Ischemia (BEST-CLI) randomized trial comparing initial open bypass (OPEN) and endovascular (ENDO) treatment strategies, with a focus on reintervention-related study endpoints. METHODS: In a planned secondary analysis, we examined the rates of major reintervention, any reintervention, and the composite of any reintervention, amputation, or death by intention-to-treat assignment in both trial cohorts (cohort 1 with suitable single-segment great saphenous vein [SSGSV], n = 1434; cohort 2 lacking suitable SSGSV, n = 396). We also compared the cumulative number of major and all index limb reinterventions over time. Comparisons between treatment arms within each cohort were made using univariable and multivariable Cox regression models. RESULTS: In cohort 1, assignment to OPEN was associated with a significantly reduced hazard of a major limb reintervention (hazard ratio [HR], 0.37; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.28-0.49; P < .001), any reintervention (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.53-0.75; P < .001), or any reintervention, amputation, or death (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.60-0.78; P < .001). Findings were similar in cohort 2 for major reintervention (HR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.33-0.84; P = .007) or any reintervention (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.52-0.98; P = .04). In both cohorts, early (30-day) limb reinterventions were notably higher for patients assigned to ENDO as compared with OPEN (14.7% vs 4.5% of cohort 1 subjects; 16.6% vs 5.6% of cohort 2 subjects). The mean number of major (mean events per subject ratio [MR], 0.45; 95% CI, 0.34-0.58; P < .001) or any target limb reinterventions (MR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.57-0.80; P < .001) per year was significantly less in the OPEN arm of cohort 1. The mean number of reinterventions per limb salvaged per year was lower in the OPEN arm of cohort 1 (MR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.35-0.57; P < .001 and MR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.55-0.79; P < .001 for major and all, respectively). The majority of index limb reinterventions occurred during the first year following randomization, but events continued to accumulate over the duration of follow-up in the trial. CONCLUSIONS: Reintervention is common following revascularization for chronic limb-threatening ischemia. Among patients deemed suitable for either approach, initial treatment with open bypass, particularly in patients with available SSGSV conduit, is associated with a significantly lower number of major and minor target limb reinterventions.

Surgery or endovascular therapy for patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia requiring infrapopliteal interventions.

OBJECTIVE: The recent publication of randomized trials comparing open bypass surgery to endovascular therapy in patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia, namely, Best Endovascular vs Best Surgical Therapy in Patients with Critical Limb Ischemia (BEST-CLI) and Bypass versus Angioplasty in Severe Ischaemia of the Leg-2 (BASIL-2), has resulted in potentially contradictory findings. The trials differed significantly with respect to anatomical disease patterns and primary end points. We performed an analysis of patients in BEST-CLI with significant infrapopliteal disease undergoing open tibial bypass or endovascular tibial interventions to formulate a relevant comparator with the outcomes reported from BASIL-2. METHODS: The study population consisted of patients in BEST-CLI with adequate single segment saphenous vein conduit randomized to open bypass or endovascular intervention (cohort 1) who additionally had significant infrapopliteal disease and underwent tibial level intervention. The primary outcome was major adverse limb event (MALE) or all-cause death. MALE included any major limb amputation or major reintervention. Outcomes were evaluated using Cox proportional regression models. RESULTS: The analyzed subgroup included a total of 665 patients with 326 in the open tibial bypass group and 339 in the tibial endovascular intervention group. The primary outcome of MALE or all-cause death at 3 years was significantly lower in the surgical group at 48.5% compared with 56.7% in the endovascular group (P = .0018). Mortality was similar between groups (35.5% open vs 35.8% endovascular; P = .94), whereas MALE events were lower in the surgical group (23.3% vs 35.0%; P<.0001). This difference included a lower rate of major reinterventions in the surgical group (10.9%) compared with the endovascular group (20.2%; P = .0006). Freedom from above ankle amputation or all-cause death was similar between treatment arms at 43.6% in the surgical group compared with 45.3% the endovascular group (P = .30); however, there were fewer above ankle amputations in the surgical group (13.5%) compared with the endovascular group (19.3%; P = .0205). Perioperative (30-day) death rates were similar between treatment groups (2.5% open vs 2.4% endovascular; P = .93), as was 30-day major adverse cardiovascular events (5.3% open vs 2.7% endovascular; P = .12). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with suitable single segment great saphenous vein who underwent infrapopliteal revascularization for chronic limb-threatening ischemia, open bypass surgery was associated with a lower incidence of MALE or death and fewer major amputation compared with endovascular intervention. Amputation-free survival was similar between the groups. Further investigations into differences in comorbidities, anatomical extent, and lesion complexity are needed to explain differences between the BEST-CLI and BASIL-2 reported outcomes.

