Comparison of lower extremity bypass and peripheral vascular intervention for chronic limb-threatening ischemia in the Medicare-linked Vascular Quality Initiative.

OBJECTIVE: There is a relative lack of comparative effectiveness research on revascularization for patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI). We examined the association between lower extremity bypass (LEB) vs peripheral vascular intervention (PVI) for CLTI and 30-day and 5-year all-cause mortality and 30-day and 5-year amputation. METHODS: Patients undergoing LEB and PVI of the below-the-knee popliteal and infrapopliteal arteries between 2014 and 2019 were queried from the Vascular Quality Initiative, and outcomes data were obtained from the Medicare claims-linked Vascular Implant Surveillance and Interventional Outcomes Network database. Propensity scores were calculated on 15 variables using a logistic regression model to control for imbalances between treatment groups. A 1:1 matching method was used. Kaplan-Meier survival curves and hierarchical Cox proportional hazards regression with a random intercept for site and operator nested in site to account for clustered data compared 30-day and 5-year all-cause mortality between groups. Thirty-day and 5-year amputation were subsequently compared using competing risk analysis to account for the competing risk of death. RESULTS: There was a total of 2075 patients in each group. The overall mean age was 71 ± 11 years, 69% were male, and 76% were white, 18% were black, and 6% were of Hispanic ethnicity. Baseline clinical and demographic characteristics in the matched cohort were balanced between groups. There was no association between all-cause mortality over 30 days and LEB vs PVI (cumulative incidence, 2.3% vs 2.3% by Kaplan Meier; log-rank P-value = .906; hazard ratio [HR], 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.62-1.44; P-value = .80). All-cause mortality over 5 years was lower for LEB vs PVI (cumulative incidence, 55.9% vs 60.1% by Kaplan Meier; log-rank P-value < .001; HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.70-0.86; P-value < .001). Accounting for competing risk of death, amputation over 30 days was also lower in LEB vs PVI (cumulative incidence function, 1.9% vs 3.0%; Fine and Gray P-value = .025; subHR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.42-0.95; P-value = .025). There was no association between amputation over 5 years and LEB vs PVI (cumulative incidence function, 22.6% vs 23.4%; Fine and Gray P-value = .184; subHR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.79-1.05; P-value = .184). CONCLUSIONS: In the Vascular Quality Initiative-linked Medicare registry, LEB vs PVI for CLTI was associated with a lower risk of 30-day amputation and 5-year all-cause mortality. These results will serve as a foundation to validate recently published randomized controlled trial data, and to broaden the comparative effectiveness evidence base for CLTI.

Examining Outcomes in Patients Admitted With Comorbid Peripheral Artery Disease and Microvascular Disease.

BACKGROUND: Peripheral artery disease (PAD) and microvascular disease (MVD) are highly prevalent conditions that share common risk factors. This observational study aimed to characterize patients with both conditions and determine the impact of comorbid PAD/MVD on outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients admitted across 31 states January 2011 through December 2018 with a primary or secondary diagnosis of PAD or MVD were included from the National Readmissions Database and weighted to approximate a national sample. Those age <18 years or with nonatherosclerotic leg injuries were excluded. Patients were divided into 3 groups: PAD-only, MVD-only, or comorbid PAD/MVD. Multiple logistic regression was used to evaluate associations with major and minor amputations, major adverse cardiac events, and in-hospital mortality. Cox regression was used to evaluate associations with readmission within 1 year. The PAD group was used as reference. The final cohort included 33 972 772 admissions: 9.1 million with PAD, 21.3 million with MVD, and 3.6 million with both. Annual admissions for PAD/MVD increased to >500 000 in 2018. Major and minor amputations increased ≈50% for PAD/MVD between 2011 and 2018. Compared with PAD-only, PAD/MVD was associated with a higher risk for major amputation (odds ratio [OR], 1.30 [95% CI, 1.28-1.32]), minor amputation (OR, 2.15 [95% CI, 2.12-2.18]), major adverse cardiac events (OR, 1.04 [95% CI, 1.03-1.04]), in-hospital mortality (OR, 1.07 [95% CI, 1.05-1.09]), and readmission (hazard ratio, 1.02 [95% CI, 1.02-1.02]) after adjustment for baseline factors. CONCLUSIONS: Comorbid MVD is present in a large and growing number of patients with PAD and is associated with augmented risk for adverse outcomes. Further prospective research is merited to understand this vulnerable population.

