Image-based assessment of aortoiliac aneurysm anatomical characteristics in patients from the global iliac branch study.

OBJECTIVE: Endovascular repair is the preferred treatment for aortoiliac aneurysm, with preservation of at least one internal iliac artery recommended. This study aimed to assess pre-endovascular repair anatomical characteristics of aortoiliac aneurysm in patients from the Global Iliac Branch Study (GIBS, NCT05607277) to enhance selection criteria for iliac branch devices (IBD) and improve long-term outcomes. METHODS: Pre-treatment CT scans of 297 GIBS patients undergoing endovascular aneurysm repair were analyzed. Measurements included total iliac artery length, common iliac artery length, tortuosity index, common iliac artery splay angle, internal iliac artery stenosis, calcification score, and diameters in the device's landing zone. Statistical tests assessed differences in anatomical measurements and IBD-mediated internal iliac artery preservation. RESULTS: Left total iliac artery length was shorter than right (6.7 mm, P = .0019); right common iliac artery less tortuous (P = .0145). Males exhibited greater tortuosity in the left total iliac artery (P = .0475) and larger diameter in left internal iliac artery's landing zone (P = .0453). Preservation was more common on right (158 unilateral, 34 bilateral) than left (105 unilateral, 34 bilateral). There were 192 right-sided and 139 left-sided IBDs, with 318 IBDs in males and 13 in females. CONCLUSION: This study provides comprehensive pre-treatment iliac anatomy analysis in patients undergoing endovascular repair with IBDs, highlighting differences between sides and sexes. These findings could refine patient selection for IBD placement, potentially enhancing outcomes in aortoiliac aneurysm treatment. However, the limited number of females in the study underscores the need for further research to generalize findings across genders.

Factors Associated with Urgent Amputation Status and Its Impact on Mortality.

BACKGROUND: Thirty-day mortality is higher after urgent major lower extremity amputations compared to elective lower extremity amputations. This study aims to identify factors associated with urgent amputations and to examine their impact on perioperative outcomes and long-term mortality. METHODS: Patients undergoing major lower limb amputation from 2013 to 2020 in the Vascular Quality Initiative were included. Urgent amputation was defined as occurring within 72 hr of admission. Associations with sociodemographic characteristics, comorbidities, and outcomes including postoperative complication, inpatient death, and long-term survival were compared using univariable tests and multivariable logistic regression. Long-term survival between groups was compared using Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS: Of the 12,874 patients included, 4,850 (37.7%) had urgent and 8,024 (62.3%) had elective amputations. Non-White patients required urgent amputation more often than White patients (39.8% vs. 37.9%, P = 0.03). A higher proportion of Medicaid and self-pay patients presented urgently (Medicaid: 13.0% vs. 11.0%; self-pay: 3.4% vs. 2.5%, P < 0.001). Patients requiring urgent amputation were less often taking aspirin (55.6% vs. 60.1%, P < 0.001) or statin (62.2% vs. 67.2%, P < 0.001), had fewer prior revascularization procedures (41.0% vs. 48.8%, P < 0.001), and were of higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class 4-5 (50.9% vs. 40.1%, P < 0.001). Urgent amputations were more commonly for uncontrolled infection (48.1% vs. 29.4%, P < 0.001) or acute limb ischemia (14.3% vs. 6.2%, P < 0.001). Postoperative complications were higher after urgent amputations (34.7% vs. 16.6%, P < 0.001), including need for return to operating room (23.8% vs. 8.4%, P < 0.001) and need for higher revision (15.2% vs. 4.5%, P < 0.001). Inpatient mortality was higher after urgent amputation (8.9% vs. 5.4%, P < 0.001). Multivariable analysis revealed non-White race, self-pay, homelessness, current smoking, ASA class 4-5, and amputations for uncontrolled infection or acute limb ischemia were associated with urgent status, whereas living in a nursing home or prior revascularization were protective. Furthermore, urgent amputation was associated with an increased odds of postoperative complication or death (odds ratio 1.86 [1.69-2.04], P < 0.001) as well as long-term mortality (odds ratio: 1.24 [1.13-1.35], P < 0.001). Kaplan-Meier analysis corroborated that elective status was associated with improvement of long-term survival. CONCLUSIONS: Patients requiring urgent amputations are more often non-White, uninsured, and less frequently had prior revascularization procedures, revealing disparities in access to care. Urgency was associated with a higher postoperative complication rate, as well as increased long-term mortality. Efforts should be directed toward reducing these disparities to improve outcomes following amputation.

