Investigation of the weekend effect on perioperative complications and mortality after carotid revascularization.

OBJECTIVE: Outcomes for weekend surgical interventions are associated with higher rates of mortality and complications than weekday interventions. Although prior investigations have reported the "weekend effect" for carotid endarterectomy (CEA), this association remains unclear for transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) and transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TFCAS). We investigated the weekend effect for all three carotid revascularization methods. METHODS: We queried the Vascular Quality Initiative for patients who underwent CEA, TCAR, and TFCAS between 2016 and 2022. χ2 and logistic regression modeling analyzed outcomes including in-hospital stroke, death, myocardial infarction, and 30-day mortality by weekend vs weekday intervention. Backward stepwise regression was used to identify significant confounding variables and was ultimately included in each final logistic regression model. Logistic regression of outcomes was substratified by symptomatic status. Secondary multivariable analysis compared outcomes between the three revascularization methods by weekend vs weekday interventions. RESULTS: A total of 155,962 procedures were analyzed including 103,790 CEA, 31,666 TCAR, and 20,506 TFCAS. Of these, 1988 CEA, 246 TCAR, and 820 TFCAS received weekend interventions. Logistic regression demonstrated no significant differences for TCAR and increased odds of in-hospital stroke/death/myocardial infarction for CEA (odds ratio [OR]: 1.31, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.04-1.65) and TFCAS (OR: 1.46, 95% CI: 1.09-1.96) weekend procedures. Asymptomatic TCAR patients had nearly triple the odds of 30-day mortality (OR: 2.85, 95% CI: 1.06-7.68, P = .038). Similarly, odds of in-hospital death were nearly tripled for asymptomatic CEA (OR: 2.89, 95% CI: 1.30-6.43, P = .009) and asymptomatic TFCAS (OR: 2.78, 95% CI: 1.34-5.76, P = .006) patients. Secondary analysis demonstrated that CEA and TCAR had no significant differences for all outcomes. TFCAS was associated with increased odds of stroke and death compared with CEA and TCAR. CONCLUSIONS: In this observational cohort study, we found that weekend carotid revascularization is associated with increased odds of complications and mortality. Furthermore, asymptomatic weekend patients perform worse in the CEA and TFCAS procedural groups. Among the three revascularization methods, TFCAS is associated with the highest odds of perioperative stroke and mortality. As such, our findings suggest that TFCAS procedures should be avoided over the weekend in favor of CEA or TCAR. In patients who are poor candidates for CEA, TCAR offers the lowest morbidity and mortality for weekend procedures.

Predicting the future caretakers of traumatic vascular injury management via operative exposure among surgical trainees.

BACKGROUND: The management of vascular trauma requires specialized training and expertise. Although traumatic vascular injury is treated currently by both vascular and trauma surgeons in modern practice, it remains unclear who will inherit the role of managing vascular trauma in the coming decades. In this study, we examined disparities in operative experience in vascular trauma among surgical trainees across different surgical specialties. METHODS: Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education national operative log reports were collected for graduating vascular surgery residents (VSRs), vascular surgery fellows (VSFs), and general surgery residents (GSRs) from 2012 to 2022. Total operative volume for traumatic vascular injury was examined, as were the five major contributing operative domains (neck, thoracic, abdominal, peripheral, and fasciotomy). RESULTS: A total of 22,052 GSRs, 334 VSRs, and 1672 VSFs graduated over the 10-year study period. VSR had the highest vascular trauma case volume (24.9 ± 3.9 cases/5 years), followed by VSF (22.1 ± 1.5 cases/2 years) then GSR (2.4 ± 0.3 cases/5 years; P < .001). Thoracic vessel exploration/repair (0.7 cases vs 0.6 cases vs 0.0 cases), abdominal vessel exploration/repair (1.0 cases vs 0.9 cases vs 0.0 cases), neck vessel exploration/repair (4.0 cases vs 3.4 cases vs 0.2 cases), peripheral vessel exploration/repair (12.1 cases vs 9.5 cases vs 1.1 cases), and lower extremity fasciotomy for trauma (7.2 cases vs 7.6 cases vs 1.1 cases) were most frequent among the VSR and VSF groups (P < .001 each). On linear regression analysis, both VSF (+0.5 cases/y; R2 = 0.81; P < .001) and GSR (+0.1 cases/y; R2 = 0.75; P = .001) groups experienced a growth in vascular trauma volume. Contrariwise, vascular trauma volume did not change among graduating VSRs (R2 = 0.13; P = .31). CONCLUSIONS: Dedicated vascular surgical training provides the highest operative exposure to civilian vascular trauma in the United States.

The Diversity of Surgical Trainees Index identifies racial and ethnic disparities among surgical specialties.

OBJECTIVE: Racial and ethnic disparities have been well-described among surgical specialties; however, variations in underrepresented in medicine (URiM) representation between these specialties have not previously been quantified. METHODS: Data collected from Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) annual reports were used to derive the Diversity of Surgical Trainee Index (DoSTI), which was calculated as the proportion of URiM residents and fellow physicians within a given surgical specialty, relative to the overall proportion of URiM trainees within all surgical and non-surgical ACGME-accredited programs in the same academic year. RESULTS: From 2013 to 2022, a total of 108,193 ACGME-accredited residency programs trained 1,296,204 residents and fellows in the United States. Of these, 14.1% (n = 182,680) of trainees self-identified as URiM over the study period. The mean DoSTI among all surgical specialties was 0.80 (standard error, 0.01) compared with all ACGME-accredited programs. High DoSTI specialties incorporated significantly higher proportions of trainees who identify as Hispanic (8.7% vs 6.3%) and Black or African American (5.2% vs 2.5%) when compared with low DoSTI specialties (P < .0001 each). General surgery (1.06 ± 0.01), plastic surgery (traditional) (1.12 ± 0.06), vascular surgery (integrated) (0.96 ± 0.03), and vascular surgery (traditional) (0.94 ± 0.06) had the highest DoSTI (P < .05 each vs composite). On linear regression analysis, only ophthalmology (+0.01/year; R2 = 0.41; P = .019), orthopedic surgery (+0.01/year; R2 = 0.33; P = .047), otolaryngology (+0.02/year; R2 = 0.86; P < .001), and pediatric surgery (+0.06/year; R2 = 0.33; P = .048) demonstrated an annual increase in DoSTI. CONCLUSIONS: The DoSTI is a novel metric used to quantify the degree of URiM representation among surgical specialties. DoSTI has revealed specialty-specific variations in racial/ethnic minority representation among surgical training programs. This metric may be used to improve provider awareness and identify high performing DoSTI specialties to highlight best practices to ultimately recruit a more diverse surgical workforce.

