Neck radiation is not associated with increased risk of perioperative adverse events after transcarotid artery revascularization or transfemoral carotid artery stenting.

OBJECTIVE: It is unclear whether patients with prior neck radiation therapy (RT) are at high risk for carotid artery stenting (CAS). We aimed to delineate 30-day perioperative and 3-year long-term outcomes in patients treated for radiation-induced stenotic lesions by the transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TFCAS) or transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) approach to determine comparative risk and to ascertain the optimal intervention in this cohort. METHODS: Data were extracted from the Vascular Quality Initiative CAS registry for patients with prior neck radiation who had undergone either TCAR or TFCAS. The Student t-test and the χ2 test were used to compare baseline patient characteristics. Multivariable logistic regression and Cox Hazard Proportional analysis were used to compare perioperative and long-term differences between patients with and without prior neck radiation following TCAR and TFCAS. Kaplan-Meier estimator was used to determine the incidence of 3-year adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 72,656 patients (TCAR, 40,879; TFCAS, 31,777) were included in the analysis. Of these, 4151 patients had a history of neck radiation. Patients with a history of neck radiation were more likely to be younger, white, and have fewer comorbidities than patients with no neck radiation history. After adjustment for confounding factors, there was no difference in relative risk of 30-day perioperative stroke (P = .11), death (P = .36), or myocardial infarction (MI) (P = .61) between TCAR patients with or without a history of neck radiation. The odds of stroke/death (P = .10) and stroke/death/MI (P = .07) were also not statistically significant. In patients with prior neck radiation, TCAR had lower odds for in-hospital stroke/death/MI (odds ratio, 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.35-0.99; P = .05) and access site complications than TFCAS. At year 3, patients with prior neck radiation had an increased hazard for mortality after TCAR (hazard ratio [HR], 1.24; 95% CI, 1.02-1.51; P = .04) and TFCAS (HR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.12-1.58; P = .001). Patients with prior neck radiation also experienced an increased hazard for reintervention after TCAR (HR, 2.16; 95% CI, 1.45-3.20; P < .001) and TFCAS (HR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.02-2.73; P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with prior neck radiation had a similar relative risk of 30-day perioperative adverse events as patients with no neck radiation after adjustment for baseline demographics and disease characteristics. In these patients, TCAR was associated with reduced odds of perioperative stroke/death/MI as compared with TFCAS. However, patients with prior neck radiation were at increased risk for 3-year mortality and reintervention.

Determinants of Mortality and Mid-Term Outcomes After Transcarotid Artery Revascularization and Transfemoral Carotid Artery Stenting.

OBJECTIVES: The potential benefit of transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) over transfemoral carotid artery stenting (tfCAS) has been studied in the perioperative period with lower rates of stroke and death; however, data on mid-term outcomes are limited. We aimed to evaluate 3-year outcomes after TCAR and tfCAS and determine the primary predictors of 30-day and 1-year mortality following TCAR. METHODS: Data from the Vascular Quality Initiative for patients undergoing TCAR or tfCAS from January 2016 to December 2022 were analyzed. 1:1 propensity score matching using the nearest-neighbor method was used to adjust baseline demographics and clinical characteristics. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox Proportional Hazard Regression were used to evaluate long-term outcomes. Iterative stepwise multiple logistic regression analysis and Cox Proportional Hazard Regression were used to identify predictors of 30-day and 1-year mortality, respectively, based upon preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative factors. RESULTS: A total of 70 237 patients were included in analysis (TCAR=58.7%, tfCAS=41.3%). Transcarotid artery revascularization patients were older and had higher rates of comorbid conditions and high-risk medical and anatomic features than tfCAS patients. Propensity score matching yielded 22 322 pairs with no major differences between groups except that TCAR patients were older (71.6 years vs 70.8 years). At 3 years, TCAR was associated with a 24% reduction in hazard of death compared with tfCAS (hazard ratio [HR]=0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.71-0.82, p<0.001), for both symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. This survival advantage was established in the first 6 months (HR=0.59, 95% CI=0.53-0.62, p<0.001), with no difference in mortality risk from 6 months to 36 months (HR=0.95, 95% CI=0.86-1.05, p=0.31). Transcarotid artery revascularization was also associated with decreased hazard for 3-year stroke (HR=0.81, 95% CI=0.66-0.99, p=0.04) and stroke or death (HR=0.81, 95% CI=0.76-0.87, p<0.001) compared with tfCAS. The top predictors for 30-day and 1-year mortality were postoperative complications. The primary independent predictor was the occurrence of postoperative stroke. CONCLUSIONS: Transcarotid artery revascularization had a sustained mid-term survival advantage associated over tfCAS, with the benefit being established primarily within the first 6 months. Notably, our findings highlight the importance of postoperative stroke as the primary independent predictor for 30-day and 1-year mortal. CLINICAL IMPACT: The ongoing debate over the superiority of TCAR compared to tfCAS and CEA has been limited by a lack of comparative studies examining the impact of pre-operative symptoms on outcomes. Furthermore, data are scarce on mid-term outcomes for TCAR beyond the perioperative period. As a result, it remains uncertain whether the initial benefits of stroke and death reduction observed with TCAR over tfCAS persist beyond one year. Our study addresses these gaps in the literature, offering evidence to enable clinicians to assess the efficacy of TCAR for up to three years. Additionally, our study seeks to identify risk factors for postoperative mortality following TCAR, facilitating optimal patient stratification.