The Differential Impact of Medicaid Expansion on Disparities in Outcomes Following Peripheral Vascular Intervention.

BACKGROUND: Peripheral artery disease (PAD) disproportionately affects nonwhite, Hispanic/Latino, and low socioeconomic status patients, who are less likely to have insurance and routine healthcare visits. Medicaid expansion (ME) has improved insurance rates and access to care, potentially benefitting these patients. We sought to assess the impact of ME on disparities in outcomes after peripheral vascular intervention (PVI) for PAD. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of prospectively-collected Vascular Quality Initiative PVI procedures between 2011 and 2019 was conducted. The sample was restricted to first-record procedures in adults under the age 65 in states that expanded Medicaid on January 1, 2014 (ME group) or had not expanded before January 1, 2019 (non-expansion [NE] group). ME and NE groups were compared between pre-expansion (2011-2013) and post-expansion (2014- 2019) time periods to assess baseline demographic and operative differences. We used difference-in-differences multivariable logistic regression adjusted for patient factors and clinical center and year fixed effects. Our primary outcome was 1-year major amputation. Secondary outcomes included trends in presentation, 30-day mortality, 1-year mortality, and 1-year primary and secondary patency. Outcomes were stratified by race and ethnicity. RESULTS: We examined 34,313 PVI procedures, including 20,378 with follow-up data. Rates of Medicaid insurance increased post-expansion in ME and NE states (ME 16.7% to 23.0%, P < 0.001; NE 10.0% to 11.9%, P = 0.013) while rates of self-pay decreased in ME states only (ME 4.6% to 1.8%, P < 0.001; NE 8.1% to 8.4%, P = 0.620). Adjusted difference-in-differences analysis revealed lower odds of urgent/emergent PVI among all patients and all nonwhite patients in ME states post-expansion compared to NE states (all: odds ratio [OR] 0.53 [95% confidence interval 0.33-0.87], P = 0.011; nonwhite: OR 0.41 [0.19-0.88], P = 0.023). No differences were observed for 1-year major amputation (OR 0.70 [0.43-1.14], P = 0.152), primary patency (OR 0.93 [0.63-1.38], P = 0.726), or secondary patency (OR 1.29 [0.69-2.41], P = 0.431). Odds of 1-year mortality were higher in ME states post-expansion compared to NE states (OR 2.50 [1.07-5.87], P = 0.035), although 30-day mortality was not different (OR 2.04 [0.60-6.90], P = 0.253). Notably, odds of 1-year major amputation among Hispanic/Latino patients decreased in ME states post-expansion compared to NE states (OR 0.11 [0.01-0.86], P = 0.036). CONCLUSIONS: ME was associated with lower odds of 1-year major amputation among Hispanic/Latino patients who underwent PVI for PAD. ME was also associated with lower odds of urgent/emergent procedures among patients overall and nonwhite patients specifically. However, 1-year mortality increased in the overall cohort. Further study is needed to corroborate our findings that ME may have benefits for certain underserved populations with PAD.

Sex-related outcomes after fenestrated-branched endovascular aneurysm repair for thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms in the U.S. Fenestrated and Branched Aortic Research Consortium.