Risk factors and consequences of wound complications following sartorius flap reconstruction.

OBJECTIVE: Groin wound complications are common following vascular surgery and can lead to significant patient morbidity. Sartorius muscle flap coverage may help to prevent vascular graft infection in the setting of wound dehiscence or infection. However, risk factors and consequences of wound complications following sartorius flap reconstruction remain incompletely investigated. METHODS: We retrospectively queried all patients who underwent sartorius flap reconstruction at a tertiary academic medical center. Data collected included patient demographics, medical comorbidities, surgical indication, index vascular procedure, and postoperative outcomes. The primary outcome was wound complication following sartorius flap procedure, which was defined as groin wound infection, dehiscence, or lymphocutaneous fistula. RESULTS: From 2012 to 2022, a total of 113 patients underwent sartorius flap reconstruction. Of these, 66 (58.4%) were performed after the development of a prior groin complication, and 47 (41.6%) were prophylactic. A total of 88 patients (77.9%) had a prosthetic bypass graft adjacent to the flap. Twenty-nine patients (25.7%) suffered a wound complication following sartorius flap reconstruction, including 14 (12.4%) with wound dehiscence, 13 (11.5%) with wound infection, and two (1.8%) with lymphocutaneous fistula. Patients with wound complications had a higher body mass index (28.8 vs 26.4 kg/m2; P =.03) and more frequently active smokers (86.2% vs 66.7%; P = .04). Additionally, patients with wound complications had a higher unplanned 30-day hospital readmission rates (72.4% vs 15.5%; P < .001), reintervention rates (75.9% vs 8.3%; P < .001), and re-do flap reconstruction rates (13.8% vs 2.4%; P = .02). On multivariable analysis, higher body mass index was independently associated with post-flap wound complications (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.001-1.03; P = .037). Consequently, wound complications were associated with both surgical reintervention (aOR, 35.4; 95% CI, 9.9-126.3; P < .001) and unplanned hospital readmission (aOR, 17.8; 95% CI, 5.9-54.1; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Sartorius flap reconstruction is an effective adjunct in facilitating wound healing of groin wounds. However, wound complications are common following sartorius flap reconstruction and may be associated with reintervention and unplanned hospital readmission. These data support the judicious and thoughtful utilization of sartorius flap procedures among high-risk patients.

A Multi-Institutional Study from the US ROPE Consortium Examining Factors Influencing Vascular Surgery Specialization among General Surgery Residents.

BACKGROUND: There remains a progressive projected deficit in the vascular surgery (VS) workforce for decades yet to come. Despite the rise of an expanding integrated VS residency pathway, the fellowship training model remains critical in supporting our future workforce. Therefore, it is imperative to understand the resident and program-specific factors that influence VS specialization among general surgery (GS) residents. METHODS: Data from the US Resident OPerative Experience (ROPE) Consortium, comprising 20 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited GS residency programs across the United States, were queried for resident demographics and residency program-related details. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with VS specialization. RESULTS: From 2010 to 2020, a total of 1343 graduating GS residents were included in the study. Of these, 135 (10.1%) pursued VS fellowship training. Residents pursuing VS were more frequently male (80.7% vs 62.8%, p<0.0001) and younger (median 32 vs 33 yr, p=0.03) compared with other GS residents. Racial and ethnic group, underrepresented in medicine (URiM) status, and international medical graduate (IMG) status were similar between VS and non-VS groups. Residency program-level details were also similar between groups, including program type (university vs community-based), region, size, resident volume, dedicated research experience, and National Institutes of Health funding. Dedicated vascular rotations were common among all GS programs (95.4%), and total months spent on a VS rotation (median 4 vs 4.5 mo, p=0.11) did not differ among residents pursuing VS and all other residents. The presence of a collocated traditional (5+2) VS fellowship (91.1% vs 90.4%, p=0.79) or integrated (0+5) VS residency (56.3% vs 55.0%, p=0.77) were also similar between groups. On multivariate analysis, only male sex (odds ratio 2.34, 95% confidence interval, 1.50-3.81, p<0.001) was associated with pursuing VS fellowship. Factors that did not impact VS specialization included resident age, URiM status, IMG status, program volume, dedicated research experience, or total months spent on a VS rotation. CONCLUSIONS: In this multi-institutional study, we did not find any program-specific factors that influence VS specialization among GS residents. Notably, the presence of a collocated 0+5 residency or 5+2 fellowship program did not appear to deter GS residents from pursuing VS fellowship. These data suggest that individual factors, such as mentorship, may be more impactful in recruiting GS residents to the VS specialty.

Burnout is not associated with trainee performance on the Vascular Surgery In-Training Exam.

