Carotid endarterectomy is safe for octogenarians.

BACKGROUND: Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) has demonstrated superior results in stroke risk reduction for patients with symptomatic and asymptomatic high-grade carotid stenosis. However, this benefit has long been questioned for the elderly and high-risk populations. In the present study, we aimed to provide high-volume, single-institution data with long-term follow-up examining the risk factors for postoperative stroke and stroke-free survival stratified by age for asymptomatic and symptomatic patients undergoing CEA. METHODS: A single-institution retrospective review of 840 consecutive patients who had undergone CEA from 2011 to 2018 was performed, inclusive of both symptomatic and asymptomatic operative indications. The primary end point was perioperative stroke within 30 days of surgery. The secondary end points were late stroke, death, and myocardial infarction. Patients aged >80 years were compared with those aged <80 years to examine freedom from stroke and death. Statistically significant differences were defined as those with P < .05. RESULTS: A total of 840 patients were evaluated with a median follow-up of 416 ± 1244 days. Of the 840 patients, 499 (59%) were men, and 604 (72%) were White. The mean age was 72 ± 9 years, with 202 (24%) aged ≥80 years. CEA was performed for symptomatic disease in 305 patients (36%), of whom 143 (47%) had had strokes and 162 (53%) had had transient ischemic attacks. The overall 30-day postoperative stroke rate was 1.0% (eight patients; 0.6% for asymptomatic and 1.6% for symptomatic; P = .147). Compared with younger patients, octogenarians had had a similar stroke rate after CEA (1.5% vs 0.8%; P = .407). Hispanic race was an independent risk factor for postoperative stroke. White race and preoperative statin use both appeared to be protective. Kaplan-Meier survival curves demonstrated decreased a 5-year stroke-free survival in patients aged ≥80 years (P = .031). However, overall, the estimated 5-year survival was similar to the U.S. general population across both age groups. CONCLUSIONS: CEA for octogenarians is safe and effective for both symptomatic and asymptomatic populations with excellent 30-day outcomes and long-term survival mirroring that of the general population.

Community-wide feasibility of the Lower Extremity Amputation Protocol amongst vascular amputees.

BACKGROUND: The Lower Extremity Amputation Protocol (LEAP) is a multidisciplinary enhanced recovery after surgery pathway for vascular amputees. The objective of this study was to examine feasibility and outcomes of community-wide implementation of LEAP. METHODS: LEAP was implemented at three safety net hospitals for patients with peripheral artery disease or diabetes requiring major lower extremity amputation. Patients who underwent LEAP (LEAP) were matched 1:1 with retrospective controls (NOLEAP) on hospital location, need for initial guillotine amputation, and final amputation type (above- vs below-knee). Primary endpoint was postoperative hospital length of stay (PO-LOS). RESULTS: A total of 126 amputees (63 LEAP and 63 NOLEAP) were included with no difference between baseline demographics and co-morbidities between the groups. After matching, both groups had the same prevalence of amputation level (76% below-knee vs 24% above-knee). LEAP patients had shorter duration of postamputation bed rest (P = .003) and were more likely to receive limb protectors (100% vs 40%; P ≤ .001), prosthetic counseling (100% vs 14%; P ≤ .001), perioperative nerve blocks (75% vs 25%; P ≤ .001), and postoperative gabapentin (79% vs 50%; P ≤ .001). Compared with NOLEAP, LEAP patients were more likely to be discharged to an acute rehabilitation facility (70% vs 44%; P = .009) and less likely to be discharged to a skilled nursing facility (14% vs 35%; P = .009). The median PO-LOS for the overall cohort was 4 days. LEAP patients had a shorter median PO-LOS (3 [interquartile range, 2-5] vs 5 [interquartile range, 4-9] days; P < .001). On multivariable logistic regression, LEAP decreased the odds of a PO-LOS of ≥4 days by 77% (odds ratio, 0.23; 95% confidence interval, 0.09-0.63). Overall, LEAP patients were significantly less likely to have phantom limb pain (5% vs 21%; P = .02) and were more likely to receive a prosthesis (81% vs 40%; P ≤ .001). In a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model, LEAP was associated with an 84% reduction in time to receipt of prosthesis (hazard ratio, 0.16; 95% confidence interval, 0.085-0.303; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Community wide implementation of LEAP significantly improved outcomes for vascular amputees demonstrating that utilization of core ERAS principles in vascular patients leads to decreased PO-LOS and improved pain control. LEAP also affords this socioeconomically disadvantaged population a greater opportunity to receive a prosthesis and return to the community as a functional ambulator.