OBJECTIVE: Fenestrated-branched endovascular aneurysm repair (FBEVAR) has expanded the treatment of patients with thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). Previous studies have demonstrated that women are less likely to be treated with standard infrarenal endovascular aneurysm repair because of anatomic ineligibility and experience greater mortality after both infrarenal and thoracic aortic aneurysm repair. The purpose of the present study was to describe the sex-related outcomes after FBEVAR for treatment of TAAAs. METHODS: The data from 886 patients with extent I to IV TAAAs (excluding pararenal or juxtarenal aneurysms), enrolled in eight prospective, physician-sponsored, investigational device exemption studies from 2013 to 2019, were analyzed. All data were collected prospectively, audited and adjudicated by clinical events committees and/or data safety monitoring boards, and subject to Food and Drug Administration oversight. All the patients had been treated with Cook-manufactured patient-specific FBEVAR devices or the Cook t-Branch off-the-shelf device (Cook Medical, Brisbane, Australia). RESULTS: Of the 886 patients who underwent FBEVAR, 288 (33%) were women. The women had more extensive aneurysms and a greater prevalence of diabetes (33% vs 26%; P = .043) but a lower prevalence of coronary artery disease (33% vs 52%; P < .0001) and previous infrarenal endovascular aneurysm repair (7.6% vs 16%; P < .001). The women had required a longer operative time from incision to surgery end (5.0 ± 1.8 hours vs 4.6 ± 1.7 hours; P < .001), experienced lower technical success (93% vs 98%; P = .002), and were less likely to be discharged to home (72% vs 83%; P = .009). Despite the smaller access vessels, the women did not have an increased incidence of access site complications. Also, the 30-day outcomes were broadly similar between the sexes. At 1 year, no differences were found between the women and men in freedom from type I or III endoleak (91.4% vs 92.0%; P = .64), freedom from reintervention (81.7% vs 85.3%; P = .10), target vessel instability (87.5% vs 89.2%; P = .31), and survival (89.6% vs 91.7%; P = .26). The women had a greater incidence of postoperative sac expansion (12% vs 6.5%; P = .006). Multivariable modeling adjusted for age, aneurysm extent, aneurysm size, urgent procedure, and renal function showed that patient sex was not an independent predictor of survival (hazard ratio, 0.83; 95% confidence interval, 0.50-1.37; P = .46). CONCLUSIONS: Women undergoing FBEVAR demonstrated metrics of increased complexity and had a lower level of technical success, especially those with extensive aneurysms. Compared with the men, the women had similar 30-day mortality and 1-year outcomes, with the exception of an increased incidence of sac expansion. These data have demonstrated that FBEVAR is safe and effective for women and men but that further efforts to improve outcome parity are indicated.

Clinical and economic outcomes of ProGlide compared with surgical repair of large bore arterial access.

Aim: This study compared real-world complication rates, hospitalization duration and costs, among patients undergoing arterial repair using the Perclose ProGlide (ProGlide) versus surgical cutdown (Cutdown). Materials & methods: Retrospective study of matched patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement/repair, endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, thoracic endovascular aortic repair or balloon aortic valvuloplasty with arterial repair by either ProGlide or Cutdown between 1 January 2013 and 24 April 2017. Results: Infections and blood transfusions were lower in the ProGlide cohort. Patients in the ProGlide cohort had a 42.5% shorter index hospitalization, which corresponded to US$14,687 lower costs. Conclusion: The use of ProGlide for arterial repair was associated with significantly lower transfusion rates, shorter index hospitalization and lower hospitalization costs compared with surgical cutdown.

Characterizing the evolution of perioperative outcomes and costs of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to characterize the evolution in perioperative outcomes and costs of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair (EVAR) by detailing changes in adjusted outcomes and costs over time. METHODS: National Inpatient Sample (2000-2011) data were used to evaluate patient characteristics, outcomes, and perioperative costs for elective EVAR performed for intact AAA. Outcomes were adjusted for patient demographics and comorbidities, and hospital factors by multivariate analysis. Costs were calculated from hospital cost to charge ratio files and adjusted to 2011 dollars. RESULTS: From 2000 to 2011, 185,249 patients underwent elective EVAR for intact AAA. The absolute rates of in-hospital major morbidity, mortality, and procedural costs all decreased significantly over time (P < .0001). The prevalence of major comorbidities in patients undergoing EVAR, including obesity, diabetes, and dyslipidemia, all increased significantly over time. After adjusting for multiple demographics, comorbidities, and hospital-level factors, recent outcomes of EVAR (2009-2011) remain superior to the early experience (2000-2002) with respect to mortality and major complications. CONCLUSIONS: From 2000-2011, the perioperative outcomes of EVAR improved significantly despite a higher prevalence of comorbidities among patients undergoing repair. Concurrently, procedure-associated costs declined. Advanced technology is often implicated in escalating healthcare spending, and the value of novel techniques is often questioned. These findings highlight that, in the case of EVAR, procedural outcomes have improved while the initial costs of repair have declined over time. EVAR offers an interesting example for stakeholders to consider in the era of cost-containment pressures and criticism of nascent, expensive technology in healthcare.