Diabetes, Hypertension, and Smoking Do Not Affect Outcomes of Iliofemoral Vein Stenting for Chronic Proximal Venous Outflow Obstruction.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes, hypertension, and smoking are well-recognized risk factors for peripheral artery disease (PAD), but little is known of their impact on chronic venous insufficiency (CVI). This study evaluates these factors in patients undergoing iliac vein stenting (IVS) for CVI. METHODS: A registry of 708 patients who underwent IVS from August 2011 to June 2021 was retrospectively analyzed. Symptoms were quantified using venous clinical severity score (VCSS) and CEAP classification. Both major and minor reinterventions were recorded. Logistic regression models were used to determine the unadjusted and adjusted odds ratio of any reintervention. Log-rank test was used to assess differences in reintervention-free survival. RESULTS: The prevalence of hypertension was 51.1% (N = 362), diabetes was 23.0% (N = 163), and smoking was 22.2% (N = 157). Patients with diabetes (3.6 vs. 3.4; P = 0.062), hypertension (3.6 vs. 3.3; P < 0.001), and smoking (3.7 vs. 3.4; P = 0.003) had higher CEAP scores than those without these comorbidities. Improvement in VCSS composite scores showed no differences postoperatively (diabetes: P = 0.513; hypertension: P = 0.053; smoking: P = 0.608), at 1-year follow-up (diabetes: P = 0.666; hypertension: P = 0.681; smoking: P = 0.745), or at 5-year follow-up (diabetes: P = 0.525; hypertension: P = 0.953; smoking: P = 0.146). Diabetes (P = 0.454), smoking (P = 0.355), and hypertension (P = 0.727) were not associated with increased odds of major reintervention. Log-rank test similarly showed no differences in reintervention-free survival for major or minor reoperations between those with and without diabetes (P = 0.79), hypertension (P = 0.14), and smoking (P = 0.80). CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes, hypertension, and smoking were prevalent among CVI patients, but unlike in PAD patients, they had little to no impact on long-term outcomes or reinterventions after IVS.

Body Mass Index Impacts Indication But Not Outcomes of Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair.