OBJECTIVE: The Vascular Surgery In-Training Examination (VSITE) is a yearly exam evaluating vascular trainees' knowledge base. Although multiple studies have evaluated variables associated with exam outcomes, few have incorporated training program-specific metrics. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of the learning environment and burnout on VSITE performance. METHODS: Data was collected from a confidential, voluntary survey administered after the 2020 to 2022 VSITE as part of the SECOND Trial. VSITE scores were calculated as percent correct then standardized per the American Board of Surgery. Generalized estimating equations with robust standard errors and an independent correlation structure were used to evaluate trainee and program factors associated with exam outcomes. Analyses were further stratified by integrated and independent training paradigms. RESULTS: A total of 1385 trainee responses with burnout data were collected over 3 years (408 in 2020, 459 in 2021, 498 in 2022). On average, 46% of responses reported at least weekly burnout symptoms. On unadjusted analysis, burnout symptoms correlated with a 14 point drop in VSITE score (95% confidence interval [CI], -24 to -4; P = .006). However, burnout was no longer significant after adjusted analysis. Instead, higher postgraduate year level, being in a relationship, identifying as male gender with or without kids, identifying as non-Hispanic white, larger programs, and having a sense of belonging within a program were associated with higher VSITE scores. CONCLUSIONS: Despite high rates of burnout, trainees generally demonstrate resilience in gaining the medical knowledge necessary to pass the VSITE. Performance on standardized exams is associated with trainee and program characteristics, including availability of support systems and program belongingness.

Feasibility and Intermediate Results of Transcarotid Revascularization with a Prosthetic Conduit.

BACKGROUND: Transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) is a hybrid technique with excellent initial outcomes. The technical success and safety of TCAR is heavily dependent on an anatomically suitable common carotid artery (CCA). Many patients do not meet anatomic criteria and therefore are not eligible for this therapy. We sought to extend the eligibility of TCAR to patients with unfavorable CCA anatomy via the adoption of a prosthetic arterial conduit. METHODS: A single-center retrospective study of patients with critical carotid artery stenosis who underwent TCAR via a prosthetic conduit between June 2019 and October 2021 was performed. All patients in the study were considered high-risk for carotid endarterectomy based on anatomic features, such as restenosis post-carotid endarterectomy and neck radiation. Unfavorable CCA anatomy was defined as a clavicle to carotid bifurcation distance <5 cm, a CCA diameter <6 mm, and/or significant atherosclerotic disease at the intended arterial access site. The primary outcome of interest was technical success. Secondary outcomes included perioperative complications, intermediate and long-term patency, intermediate and long-term stroke and/or mortality and in-hospital length of stay. Follow-up ranged from 1 to 29 months. RESULTS: Eight patients underwent 10 TCAR procedures via a prosthetic conduit. A total of 2 procedures (20%) were performed on female patients and 8 procedures (75%) were performed on male patients. The mean age was 65 years old (standard deviation 11 years). Technical success was 100%. The 30-day ipsilateral stroke rate was 0%. The 30-day patency was 90%. There was no re-exploration for hemorrhage and 30 day mortality was 0%. CONCLUSIONS: TCAR is an excellent option for carotid artery revascularization. Unfavorable CCA anatomy has limited its applicability. TCAR via a prosthetic conduit has the potential to expand eligibility for this promising therapy.

Concerning Trends in Vascular Surgery Trainee Operative Experience in Venous Disease.

BACKGROUND: Comprehensive vascular care includes both arterial and venous disease management. However, operative training in venous disease is often significantly overshadowed by arterial procedures, despite the public health burden of acute and chronic venous disease. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the case-mix and volume of venous procedures performed by graduating integrated vascular surgery residents and fellows in the United States. METHODS: Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education national operative log reports were compiled for graduating integrated VSR (vascular surgery residency) and traditional vascular surgery fellowship (VSF) trainees from academic years 2013 to 2022. Only cases categorized as "surgeon fellow", "surgeon chief", or "surgeon junior" were included. Linear regression analysis was utilized to evaluate trends in case-mix and volume. RESULTS: Over the 10-year study period, total vascular cases increased for both VSR (mean 870.5 ± 9.3 cases, annual change +9.5 cases/year, R2 = 0.77, P < 0.001) and VSF (mean 682.1 ± 6.9 cases, annual change +6.7 cases/year, R2 = 0.85, P < 0.001) trainees. Concurrently, the proportion of venous cases in the VSR group decreased from 12.5% to 7.3% (annual change -3.7 cases/year, R2 = 0.72, P < 0.001). VSR trainees experienced an annual decrease in 4 of the top 5 venous case types performed, including venous angioplasty/stenting (-1.6 cases/year, P = 0.002), vena cava filter placement (-0.9 cases/year, P = 0.002), endoluminal ablation (-0.2 cases/year, P = 0.47), diagnostic venography (-1.7 cases/year, P < 0.001), and varicose vein treatment (-1.0 cases/year, P < 0.001). Venous cases proportions also decreased in the VSF group from 8.4% to 6.2% (annual change -2.2 cases/year, R2 = 0.54, P = 0.002). VSF trainees experienced an annual decrease in 4 of the top 5 venous case types, including venous angioplasty/stenting (-1.5 cases/year, P = 0.003), diagnostic venography (-1.2 cases/year, P < 0.001), vena cava filter placement (-0.2 cases/year, P = 0.44), endoluminal ablation (-0.6 cases/year, P < 0.001), and varicose vein treatment (-0.1 cases/year, P = 0.04). Both VSR and VSF trainee groups graduated with fewer than 5 cases for each of the following venous procedures-percutaneous mechanical thrombectomy, venous thrombolysis, open venous reconstruction, sclerotherapy, venous embolectomy, portal-systemic shunting, venous ulceration treatment, and arteriovenous malformation treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Current vascular residents and fellows have limited exposure to venous procedures, in part due to a proportional decline in venous cases. More robust venous operative experience is needed during surgical training. Further studies are needed to understand whether this discrepancy in venous and arterial training impacts career progression and patient outcomes.