Impact of "Do Not Resuscitate" Status on the Outcome of Major Vascular Surgical Procedures.

BACKGROUND: Patients with Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) orders may still be offered surgery that aims to prolong or improve quality of life. The widely accepted approach of "required reconsideration" mandates that patients and surgeons discuss perioperative risks and expected outcomes in the context of the patient's values and preferences. However, surgical outcomes in this patient population have not been well-defined. The objectives of this study are to assess outcomes in DNR patients undergoing major vascular procedures, and develop an evidence basis for informed, shared decision-making. METHODS: Patients undergoing common major vascular procedures were identified in the 2007-2010 National Surgical Quality Improvement Project databases. DNR patients were defined as those with an active DNR order within 30 days before surgery. Demographics, comorbidities, procedural details, and complications were compared with those without DNR orders. To isolate the impact of DNR status, multivariate regression and 1:1 propensity score matching were used to compare outcomes between DNR patients and a non-DNR cohort of comparably high-risk patients. RESULTS: Of 110,279 patients undergoing major vascular surgery, 1,565 (1.4%) had active DNR orders 30 days preceding surgery. DNR patients were more likely to be functionally dependent (69% vs. 15%; P < 0.0001), over 80 years of age (53% vs. 20%; P < 0.001), and suffer from a variety of cardiac, pulmonary, and systemic comorbidities. The most common procedures in DNR patients were major amputation (38.4%), lower extremity bypass (20%), and peripheral thromboembolectomy (11.7%). Unadjusted 30-day mortality was significantly higher among DNR patients (21% vs. 3.4%; P < 0.001). After 1:1 propensity score matching, with the 2 cohorts differing only with respect to DNR status, perioperative mortality remained significantly higher among DNR patients (21% vs. 13%; P < 0.01). There was a trend toward reduced cardiopulmonary resuscitation in patients with recent DNR (1.7% vs. 2.6%; P = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS: DNR patients are at high risk for major complications and mortality after vascular surgery procedures. Compared with a matched cohort of "high-risk" non-DNR patients, those with DNR orders suffered equivalent rates of postoperative morbidity, but markedly increased mortality. This suggests that DNR status, independent of comorbidities and perioperative complications, may increase the risk of "failure to rescue." These findings have implications not only for risk adjustment, but also provide an evidence basis for shared decision-making in challenging circumstances.

Variability in anesthetic considerations for arteriovenous fistula creation.

INTRODUCTION: Anesthetic options for arteriovenous fistula (AVF) creation include regional anesthesia (RA), general anesthesia (GA) and local anesthetic for select cases. In addition to the benefits of avoiding GA in high-risk patients, recent studies suggest that RA may increase perioperative venous dilation and improve maturation. Our objective was to assess perioperative outcomes of AVF creation with respect to anesthetic modality and identify patient-level factors associated with variation in contemporary anesthetic selection. METHODS: National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (NSQIP) data (2007-2010) were accessed to identify patients undergoing AVF creation. Univariate analysis and multivariate logistic regression were performed to assess the relationships among patient characteristics, anesthesia modality and outcome. RESULTS: Of 1,540 patients undergoing new upper extremity AVF creation, 52% were male and 81% were younger than 75 years. Anesthesia distribution was GA in 85.2%, local/monitored anesthetic care (MAC) in 2.9% and RA in 11.9% of cases. By multivariate analysis, independent predictors of RA were dyspnea at rest (hazard ratio [HR] 2.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1-4.9), age >75 (HR 1.6, 95% CI 1.1-2.3) and teaching hospital status as indicated by housestaff involvement (HR 3.7, 95% CI 2.5-5.5). RA was associated with higher total operative time, duration of anesthesia, length of time in operating room and duration of anesthesia start until surgery start (p<0.01). There were no differences between perioperative complications or mortality among anesthetic modalities, although all deaths occurred in the GA group. DISCUSSIONS: Despite recent reports highlighting potential benefits of RA for AVF creation, GA was surprisingly used in the vast majority of cases in the United States. The only comorbidities associated with preferential RA use were advanced age and dyspnea at rest. Practice environment may influence anesthetic selection for these cases, as a nonteaching environment was associated with GA use. The trend seen here toward higher mortality in GA and the potential perioperative benefits of RA for the access should encourage more widespread use of RA in practice for this high-risk patient population.