Comparison of endoscopic treatment modalities for Barrett's neoplasia.

BACKGROUND: There are few data comparing endoscopic treatment outcomes for Barrett's esophagus (BE). OBJECTIVE: To compare treatment outcomes in BE patients treated with radiofrequency ablation (RFA), RFA after EMR, and porfimer sodium photodynamic therapy (Ps-PDT). DESIGN: Retrospective, observational study. SETTING: Single tertiary center between 2001 and 2013. PATIENTS: A total of 342 BE patients treated with RFA (n = 119), EMR+RFA (n = 98), and Ps-PDT (n = 125). MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Rates of complete remission of intestinal metaplasia (CRIM), BE recurrence, and adverse events. RESULTS: Baseline BE high-grade dysplasia (HGD) and adenocarcinoma were more common in the Ps-PDT group (89%) compared with the EMR-RFA (70%) and RFA (37%) groups. At a median follow-up of 14.2 months, 173 patients (50.6%) achieved CRIM. CRIM was significantly more common in Ps-PDT patients compared with RFA (P < .001) and EMR-RFA (P < .001) patients on multivariable analysis. In patients who achieved CRIM, the rates of subsequent BE recurrence were relatively similar among the 3 groups. Although the rates of bleeding were similar, strictures were less common in RFA patients (2.4%) compared with EMR-RFA (13.3%, P = .001) and Ps-PDT (10.4%, P =.043) patients. CONCLUSION: This study of endoscopic treatment for Barrett's dysplasia and neoplasia found that complete remission was achieved more often and more rapidly after Ps-PDT with similar disease recurrence rates compared with EMR or RFA. Adverse events were more common after EMR and Ps-PDT. Further studies are required to determine which ablation and resection techniques are ideally suited for each BE patient.

Barrett's Esophagus in Obese Patient Post-Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: a Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: Barrett's esophagus (BE) is a relative contraindication for sleeve gastrectomy, but not for Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RNY). However, studies assessing the effect of RNY on BE are limited. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies of obese patients who also had BE and underwent RNY. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of literature using multiple search engines from inception to January 2021. The primary outcome of interest was the rate of BE resolution post-RNY. This was reported as a proportion with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Publication bias was assessed by funnels plots and the classic fail test. Forest plots were used to report pooled effect estimates. Heterogeneity was assessed using I2 and p-value. RESULTS: The final search included 4389 citations, 16 were reviewed in full text, and 9 were included in the final analysis, including 7 manuscripts and 2 recent meeting abstracts. In the 9 studies, 104 patients had BE and underwent RNY. On random effect modeling, the rate of complete remission of intestinal metaplasia (CRIM) was 50% [95%CI: 40-61%], p = 0.937, I2 = 4.6%, Q = 8.4, p = 0.396. The pooled rate of BE improvement was 52% [95%CI: 37-66%], p = 0.8, I2 = 16.5%, Q = 4.8, p = 0.31. Complete remission of dysplasia (CRD) was also reported in 4 of 6 patients. CONCLUSION: Despite the limited data, a majority of patient with BE who underwent RNY for weight loss had remission or improvement in BE on follow-up endoscopy. However, a significant minority had no change to BE on follow-up.

Primary arterial closure after carotid endarterectomy is a safe and expeditious technique in appropriately selected patients.