Postoperative Bleeding Complications are Common Among Patients Undergoing Transcarotid Artery Revascularization.

BACKGROUND: Current practice guidelines recommend dual antiplatelet therapy for at least 30 days postoperatively after transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) to promote stent patency. However, many patients are already taking other antithrombotic medications. The optimal pharmacologic regimen in this patient population remains unclear, especially as it pertains to postoperative bleeding complications. METHODS: All TCAR procedures performed at a large academic medical center from January 1, 2017 to April 30, 2023 were identified via current procedural terminology codes and retrospectively reviewed via electronic medical records. Data were collected on patient demographics, procedural details, postoperative complications, and antithrombotic regimen. Bleeding complications were categorized as surgical and non-surgical, which included any bleeding diatheses that were not related to the neck incision, such as epistaxis, hematuria, melena, or non-cervical hematoma. RESULTS: A total of 116 TCAR procedures were performed. The 30-day incidence of bleeding complications was 12.1% (n=14), which included 8 (6.9%) symptomatic neck hematomas and 6 (5.2%) non-surgical site bleeding complications. Aside from patient age (median 72 y [66-79] vs 79 y [70.5-88], p=0.03), demographics, medical comorbidities, surgical indication, risk-related indication for TCAR, and inpatient/outpatient status were similar between patients who experienced bleeding versus no bleeding complications. Patients who developed bleeding complications experienced higher thirty-day hospital readmission (42.9% vs 9.8%, p<0.001) and reintervention rates (21.4% vs 2.0%, p<0.001) and trended towards longer postoperative length of stay (1.5 d [1-3] vs 1 [1-2] d, p=0.07). Reasons for readmission (n=16) included: epistaxis (1), hematuria (1), headache and melena (1), melena and myocardial infarction (1), fall (1), headache (1), dyspnea (5), delirium (1), diarrhea (1), atrial fibrillation (1), and neck hematoma (1); one patient did not have a readmission reason documented. Reinterventions (n=6) included: neck hematoma evacuation (2), epistaxis cauterization (1), emergent cricothyroidotomy (1), and repeat carotid stenting (1). The management of antithrombotic medications during bleeding events were highly variable amongst providers (11 patients with nothing held, one apixaban held, one aspirin held, one clopidogrel held), however, no patients suffered carotid stent thrombosis. CONCLUSIONS: Bleeding complications are common within 30 days of TCAR and frequently result in unplanned hospital readmission and reintervention. There is significant provider-level variability in management of antithrombotic medications during these events. These data highlight need for evidence-based guidelines for the optimal pharmacologic strategy for patients post-TCAR who develop bleeding complications.

Impact of Wound Closure Technique on Surgical Site Infection After Lower Extremity Bypass Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infections (SSIs) are among the most common complications after lower extremity bypass (LEB). Both patient and hospital-related factors have been associated with SSI after LEB; however, the impact of surgical closure technique on SSI incidence remains unclear. METHODS: Institutional electronic medical records (EMRs) were retrospectively queried for all LEB procedures performed from 2018 to 2022. Data were collected on patient demographics, medical comorbidities, operative details, wound closure techniques, and postoperative outcomes. Closure techniques included skin staples, absorbable monofilament (Monocryl), nonabsorbable monofilament (Nylon), or left open to heal by secondary intention. Logistic regression analysis was utilized to identify risk factors and calculate adjusted odds ratios (ORs) for postoperative SSI. RESULTS: A total of 517 patients underwent LEB surgery over the study period. SSI was diagnosed in 120 (23.2%) patients over a median follow-up period of 1.5 years. The most common SSI locations were groin incision (40.0%), saphenectomy (31.7%), and leg incision (19.2%). The median onset of SSI was 18.5 d (interquartile range [IQR] 11-28 d) post-LEB surgery. Patients with SSI had higher body mass index (BMI) (28.2 [IQR 24.2-33.5] vs. 26.6 [23.1-31.5] kg/m2, P = 0.03) compared with non-SSI patients. Patient age, sex, and medical comorbidities were otherwise similar between groups. There were no differences in closure technique (79.2% vs. 78.1% staples, 18.3% vs. 19.7% Monocryl, 0.8% vs. 1.8% Nylon, 1.7% vs. 0.5% open; P = 0.53) in SSI versus non-SSI groups. On multivariate analysis, patient BMI (OR 1.04 per unit, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.08, P = 0.02), reoperative field (OR 1.81, 95% CI 1.00-3.25, P = 0.03), and active smoking (OR 2.72, 95% CI 1.12-6.59, P = 0.048) were independently associated with increased SSI incidence. Postoperative SSI resulted in prolonged hospital length of stay (LOS) (7 vs. 6 days, P = 0.04), unplanned hospital readmission (49.2% vs. 12.3%, P < 0.001), and reoperation rates (64.7% vs. 8.1%, P < 0.001). Bypass graft infection rates were also higher among patients suffering postoperative SSI (9.2% vs. 0.0%, P < 0.001). On subset analysis of patients at increased risk of postoperative SSI, as found on multivariate modeling, there were no differences in closure technique between SSI and no SSI groups. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides insights on wound closure techniques and postoperative SSI made available through granular, operative data that are not found in large database analyses. Surgical wound closure technique was not associated with postoperative SSI after LEB surgery, even among patients at increased risk of infection. These data support individualization of wound closure techniques among patients undergoing LEB surgery.

A national analysis of vascular surgery resident operative experience in peripheral artery disease.