BACKGROUND: There are limited studies looking at thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) outcomes in obese and overweight patients. Our objective was to determine the rate of complications, reintervention, and short-term mortality in normal weight, overweight, and obese patients undergoing TEVAR. METHODS: Patients undergoing TEVAR at a large tertiary hospital from October 2007 to January 2020 were analyzed. Patients were stratified into 3 cohorts based on body mass index (BMI): normal (18.5-25 kg/m2), overweight (25-30 kg/m2), and obese (>30 kg/m2). Primary outcomes were 30-day and 1-year survival. Intraoperative, in-hospital, and postdischarge complications were assessed as secondary outcomes using the Clavian-Dindo classification system. In addition, reinterventions associated with the index TEVAR procedure as a secondary outcome. RESULTS: Among 204 patients fitting the study criteria, we identified 65 with normal BMI, 78 overweight, and 61 obese patients. Obese patients were younger than the overweight and normal BMI patients (mean age 62.2 vs. 66.7 vs. 70.7, respectively, P = 0.003). In terms of TEVAR indication, the obese cohort had the highest percentage of patients with type B aortic dissection (36.4%), while the normal BMI cohort had the higher proportion of patients undergoing TEVAR for isolated thoracic aortic aneurysm (63.9%). Intraoperative complications did not significantly differ between cohorts. Postoperatively, in-hospital complications, postdischarge complications and 30-day return to the operative room did not differ significantly between study cohorts. Odds of reintervention did not differ significantly between cohorts, both on univariate and multivariate analysis. Log-rank test of Kaplan Meier analysis revealed no difference in reintervention-free survival (P = 0.22). Thirty-day mortality and 1-year overall survival were similar across cohorts. Both univariate and multivariate logarithmic regression revealed no difference in likelihood of 30-day mortality between the obese and normal cohort. CONCLUSIONS: There were no measurable differences in complications, reinterventions, or mortality, suggesting that vascular surgeons can perform TEVAR across a spectrum of BMI without compromising outcomes.

Review of Malpractice Litigation in the Diagnosis and Treatment of Venous & Lymphatic Disease.

BACKGROUND: Malpractice claims involving nonthrombotic venous and lymphatic diseases and interventions have not been reported previously. We investigated common reasons for litigation, medical specialties involved, patient injuries, and case outcomes in malpractice litigation involving venous and lymphatic disease. METHODS: Litigation cases entered into the Westlaw database from June 8th, 1984 to February 15th, 2018 were analyzed. Search terms included relevant words and phrases related to nonthrombotic venous, thoracic outlet syndrome, and lymphatic disease and treatment. Data on physician specialty, malpractice claims, and patient injuries jury outcomes, amount awarded to the plaintiff, and jury fees were collected and compared for each category. RESULTS: A total of 144 cases were identified. 41 cases involved varicose veins, 11 spider veins, 35 thoracic outlet syndrome (TOS), 17 other venous diseases, and 40 lymphatic diseases. Physician defendants were frequently vascular surgeons (23%) and general surgeons (15%). The majority of litigation claims involved "post-procedure complication" (77%), "lack of informed consent" (25%), "failure to diagnose & treat" (15%), and "intraoperative complications" (13%). The most common injuries were skin damage (27.8%), nerve damage (25%), and lymphedema (24%). Patient death occurred in 6% of cases. Out of venous malpractice cases with post-procedure complications, stab phlebectomy (27%) was the most common intervention followed by foam sclerotherapy (21%), rib resection (21%), laser spider vein removal (5%), and endovenous laser ablation therapy (EVLT)(3%). Of varicose vein cases, 15% included deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism as post-procedure complications. In TOS rib resections, 65% of cases referenced nerve damage and 12% involved arterial injury. For lymphatic disease cases, general surgeons were frequently identified defendants (25%). Lymphedema (93%) and lymphangitis (7%) occurred as post-procedure complications after breast, gynecologic, orthopedic, and radiation procedures. A majority of complications occurred after breast cases (40%). Verdicts overall ruled in favor of the defendant in 71% (102/144) of cases and the plaintiff in 20% (29/144) of cases. Out of cases ruled in favor of the plaintiff, 31% were lymphatics, 24% varicose veins, and 24% TOS cases. Only 8% (12/144) of cases were settled and one outcome was unknown. The mean award was $820,193 (standard deviation SD $1,226,008, Range $12,853 - $6,500,000). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of venous and lymphatic litigation cases involve claims of post-procedure complications. Venous complications occurred after open and endovascular treatment of varicose veins, spider vein treatment, and surgical management of TOS. Lymphedema occurred after breast, oncology, and orthopedic procedures. These cases reflect opportunities for intervention to help potentially prevent litigation.