BACKGROUND: Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) remains a safe and durable operation for both symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid stenosis, however conflicting evidence exists on the benefit of patch angioplasty and its effects on post-operative outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients undergoing CEA from 2011 to 2018 was performed. RESULTS: Of 851 patients, primary closure was performed in 277 (33%). Patients with primary closure were older (74 vs 72, p = 0.001), symptomatic (39% vs 34%, p = 0.024), and male (69% vs 31% p < 0.001), with a higher incidence of diabetes mellitus (47% vs 39%, p = 0.046) and ESRD (4% vs 2%, p = 0.015). Restenosis rates were similar (7% vs 8%, p = 0.67). Operative time was shorter for primary closure (87 ± 28 vs 102 ± 26 min, p < 0.001). There were no differences in 30-day ipsilateral stroke rates (1% vs 1%, p = 0.51) or stroke-free survival. CONCLUSIONS: Primary arterial closure is safe and expeditious in appropriately selected high-risk patients.

Lower extremity amputation protocol: a pilot enhanced recovery pathway for vascular amputees.

Vascular patients, an inherently older, frail population, account for >80% of major lower extremity amputations (transtibial or transfemoral) in the United States. Retrospective data have shown that early physical therapy and discharge to an acute rehabilitation facility decreases the postoperative length of stay (LOS) and expedites ambulation. In the present study, we sought to determine whether patients treated with the lower extremity amputation protocol (LEAP) will have improved outcomes. We performed a nonrandomized prospective study of vascular patients undergoing an amputation from January 2019 to February 2020. Patients who were nonambulatory or had undergone a previous contralateral major amputation were excluded. LEAP is a multidisciplinary team approach to the perioperative care of amputees using an outlined protocol. The prospective patients were compared with historic controls treated before the initiation of LEAP (January 2016 to December 2018). The primary outcomes included the postoperative LOS, time to receipt of a prosthesis, and time to ambulation. Of the 141 included patients, 130 were in the retrospective group and 11 in the LEAP group. The demographics and comorbidities were similar. All 11 LEAP patients had undergone a below-the-knee amputation, with 1 requiring revision to an above-the-knee amputation. Of the 130 retrospective patients, 122 (94%) had undergone a below-the-knee amputation, with 1 requiring revision to an above-the-knee amputation. The LEAP patients were more likely to be discharged to acute rehabilitation (100% vs 27%; P < .001), receive a prosthesis (100% vs 45%; P < .001), and ambulate with the prosthesis (100% vs 43%; P < .001). The LEAP patients had received physical therapy 2 days sooner than had the retrospective controls (P = .006) with a shorter postoperative LOS (3 days vs 6 days; P < .001). Of the patients who had received their prosthesis, the LEAP patients had received their prosthesis, on average, 2 months sooner than had the retrospective cohort (81 ± 39 days vs 137 ± 97 days, respectively; P = .002) and had ambulated with their prosthesis sooner (86 ± 53 days vs 146 ± 104 days, respectively; P = .002). No differences were found in the incidence of surgical site complications or unplanned readmissions between the two groups. The results from the present pilot study have demonstrated that the use of LEAP can significantly decrease postoperative LOS and expedite the time to independent ambulation with a prosthesis for vascular patients undergoing a major lower extremity amputation. These findings suggest a powerful ability to bridge the healthcare gap for this high-risk, underserved, and ethnically diverse population using a disease-specific standardized protocol.

Outcomes of major lower extremity amputations n dysvascular patients: Room for improvement.

OBJECTIVES: Dysvascular patients account for >80% of major amputations in the US. We sought to determine if early mobilization and discharge disposition decreased post-operative hospital length of stay (PO-LOS) and expedited independent ambulation. METHODS: A retrospective review of dysvascular patients undergoing major amputations was performed. Primary outcomes included PO-LOS, discharge disposition, and days to ambulation. RESULTS: 130 patients were included. Patients evaluated by Physical Therapy (PT) within 1 day of formal amputation had decreased PO-LOS (5.6 vs 6.5 days, p = 0.029). Patients discharged to rehab had a shorter PO-LOS (4 days) than those discharged to SNF or home (8 and 5 days, respectively; p = 0.008). Time to ambulation was shorter for patients discharged to rehab (109 days vs home = 153 days; SNF = 175 days; p = 0.033). CONCLUSION: Modifiable factors, including early PT and rehab placement, decreased PO-LOS and expedited time to ambulation. A need exists for a standardized multidisciplinary team approach to improve outcomes.