BACKGROUND: Endovascular and hybrid interventions have played an increasingly prominent role in the treatment of peripheral arterial disease (PAD) in the past decade. This shift has prompted concerns about the adequacy of open surgical training for current surgical residents. Moreover, the recent Best Surgical Therapy in Patients With Critical Limb Ischemia trial has further emphasized the importance of open surgical techniques in the treatment of peripheral arterial disease. The purpose of this study was to examine national temporal trends in peripheral operative volume among integrated vascular surgery residents. METHODS: Data was obtained from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education national data reports for integrated vascular surgery residents. Case volumes for surgeon chief or surgeon junior cases were collected from academic years 2012 to 2013 and 2021 to 2022. Trends in case-mix and volume were evaluated using linear regression analysis. RESULTS: The mean total vascular operative volume increased from 851.2 to 914.3 cases among graduating chief residents, with an annual growth of 8.5 ± 1.7 cases/year (R2 = 0.77; P < .0001). Major vascular case volume also increased at a rate of 5.7 ± 1.2 cases/year (R2 = 0.74; P < .001). Among operative categories, peripheral cases were the most frequent (n = 232.2 [26.6%]) and demonstrated the greatest annual growth (+8.0 ± 0.8 cases/year, R2 = 0.93; P < .001). No changes were seen in volume of open peripheral cases, including suprainguinal bypass (+0.1 ± 0.2 cases/year; R2 = 0.08; P = .40) or femoropopliteal bypass procedures (-0.1 ± 0.2 cases/year; R2 = 0.17; P = .20). Infrapopliteal bypass (+0.4 ± 0.1 cases/year; R2 = 0.48; P = .006), iliac/femoral endarterectomy (+1.3 ± 0.2 cases/year; R2 = 0.82; P < .001), and leg thromboembolectomy (+0.4 ± 0.1 cases/year; R2 = 0.64; P < .001) all demonstrated annual growth. For endovascular peripheral cases, aortoiliac revascularization (+3.4 ± 0.3 cases/year; R2 = 0.94; P < .001), femoropopliteal revascularization (+5.4 ± 0.2 cases/year; R2 = 0.98; P < .001), and tibioperoneal revascularization (+2.0 ± 0.2 cases/year; R2 = 0.92; P < .001) all increased in volume. Lower extremity amputations, including above-knee amputation (+0.6 ± 0.2 cases/year; R2 = 0.65; P < .001) and below-knee amputation (+0.9 ± 0.2 cases/year; R2 = 0.72; P < .001) also demonstrated an increase in volume. CONCLUSIONS: Current graduating residents have higher open and endovascular case volumes for peripheral artery disease on a national level, despite the increasing popularity of endovascular techniques. Further studies are needed to identify how these trends may impact current vascular surgery milestones. These trends may also influence the rising interest in competency-based training programs.

Effect of Postoperative Stroke Timing on Perioperative Mortality After Carotid Revascularization.

BACKGROUND: In-hospital stroke (IHS) has been associated with worse outcomes than out-of-hospital stroke (OHS) due to delays in diagnosis and treatment. A paucity of studies exists comparing the timing of postoperative stroke after carotid revascularization. We aimed to study the effect of IHS versus OHS on postoperative mortality in carotid revascularization patients in a large-scale national database. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent carotid artery stenting (CAS) and carotid endarterectomy (CEA) between 2011 and 2018 in the American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. Statistical analysis included chi-squared test and multivariable logistic regression. Patients were divided based on postoperative stroke timing (no stroke, IHS, or OHS) as well as procedure type (CEA or CAS). RESULTS: A total of 31,304 carotid revascularizations were performed with 420 (1.3%) IHSs and 207 (0.7%) OHSs. On adjusted analysis, there was significantly higher perioperative mortality with both IHS [odds ratio (OR): 19.75, 95% confidence interval (CI): 13.61-28.18, P < 0.001] and OHS [OR: 29.73, 95% CI: 18.76-45.82, P < 0.001]. There was no difference in mortality after OHS versus IHS [OR: 1.51, 95% CI: 0.89-2.55, P = 0.161]. CONCLUSIONS: Any postoperative stroke after carotid revascularization significantly increased the odds of 30-day mortality. In contrast to previous studies demonstrating worse outcomes after IHS than OHS, we observed similar 30-day mortality between the 2 stroke categories. Improved follow-up and early recognition with rescue within carotid revascularization patients compared to the general population could potentially contribute to these results. However, overall mortality remains high for any postoperative stroke following carotid revascularization, emphasizing the importance of vigilant in-hospital monitoring and follow-up even after discharging the patient.

In-Hospital Outcomes of Urgent, Early, or Late Revascularization for Symptomatic Carotid Artery Stenosis.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Advancements in carotid revascularization have produced promising outcomes in patients with symptomatic carotid artery stenosis. However, the optimal timing of revascularization procedures after symptomatic presentation remains unclear. The purpose of this study is to compare in-hospital outcomes of transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR), transfemoral carotid stenting (TFCAS), or carotid endarterectomy (CEA) performed within different time intervals after most recent symptoms. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of United States patients in the vascular quality initiative. All carotid revascularizations performed for symptomatic carotid artery stenosis between September 2016 and November 2019 were included. Procedures were categorized as urgent (0-2 days after most recent symptom), early (3-14 days), or late (15-180 days). The primary outcome of interest was in-hospital stroke and death. Secondary outcomes include in-hospital stroke, death, and transient ischemic attacks. Multivariable logistic regression was used to compare outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 18 643 revascularizations were included: 2006 (10.8%) urgent, 7423 (39.8%) early, and 9214 (49.42%) late. Patients with TFCAS had the highest rates of stroke/death at all timing cohorts (urgent: 4.0% CEA, 6.9% TFCAS, 6.5% TCAR, P=0.018; early: 2.5% CEA, 3.8% TFCAS, 2.9% TCAR, P=0.054; late: 1.6% CEA, 2.8% TFCAS, 2.3% TCAR, P=0.003). TFCAS also had increased odds of in-hospital stroke/death compared with CEA in all 3 groups (urgent adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.7 [95% CI, 1.0-2.9] P=0.03; early aOR, 1.6 [95% CI, 1.1-2.4] P=0.01; and late aOR, 1.9 [95% CI, 1.2-3.0] P=0.01). TCAR and CEA had comparable odds of in-hospital stroke/death in all 3 groups (urgent aOR, 1.9 [95% CI, 0.9-4], P=0.10), (early aOR, 1.1 [95% CI, 0.7-1.7], P=0.66), (late aOR, 1.5 [95% CI, 0.9-2.3], P=0.08). CONCLUSIONS: CEA remains the safest method of revascularization within the urgent period. Among revascularization performed outside of the 48 hours, TCAR and CEA have comparable outcomes.