Real-World Vein Mapping Practice Patterns Before Endovascular Treatment of Limb Ischemia.

INTRODUCTION: The Best Endovascular versus Best Surgical Therapy in Patients with Critical Limb Ischemia (BEST-CLI) trial results suggest that in patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) and adequate single-segment great saphenous vein (SSGSV) by preoperative duplex ultrasonography, a surgical-first treatment strategy is superior to an endovascular-first strategy. However, the utilization of vein mapping prior to endovascular-first revascularization for CLTI in actual clinical practice is not known. METHODS: Data from a multicenter clinical data warehouse (2008-2019) were linked to Medicare claims data for patients undergoing endovascular-first treatment of infra-inguinal CLTI. Only patients who would have otherwise been eligible for enrollment in BEST-CLI were included. Adequate SSGSV was defined as healthy vein >3.0 mm in diameter from the groin through the knee. Logistic regression was used to estimate associations between preprocedure characteristics and vein mapping. Survival methods were used to estimate the risk of major adverse limb events and death. RESULTS: A total of 142 candidates for either surgical or endovascular treatment underwent endovascular-first management of CLTI. Ultrasound assessment for SSGSV was not performed in 76% of patients prior to endovascular-first revascularization. Of those who underwent preprocedure vein mapping, 44% had adequate SSGSV for bypass. Within one year postprocedure, 12.0% (95% confidence interval 7.4-18.0%) of patients underwent open surgical bypass and 54.7% (95% confidence interval 45.3-62.4%) experienced a major adverse limb event or death. CONCLUSIONS: In a real-world cohort of BEST-CLI-eligible patients undergoing endovascular-first intervention for infra-inguinal CLTI, three-quarters of patients had no preprocedure ultrasound assessment of great saphenous vein conduit. Practice patterns for vein conduit assessment in the real-world warrant reconsideration in the context of BEST-CLI trial results.

Reduction of Major Amputations after Surgery Versus Endovascular Intervention: The BEST-CLI Randomised Trial.

OBJECTIVE: BEST-CLI, an international randomised trial, compared bypass surgery with endovascular treatment in chronic limb threatening ischaemia (CLTI). In this substudy, overall amputation rates and risk of major amputation as an initial or subsequent outcome were evaluated. METHODS: A total of 1 830 patients were randomised to receive surgical or endovascular treatment:(1) patients with adequate single segment great saphenous vein (SSGSV) (n = 1 434); and (2) patients without adequate SSGSV (n = 396). Differences in time to first event and number of amputations were evaluated. RESULTS: In cohort 1, 410 (45.6%) total amputation events occurred in the surgical group vs. 490 (54.4%) in the endovascular group (p = .001) during mean follow up of 2.7 years. Every third patient underwent minor amputation after index revascularisation: 31.5% of the surgical group vs. 34.9% in the endovascular group (p = .17). Subsequent major amputation was required significantly less often in the surgical group compared with the endovascular group (15.0% vs. 25.6%; p = .002). The first amputation was major in 5.6% of patients in the surgical and 6.0% in the endovascular group (p = .72). Major amputation was required in 10.3% (n = 74/718) of patients in the surgical group and 14.9% (n = 107/716) in the endovascular group (p = .008). In cohort 2, 199 amputation events occurred in 132 (33.3%) patients during mean follow up of 1.6 years: 95 (47.7%) in the surgical vs. 104 (52.3%) in the endovascular group (p = .49). Major amputation was required in 15.2% (n = 30/197) of the patients in the surgical and 14.1% (n = 28/199) in the endovascular group (p = .74). CONCLUSION: In patients with CLTI, surgical bypass with SSGSV was more effective than endovascular treatment in preventing major amputations because of a decrease in major amputations subsequent to minor amputations.