The Comprehensive Risk Assessment for Bypass (CRAB) facilitates efficient perioperative risk assessment for patients with critical limb ischemia.

OBJECTIVE: Specific perioperative risk assessment models have been developed for bariatric, pancreatic, and colorectal surgery. A similar instrument, specific for patients with critical limb ischemia (CLI), could improve patient-centered clinical decision making. We describe a novel tool to predict 30-day major morbidity and mortality (M&M) after bypass surgery for CLI. METHODS: Data for 4985 individuals from the 2007 to 2009 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program were used to develop and internally validate the model. Outcome measures included mortality, major morbidity, and a composite end point (M&M). M&M included mortality and the most severe postoperative morbidities that were highly associated with death (eg, sepsis and major cardiopulmonary complications). More than 30 preoperative factors were tested for association with 30-day mortality, major morbidity, and M&M. Significant predictors in multivariate models were assigned integer values (points), which were added to calculate a patient's Comprehensive Risk Assessment For Bypass (CRAB) score. Performance was assessed (C-index) across all outcome measures and compared with other general tools (American Society of Anesthesiologists class, Surgical Risk Scale) and existing CLI-specific survival prediction models (Finnvasc score, Edifoligide for the Prevention of Infrainguinal Vein Graft Failure [PREVENT III] score) on a distinct validation sample (n = 1620). RESULTS: In the derivation data set (n = 3275), the 30-day mortality rate was 2.9%. The rate of any major morbidity was 19.1%. The composite end point M&M occurred in 10.1%. Significant predictors of M&M by multivariate analysis included age >75 years, prior amputation or revascularization, tissue loss, dialysis dependence, severe cardiac disease, emergency operation, and functional dependence. Applied to a distinct validation sample of 1620 patients, higher CRAB scores were significantly associated with higher rates of mortality, all major morbidities, and M&M (P < .0001). Comparison with other models by assessment of area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve revealed the CRAB was a more accurate predictor of mortality, all major morbidity, and M&M. CONCLUSIONS: The CRAB is a CLI-specific, risk assessment instrument derived from multi-institutional American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program surgical outcomes data that out-performs existing prognostic risk indices in the prediction of clinically significant adverse events after bypass surgery. Use of the CRAB as a risk assessment tool provides an evidence basis for patient-centered clinical decision making and may have a role in identifying patients at higher risk for surgical revascularization in whom an endovascular approach is preferable.