In-hospital complications and long-term outcomes associated with timing of carotid endarterectomy.

OBJECTIVE: Carotid revascularization performed within 2 weeks of symptoms has proven to reduce risk of recurrent stroke in patients with symptomatic carotid artery stenosis. However, the optimal timing of revascularization within the 2-week window has yet to be determined. The objective of this study was to perform a comprehensive analysis of in-hospital and long-term outcomes of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) performed within different time intervals after most recent symptoms. METHODS: We analyzed 2003 to 2016 data from the Vascular Quality Initiative Vascular Implant Surveillance and Interventional Outcomes Network. Only revascularizations performed for symptomatic carotid artery stenosis were included. Procedures were categorized as urgent (0-2 days from latest symptom), early (3-14 days), or late (15-180 days). The primary in-hospital outcome was stroke/death. The primary long-term outcomes of interest were 5-year recurrent ipsilateral stroke/death. Multivariable logistic regression, Kaplan-Meier analysis, and Cox regression were utilized to compare outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 18,970 revascularizations were included: 1130 (6.0%) urgent, 4643 (24.5%) early, and 13,197 (69.6%) late. Earlier CEA had increased odds of in-hospital stroke/death compared with late CEA (urgent: adjusted odds ratio, 1.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-2.8; P = .001; early: adjusted odds ratio, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.3-2.2; P < .001). No differences were seen in 5-year risk of stroke/death (urgent: adjusted hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.79-1.15; P = .592; early: adjusted hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.87-1.07; P = .928). CONCLUSIONS: Urgent and early CEA were associated with increased perioperative risk without difference in 5-year outcomes compared with late CEA. Short-term recurrent stroke prevention could not be assessed. Updated population-based studies comparing recurrent stroke prevention with urgent or early revascularization vs best medical management are warranted.

Differences in Perioperative Outcomes after Carotid Revascularization between White and Non-white Patients.

BACKGROUND: Racial disparities in carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) continue to persist. We aimed to provide a large-scale analysis of racial disparities in perioperative outcomes of carotid revascularization in a nationally representative cohort of patients, with sub-analyses stratifying by procedure type and symptomatic status. METHODS: We studied all patients undergoing carotid revascularization between 2011 and 2018 in the American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) Database. Univariate methods were used to compare patients' demographic and medical characteristics. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to compare adjusted perioperative outcomes between white patients (WP) and non-white patients (NWP). Sub-analysis was performed stratifying by method of revascularization and symptomatic status. RESULTS: A total of 31,356 carotid revascularizations were performed in 26,550 (84.7%) white patients and 4,806 (15.3%) non-white patients. On adjusted analysis, NWP had increased odds of stroke (OR:1.2, 95%CI:1.1-1.5, P = 0.0496), unplanned return to the OR (OR:1.4, 95%CI:1.1-1.6, P < 0.001) and restenosis (OR:2.6, 95%CI:1.7-3.9, P < 0.001). On sub-analysis, NWP undergoing CAS had increased odds of stroke/death (OR:2.2, 95%CI:1.1-4.3, P = 0.025), stroke (OR:2.9, 95%CI:1.3-6.0, P = 0.007), and stroke/TIA (OR:2.1, 95%CI:1.0-4.2, P = 0.025). NWP undergoing CEA had increased odds of unplanned return to the OR (OR:1.4, 95%CI:1.2-1.6, P < 0.001) and restenosis (OR:2.7, 95%CI:1.7-4.0, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: NWP had higher rates of 30-day stroke, driven primarily by higher rates of perioperative stroke/death in NWP undergoing CAS. NWP undergoing CEA did not have higher rates of stroke/death after adjusted analysis, although they had higher rates of unplanned return to OR and restenosis. Upon stratification for symptomatic status, the stroke/death rate between NWP and WP was shown to be non-significant.

Performance of Carotid Revascularization Procedures as Modified by Sex.