Common Criticisms and Rebuttals of the Best Endovascular Versus Best Surgical Therapy in Patients with Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia (BEST-CLI) Trial.

The Best Endovascular Versus Best Surgical Therapy in Patients With Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia trial was a landmark trial which provides high-quality data for the decision-making regarding the treatment of chronic-limb threatening ischemia. Overall, the trial suggests that in patients with adequate greater saphenous vein conduit, bypass surgery should be offered as a first line treatment given superior outcomes. In this article, we outline the common critiques of the trial, followed by responses to provide a deeper understanding of the strengths and limitations of this important trial.

Early Kidney Transplantation or Conversion to Peritoneal Dialysis after First-Time Arteriovenous Access Creation.

BACKGROUND: After autogenous arteriovenous (AV) access creation for end-stage renal disease, a majority of patients will continue on hemodialysis (HD), a minority will receive definitive treatment with kidney transplantation, and a subset of patients will convert to peritoneal dialysis (PD). Our goal was to identify patient factors associated with early transition from HD to either kidney transplantation or PD. METHODS: This is a case-control study of all patients with first-time AV access creation in the Vascular Quality Initiative (2011-2022) who had long-term follow-up. Patients who remained on HD after AV access creation were the control group while patients who received early kidney transplant or who converted to PD were the 2 case groups. Relationship among demographics, comorbidities, neighborhood social disadvantage, and functional status as they relate to renal replacement therapy modality was assessed. RESULTS: There were 19,782 patients included; the average age was 62 ± 15 years and 57% were male. During the follow-up period of a median 306 (71-403) days, 1.3% underwent a kidney transplantation and 2.3% underwent conversion to PD. On univariable analysis, rates of kidney transplantation or conversion to PD varied with race (P < 0.001), insurance status (P < 0.001), area deprivation index (ADI) quintile (P < 0.001), and several medical comorbidities. On multivariable analysis, impaired ambulation, current smoking, Medicaid or Medicare insurance, Black race, heart failure, body mass index, and older age were associated with decreased transplantation rates. Conversion to PD was associated with ADI Q5, Q4, and Q3. Decreased conversion to PD was associated with impaired ambulation, Hispanic ethnicity, Black race, former smoking, medication-controlled diabetes, and older age. CONCLUSIONS: Decreased kidney transplantation was associated with Black race and noncommercial health insurance but not ADI quintile, suggesting disparities exist beyond community-level access to care. Early kidney transplantation conveyed a 3-year survival benefit compared with HD and PD, which had similar survival. Furthermore work is required to increase access to kidney transplantation and PD.

Assessing Time to Removal of Tunneled Dialysis Catheters after Arteriovenous Access Creation.

BACKGROUND: Tunneled dialysis catheters (TDCs) are a temporary bridge until definitive arteriovenous (AV) access is established. Our objective was to evaluate the time to TDC removal in patients who underwent AV access creations with TDCs already in place. METHODS: A single-center analysis of all AV access creations in patients with TDCs was performed (2014-2020). Primary outcome was time to TDC removal after access creation. RESULTS: There were 364 AV access creations with TDCs in place. The average age was 58 years, 44% of patients were female, and 64% were Black. The median time to TDC removal was 113 days (range, 22-931 days) with 71.4% having a TDC >90 days after access creation. Patients with TDC >90 days were often older (60 vs. 54.7), had hypertension (98.1% vs. 93.3%), were diabetic (65.4% vs. 47.1%), and had longer average time to maturation (107.1 vs. 55.4 days, P < 0.001) and first access (114 vs. 59.4 days, P < 0.001). Multivariable analysis showed that older age was associated with prolonged TDC placement (odds ratio [OR] 1.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.05, P = 0.005) and prosthetic graft use was associated with shorter TDC indwelling time (OR 0.09, 95% CI 0.04-0.23, P ≤ 0.001). Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that 87% of TDCs were removed at 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients with TDCs who underwent AV access creation had prolonged TDC placement. Prosthetic graft use was associated with shorter catheter times. Close follow-up after access placement, improving maturation times, and access type selection should be considered to shortened TDC times.