Clinical, demographic, and medicolegal factors associated with geographic variation in inferior vena cava filter utilization: an interstate analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Geographic variability exists in the use of IVC filters (IVCF). We hypothesized that variation in IVCF use is incompletely explained by variation in the prevalence of deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) and may result from different practice patterns regarding prophylactic IVCF use. We characterize geographic variation in IVCF use at the state level and evaluate its association with clinical factors, patient demographics, and the medicolegal environment. METHODS: Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient Database records were accessed to identify 230,445 IVCFs placed from 2006 to 2008 in 33 states. Similar queries were performed for DVT and PE. Additional state data were obtained from public sources. Analyses included descriptive statistics, Spearman Correlation (SC), Wilcoxon rank-sum test, and characterization of variability. RESULTS: Overall, IVCF use correlated with the prevalence of DVT (SC = 0.89, P < .01). States on the East coast have significantly greater rates of IVCF use per 100K (mean ± SD = 41.2 ± 16.7 vs 27.8 ± 11.1, P < .05) and greater rates of IVCF per DVT (20.2 ± 4.5% vs 15.2 ± 2.9%; P < .005), despite similar rates of DVT per 100K (198.1 ± 51.2 vs 177.7 ± 46.7, P = NS) compared with all other states. Overall, states with the greatest rate of IVCF per DVT were (in descending order): Rhode Island, New Jersey, Florida, New York, and West Virginia. Rates of detected PE per 100K in these states were not significantly different from all other states (95.6 ± 16.6 vs 90.4 ± 16.1, P = NS). In these states, a greater percentage of IVCF recipients were older than 85 (15.3% vs 11.8%; P < .01); fewer were pediatric (0.3% vs 0.7%; P < .05) or aged 45 to 64 (26.1% vs 32.4%; P < .001). There were no differences in patient sex, race, insurance type, hospital size, or teaching status. States with high rates of IVCF per DVT were noted to have significantly greater rates of paid malpractice claims per 100K (4.9 ± 2.51 vs 1.1 ± 0.8; P = .001), and annual general surgeon liability insurance premiums ($78,630 ± 34,822 vs $43,989 ± 17,794; P < .05). CONCLUSION: Variation in IVCF use is incompletely explained by clinical factors. High rates of IVCF per DVT in some states may represent increased use of prophylactic IVCF in states with litigious medicolegal environments.

Integrated fellowship in vascular surgery and intervention radiology: a new paradigm in vascular training.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate an integrated fellowship in vascular surgery and interventional radiology initiated to train vascular surgeons in endovascular techniques and to train radiology fellows in clinical aspects of vascular diseases. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: The rapid evolution of endovascular techniques for the treatment of vascular diseases requires that vascular surgeons develop proficiency in these techniques and that interventional radiologists develop proficiency in the clinical evaluation and management of patients who are best treated with endovascular techniques. In response to this need the authors initiated an integrated fellowship in vascular surgery and interventional radiology and now report their interim results. METHODS: Since 1999 vascular fellows and radiology fellows performed an identical year-long fellowship in interventional radiology. During the fellowship, vascular surgery and radiology fellows perform both vascular and nonvascular interventional procedures. Both vascular surgery and radiology-based fellows spend one quarter of the year on the vascular service performing endovascular aortic aneurysm repairs and acquiring clinical experience in the vascular surgery inpatient and outpatient services. Vascular surgery fellows then complete an additional year-long fellowship in vascular surgery. To evaluate the type and number of interventional radiology procedures, the authors analyzed records of cases performed by all interventional radiology and vascular surgery fellows from a prospectively maintained database. The attitudes of vascular surgery and interventional radiology faculty and fellows toward the integrated fellowship were surveyed using a formal questionnaire. RESULTS: During the fellowship each fellow performed an average of 1,201 procedures, including 808 vascular procedures (236 diagnostic angiograms, 70 arterial interventions, 59 diagnostic venograms, 475 venous interventions, and 43 hemodialysis graft interventions) and 393 nonvascular procedures. On average fellows performed 20 endovascular aortic aneurysm repairs per year. There was no significant difference between the vascular surgery and radiology fellows in either the spectrum or number of cases performed. Eighty-eight percent (23/26) of the questionnaires were completed and returned. Both interventional radiologists and vascular surgeons strongly supported the integrated fellowship model and favored continuation of the integrated program. Vascular surgery and interventional radiology faculty members wanted additional training in clinical vascular surgery for the radiology-based fellows. With the exception of the radiology fellows there was uniform agreement that vascular surgery fellows benefit from training in nonvascular aspects of interventional radiology. CONCLUSIONS: Integration of vascular surgery and interventional radiology fellowships is feasible and is mutually beneficial to both disciplines. Furthermore, the integrated fellowship provides exceptional training for vascular surgery and interventional radiology fellows in all catheter-based techniques that far exceeds the minimum requirements for credentialing suggested by various professional societies. There is a clear need for cooperation and active involvement on the parts of the American Board of Radiology and the American Board of Surgery and its Vascular Board to create hybrid training programs that meet mutually agreed-on criteria that document sufficient acquisition of both the cognitive and technical skills required to manage patients undergoing endovascular procedures safely and effectively.