Clinical Interpretation of Serum Troponin in the Era of High-Sensitivity Testing.

Cardiac troponin (Tn) plays a central role in the evaluation of patients with angina presenting with acute coronary syndrome. The advent of high-sensitivity assays has improved the analytic sensitivity and precision of serum Tn measurement, but this advancement has come at the cost of poorer specificity. The role of clinical judgment is of heightened importance because, more so than ever, the interpretation of serum Tn elevation hinges on the careful integration of findings from electrocardiographic, echocardiographic, physical exam, interview, and other imaging and laboratory data to formulate a weighted differential diagnosis. A thorough understanding of the epidemiology, mechanisms, and prognostic implications of Tn elevations in each cardiac and non-cardiac etiology allows the clinician to better distinguish between presentations of myocardial ischemia and myocardial injury-an important discernment to make, as the treatment of acute coronary syndrome is vastly different from the workup and management of myocardial injury and should be directed at the underlying cause.

Effect of inferior vena cava filter placement position on device complications.

BACKGROUND: Indwelling inferior vena cava (IVC) filters can cause complications, including penetration into surrounding structures, migration, and thrombosis of the vena cava. Computational fluid dynamics suggests juxtarenal placement of IVC filters decreases the risk of thrombosis; however, this has not been explored clinically. The present study examines the effect of filter placement position on long-term device complications with an emphasis on IVC thrombosis. We hypothesized that IVC filters placed further caudal to the renal veins were more likely to develop long-term thrombosis. METHODS: A retrospective review of the medical records of patients receiving IVC filters at a single tertiary center between 2008 and 2016 was performed. Patients missing follow-up or procedural imaging data were excluded. The placement procedure venograms were reviewed, and the distance from the filter apex to the more inferior renal vein was measured using reported IVC filter lengths for calibration. The patients were divided into three groups according to the tip position relative to the more inferior renal vein: at or superior (group A), 1 to 20 mm inferior (group B), and >20 mm inferior (group C). The patient and procedural characteristics and outcomes were compared between the three groups. The primary end points were IVC thrombosis and device-related mortality. RESULTS: Of 1497 eligible patients, 267 (17.8%) were excluded. The most common placement position was group B (64.0%). The mean age was lowest in group C, followed by groups A and B (age, 59.5 years, 64.6 years, and 62.2 years, respectively; P = .003). No statistically significant differences were found in the distribution of sex or the measured comorbidities. Group C was the most likely to receive jugular access (group C, 71.7%; group A, 48.3%; group B, 62.4%; P < .001) and received more first-generation filters (group C, 58.5%; group A, 46.6%; group B, 52.5%; P = .045). The short-term (<30-day) and long-term (≥30-day) outcomes, including access site hematoma, deep vein thrombosis, and pulmonary embolism, were uncommon, with no differences between the groups. Cases of symptomatic filter penetration, migration, and fracture were rare (one, one, and three cases, respectively). Although a pattern of increasing thrombosis with more inferior placement was found, the difference between groups was not statistically significant (group A, 1.5%; group B, 1.8%; group C, 2.5%; P = .638). No cases of device-related mortality occurred. All-cause mortality after a mean follow-up of 2.6 ± 2.3 years was 41.3% and did not vary significantly between the groups (P = .051). Multivariate logistic regression revealed that placement position did not predict for short- or long-term deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, IVC thrombosis, or all-cause mortality after adjustment for the baseline patient characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: IVC filters have low rates of short- and long-term complications, including IVC thrombosis. The placement position did not affect the occurrence of device complications in this study.

Placement and retrieval of bilateral iliac vein filters in patients with mega cava.

Temporary interruption of the inferior vena cava is the recommended treatment to prevent pulmonary embolism in patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) and active contraindications for therapeutic anticoagulation. In patients with mega cava (diameter >30 mm), temporary inferior vena cava filters are contraindicated. In the present report, we have described the successful placement and retrieval of bilateral iliac vein filters in two patients with VTE, mega cava, and active contraindications for therapeutic anticoagulation. At the last follow-up, both patients had recovered without recurrent VTE and had had all filters successfully retrieved without complications.