BACKGROUND: Current recommendations on carotid revascularization postulate that women have both increased perioperative risks, such as stroke and death, as well as reduced benefit from intervention. These recommendations do not include data on transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR). This study strives to compare safety and benefits of TCAR, TFCAS (Transfemoral Carotid Artery Stenting), and CEA (Carotid Endarterectomy) with regard to patient sex. METHODS: We performed retrospective analysis of the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) CEA and stenting registries, as well as TCAR Surveillance Project data. We compared outcomes after TCAR, TFCAS, and CEA based on sex. The primary outcome was the rate of in-hospital stroke or death. Secondary outcomes included in-hospital stroke, death, transient ischemic attack (TIA), myocardial infarction (MI), stroke/death/MI, stroke/TIA, and recurrent ipsilateral stroke and/or death at 1-year of follow-up. RESULTS:  A total of 75,538 patients were included, of which 28,960 (38.3%) were female and 46,578 (61.7%) were male. TFCAS females had more than 2 times higher odds of stroke/death (OR:2.85, 95%CI: 2.21-3.67, P < 0.001) and stroke/death/MI (OR:2.23, 95%CI:1.75-2.83, P < 0.001) when compared to CEA females. Odds of TIA were also higher in both TFCAS females (OR:2.01, 95%CI:1.19-3.42, P = 0.010) and TCAR females (OR:1.91, 95%CI:1.09-3.35, P = .023) when compared to CEA females. However, only TFCAS females experienced increased odds of stroke/TIA (OR:1.96, 95%CI:1.45-2.65, P < 0.001) when compared to CEA females. TFCAS males had almost twice the odds of stroke/death (OR:1.74, 95%CI:1.39-2.16, P < 0.001) and 44% higher odds of stroke/death/MI (OR:1.44, 95%CI:1.19-1.75, P < 0.001), and more than 3-times increased odds of death (OR:3.45, 95%CI:2.53-4.71, P < 0.001) when compared to CEA males. Odds of in-hospital stroke were comparable between TFCAS and CEA after adjusting for covariates. TCAR males have half the odds of MI when compared to CEA males (OR:0.52, 95%CI:0.34-0.80, P = 0.003). At 1-year TCAR had comparable risk of stroke/death while TFCAS had increased risk of stroke/death when compared to CEA among both males and females. CONCLUSION: TCAR performed similarly to CEA in both sexes regardless of symptomatic status. Stroke/death and stroke/death/MI rates were similar in symptomatic and asymptomatic males and females treated by CEA or TCAR. The 1-year outcomes of TCAR were also comparable to CEA in both sexes. It seems that TCAR may be a safe alternative to CEA particularly in women when surgical risk prohibits CEA and while TFCAS is associated with substantial adverse outcomes.

Effects of timing on in-hospital and one-year outcomes after transcarotid artery revascularization.

OBJECTIVE: The current recommendations are to perform carotid endarterectomy within 2 weeks of symptoms for maximum long-term stroke prevention, although urgent carotid endarterectomy within 48 hours has been associated with increased perioperative stroke. With the development and rapid adoption of transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR), we decided to study the effect of timing on the outcomes after TCAR. METHODS: The Vascular Quality Initiative database was searched for symptomatic patients who had undergone TCAR from September 2016 to November 2019. These patients were stratified by the interval to TCAR after symptom onset: urgent, within 48 hours; early, 3 to 14 days; and late, >14 days. The primary outcome was the in-hospital rate of combined stroke and death (stroke/death), evaluated using logistic regression analysis. The secondary outcome was the 1-year rate of recurrent ipsilateral stroke and mortality, evaluated using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. RESULTS: A total of 2608 symptomatic patients who had undergone TCAR were included. The timing was urgent for 144 patients (5.52%), early for 928 patients (35.58%), and late for 1536 patients (58.90%). Patients undergoing urgent intervention had an increased risk of in-hospital stroke/death, which was driven primarily by an increased risk of stroke. No differences were seen for in-hospital death. On adjusted analysis, urgent intervention resulted in a threefold increased risk of stroke (odds ratio [OR], 2.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-6.2; P = .01) and a threefold increased risk of stroke/death (OR, 2.9; 95% CI, 1.3-6.4; P = .01) compared with late intervention. Patients undergoing early intervention had comparable risks of stroke (OR, 1.3; 95% CI, 0.7-2.3; P = .40) and stroke/death (OR, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.7-2.1; P = .48) compared with late intervention. On subset analysis, the type of presenting symptoms was an effect modifier. Patients presenting with stroke and those presenting with transient ischemic attack or amaurosis fugax both had an increased risk of stroke/death when undergoing urgent compared with late TCAR (OR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.1-6.6; P = .04; and OR, 4.1; 95% CI, 1.1-15.0; P = .03, respectively). However only patients presenting with transient ischemic attack or amaurosis fugax had experienced an increased risk of stroke with urgent compared with late TCAR (OR, 5.0; 95% CI, 1.4-17.5; P < .01). At 1 year of follow-up, no differences were seen in the incidence of recurrent ipsilateral stroke (urgent, 0.7%; early, 0.2%; late, 0.1%; P = .13) or postdischarge mortality (urgent, 0.7%; early, 1.6%; late, 1.8%; P = .71). CONCLUSIONS: We found that TCAR had a reduced incidence of stroke when performed 48 hours after symptom onset. Urgent TCAR within 48 hours of the onset of stroke was associated with a threefold increased risk of in-hospital stroke/death, with no added benefit for ≤1 year after intervention. Further studies are needed on long-term outcomes of TCAR stratified by the timing of the procedure.

Poststent ballooning during transcarotid artery revascularization.