Sentiment Analysis of Online Patient-Written Reviews of Vascular Surgeons.

BACKGROUND: Online patient reviews influence a patient's choice of a vascular surgeon. The aim of this study is to examine underlying factors that contribute to positive and negative patient reviews by leveraging sentiment analysis and machine learning methods. METHODS: The Society of Vascular Surgeons publicly accessible member directory was queried and cross-referenced with a popular patient-maintained physician review website, healthgrades.com. Sentiment analysis and machine learning methods were used to analyze several parameters. Demographics (gender, age, and state of practice), star rating (of 5 stars), and written reviews were obtained for corresponding vascular surgeons. A sentiment analysis model was applied to patient-written reviews and validated against the star ratings. Student's t-test or one-way analysis of variance assessed demographic relationships with reviews. Word frequency assessments and multivariable logistic regression analyses were conducted to identify common and determinative components of written reviews. RESULTS: A total of 1,799 vascular surgeons had public profiles with reviews. Female gender of surgeon was associated with lower star ratings (male = 4.19, female = 3.95, P < 0.01) and average sentiment score (male = 0.50, female = 0.40, P < 0.01). Younger physician age was associated with higher star rating (P = 0.02) but not average sentiment score (P = 0.12). In the Best reviews, the most commonly used one-words were Care (N = 999), Caring (N = 767), and Kind (N = 479), while the most commonly used two-word pairs were Saved/Life (N = 189), Feel/Comfortable (N = 106), and Kind/Caring (N = 104). For the Worst reviews, the most commonly used one-words were Pain (N = 254) and Rude (N = 148), while the most commonly used two-word pairs were No/One (N = 27), Waste/Time (N = 25), and Severe/Pain (N = 18). In a multiple logistic regression, satisfactory reviews were associated with words such as Confident (odds ratio [OR] = 8.93), Pain-free (OR = 4.72), Listens (OR = 2.55), and Bedside Manner (OR = 1.70), while unsatisfactory reviews were associated with words such as Rude (OR = 0.01), Arrogant (OR = 0.09), Infection (OR = 0.20), and Wait (OR = 0.48). CONCLUSIONS: Female surgeons received significantly worse reviews and younger surgeons tended to receive better reviews. The positivity and negativity of reviews were largely related to words associated with the patient-doctor experience and pain. Vascular surgeons should focus on these 2 areas to improve patient experiences and their own reviews.

Identifying venous clinical severity score thresholds for Clinical-Etiology-Anatomy-Pathophysiology classifications of venous edema and higher.