BACKGROUND: Poststent ballooning/angioplasty (post-SB) have been shown to increase the risk of stroke risk after transfemoral carotid artery stenting. With the advancement of transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) with dynamic cerebral blood flow reversal, we aimed to study the impact of post-SB during TCAR. METHODS: Patients undergoing TCAR in the Vascular Quality Initiative between September 2016 and May 2019 were included and were divided into three groups: those who received prestent deployment angioplasty only (pre-SB, reference group), those who received poststent deployment ballooning only (post-SB), and those who received both prestent and poststent deployment ballooning (prepost-SB). Patients who did not receive any angioplasty during their procedure (n = 367 [6.7%]) were excluded because these represent a different group of patients with less complex lesions than those requiring angioplasty. Primary outcome was in-hospital stroke or death. Analysis was performed using univariable and multivariable logistic regression models. RESULTS: Of 5161 patients undergoing TCAR, 34.7% had pre-SB only, 25% had post-SB only, and 40.3% had both (prepost-SB). No differences in the rates of in-hospital and 30-day stroke, death, and stroke/death were observed among the three groups; in-hospital stroke/death in the pre-SB group was 1.4% (n = 25), post-SB 1.2% (n = 16), and prepost-SB 1.4% (n = 29; P = .92). However, patients undergoing post-SB and prepost-SB had higher rates of in-hospital transient ischemic attacks (TIA) (post-SB, 0.9%; prepost-SB, 1% vs pre-SB, 0.2%, P < .01) and postprocedural hypotension (16.6% and 16.8% vs 13.1%, respectively; P < .001). Post-SB also had longer operative times, as well as flow reversal and fluoroscopy times. On multivariable analysis, no association was seen between post-SB and the primary outcome of in-hospital stroke/death (post-SB odds ratio [OR], 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.44-1.73; prepost-SB OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.57-1.70). Similarly, no significant differences were noted in terms of postprocedural hemodynamic instability and 30-day outcomes. However, post-SB and prepost-SB were associated with four times the odds of in-hospital TIA compared with pre-SB alone (post-SB OR, 4.24 [95% CI, 1.51-11.8]; prepost-SB OR, 4.76 [95% CI, 1.53-14.79]; P = .01). Symptomatic patients had higher rates of in-hospital stroke/death compared with their asymptomatic counterparts; however, there was no significant interaction between symptomatic status and ballooning in predicting the primary outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Post-SB was used in 65.3% of TCAR patients. This maneuver seems to be safe without an increase in the odds of postoperative in-hospital stroke/death. However, the increased rates of TIA associated with post-SB requires further investigation.

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Transcarotid Artery Revascularization with Dynamic Flow Reversal Versus Transfemoral Carotid Artery Stenting and Carotid Endarterectomy.

BACKGROUND: Transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TFCAS) was introduced as a less invasive option for carotid revascularization in patients at high risk for complications from carotid endarterectomy (CEA). The increased perioperative stroke and death risk of TFCAS has however prevented TFCAS from widespread acceptance as an alternative to CEA in high-risk patients. Recent research suggests that transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) may be associated with a low stroke and death risk and potentially meet the needs of patients at high surgical risk. We aimed to estimate the 30-day risk of stroke or death of TCAR and compare it to TFCAS and CEA. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Scopus for studies of patients treated with TCAR. Meta-analysis was conducted when appropriate. A logistic-normal random-effects model with logit transformation was used to estimate the pooled event rates after TCAR. Pooled Mantel-Haenszel odds ratios (ORs) of events comparing TCAR to TFCAS and CEA were calculated using a fixed-effects model. Heterogeneity among studies was quantified with the chi-squared statistic of the likelihood ratio (LR) test that compares the random-effects and fixed-effects models. RESULTS: Nine nonrandomized studies evaluating 4012 patients who underwent TCAR were included. The overall 30-day risks after TCAR were stroke/death, 1.89% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.50, 2.37); stroke, 1.34% (95% CI: 1.02,1.75); death, 0.76% (95% CI: 0.56, 1.08); myocardial infarction (MI), 0.60% (95% CI: 0.23, 1.59); stroke/death/MI, 2.20% (95% CI: 1.31, 3.69); cranial nerve injury (CNI), 0.31% (95% CI: 0.12, 0.83). The failure rate of TCAR was 1.27% (95% CI: 0.32, 4.92). Two nonrandomized studies suggested that TCAR was associated with lower risk of stroke and death as compared with TFCAS (1.33% vs. 2.55%, OR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.36, 0.74 and 0.76% vs. 1.46%, OR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.32, 0.84, respectively). Four nonrandomized studies suggested that TCAR was associated with a lower risk of CNI (0.54% and 1.84%, OR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.36, 0.74) than CEA, but no statistically significant difference in the 30-day risk of stroke, stroke/death, or stroke/death/MI. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing TCAR with dynamic flow reversal for carotid stenosis the 30-day risk of stroke or death was low. The perioperative stroke/death rate of TCAR was similar to that of CEA while CNI risk was lower. Larger prospective studies are needed to account for confounding factors and provide higher certainty.

Impact of Integrated Vascular Surgery Residency on General Surgery Resident and Vascular Fellow Operative Volume: A National Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The impact of integrated vascular surgery (VS) residency (0 + 5) programs on general surgery (GS) resident and VS fellow (5 + 2) operative volume has not been investigated on a national scale. METHODS: Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) case logs were reviewed for GS resident, VS resident, and VS fellow operative volume from 2001-2021. Integrated VS resident data was available from 2012-2021, corresponding with the introduction of the 0 + 5 paradigm. Trends in operative volume were evaluated via linear regression analysis. RESULTS: The national cohort of chief GS resident graduates increased from 1005 to 1357 per year. Total operative volume also increased from 932 to 1039 cases (+7.4 cases/yr, R2 = .80, P < .0001) among GS residents. Major vascular cases decreased among GS residents from 138 to 101 cases (-2.4 cases/yr, R2 = .58, P < .0001) with a decrease in proportion of chief-level vascular cases from 30.4% to 11.9% (-1.0%/yr, R2 = .92, P < .0001). Palliative procedures (amputations and hemodialysis access) comprised a significant proportion of GS cases (median 44.7%). Concurrently, integrated VS graduates increased from 11 to 37 per year, with an increase in major vascular case volume from 506 to 658 cases (+18.4 cases/yr, R2 = .63, P = .01). Total VS fellow major case volume also increased from 369 to 444 cases (+3.5 cases/yr, R2 = .73, P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of the 0 + 5 intgrated VS residency paradigm has correlated with a significant decrease in GS operative experience in major vascular procedures on a national level. Traditional VS fellow case volume does not appear to be impacted by 0 + 5 integrated residents. Further analysis with program-level data may help to explain the causative relationship of these findings.