OBJECTIVE: Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS) is a widely used standard for assessing and grading the severity of chronic venous disease (CVD). Prior research highlighted its high validity in detecting and quantifying venous disease. However, there is little, if any, known about the precise thresholds at which VCSS discriminates important stages of deep venous disease. This study sought to elucidate the diagnostic accuracy, thresholds, and correlation at which VCSS detects salient CEAP (Clinical-Etiology-Anatomy-Pathophysiology) classes in deep venous disease progression. METHODS: A registry of 840 patients who presented with chronic proximal venous outflow obstruction (PVOO) secondary to non-thrombotic iliac vein lesions from August 2011 to June 2021 was retrospectively analyzed. VCSS and CEAP classifications were used to evaluate preoperative symptoms. VCSS was compared to CEAP classes to determine the precise VCSS composite values at which the instrument was able to detect CEAP C3 and higher, C4 and higher, and C5 and higher. Receiver operative characteristic (ROC) curve and area under the curve (AUC) were used to evaluate VCSS for its ability to discriminate disease at these stages of CEAP classification. Spearman's rank coefficient was used to determine the correlation between CEAP VCSS composite as well as individual VCSS components (pain, varicose vein, edema, pigmentation, inflammation, induration, ulcer number, ulcer size, ulcer duration, compression). RESULTS: VCSS composite was able to detect venous edema (C3) and higher at a sensitivity of 68.9% and a specificity of 54.8% at an optimized threshold of 8.5 (AUC = 0.648; 95% C.I. = 0.575-0.721). To detect changes in skin and subcutaneous tissue from CVD (C4) and higher, an optimal threshold of 11.5 was found with a sensitivity of 51.7% and specificity of 76.5% (AUC = 0.694; 95% C.I. = 0.656-0.731). Healed venous ulcer (C4) and higher was detectable at an optimized threshold of 13.5 at a sensitivity of 67.7% and a specificity of 88.9% (AUC = 0.819; 95% C.I. = 0.766-0.873). The correlation between VCSS composites and CEAP was weak (ρ = 0.372; p < .001). Attributes of VCSS that reflect more severe venous disease correlated more closely with CEAP classes, namely pigmentation (ρ = 0.444; p < .001), inflammation (ρ = 0.348; p < .001), induration (ρ = 0.352; p < .001), number of active ulcers (ρ = 0.497; p < .001), active ulcer size (ρ = 0.485; p < .001), and ulcer duration (ρ = 0.497; p < .001). The correlation between CEAP class and the other four components of VCSS were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: VCSS composite thresholds of 8.5, 11.5, and 13.5 are threshold values for detecting CEAP classification C3 and higher, C4 and higher, and C5 and higher, respectively. Consistent with prior work, VCSS appears to have a better ability to discriminate CVD at more severe CEAP classifications. In this registry, the correlation between VCSS and CEAP was found to be weak while components of VCSS that suggest more advanced disease exhibited the strongest correlation with CEAP.

The Venous Thrombectomy Armamentarium: An Expanding World.

Acute deep venous thrombosis (DVT) is a common and important public health problem. It affects more than 350,000 people in the United States annually and has a substantial economic impact. Without adequate treatment, there is significant risk of development of post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS) resulting in patient morbidity, worse quality of life, and costly long-term medical care. Over the past decade, the treatment algorithm for patients with acute DVT has significantly changed. Prior to 2008, the treatment recommendation for patients with acute DVT was limited to anticoagulation and conservative management. In 2008, national clinical practice guidelines were updated to include interventional strategies such as surgical- and catheter-based techniques for the treatment of acute DVT. Early strategies for debulking of extensive acute DVT primarily consisted of open surgical thrombectomy and administration of thrombolytics. In the intervening period, a plethora of advanced endovascular techniques and technologies have been developed which reduced the morbidity of operative intervention and risks of hemorrhage associated with thrombolysis. This review will focus on the novel technologies commercially available for management of acute DVT, denoting unique features inherent to each device. This expanded armamentarium gives vascular surgeons and proceduralists the opportunity to individualize their treatment approach to the specific patient's anatomy, lesion, and history.

Carotid stenosis patients with a remote history of cerebrovascular events have increased risk of major adverse events over asymptomatic patients.

INTRODUCTION: Asymptomatic patients with a remote history of transient ischemic attack (TIA) or stroke are not well studied as a separate population from asymptomatic patients with no prior history of TIA or stroke. We compared in-hospital outcomes after transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) and transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TFCAS) among symptomatic patients, patients with a remote history of neurologic symptoms, and asymptomatic patients. METHODS: Data from patients in the Vascular Quality Initiative database who underwent TCAR (January 2017 to April 2020) or TFCAS (May 2005 to April 2020) were analyzed. Symptomatic status was defined as TIA and/or stroke occurring within 180 days before the procedure. Asymptomatic status was divided into patients with no history of TIA/stroke (asymptomatic) and patients with a history of TIA/stroke occurring more than 180 days before the procedure (remote history of neurologic symptoms). The Student t-test and Pearson χ2 test were used to compare baseline patient characteristics and outcomes. Multivariate logistic regression was used to adjust for significant between-group differences in baseline characteristics. RESULTS: There were 7158 patients who underwent TCAR (symptomatic: 2574, asymptomatic: 3689, and asymptomatic with a remote history of neurologic symptoms: 895) and 18,023 patients who underwent TFCAS (symptomatic: 6195, asymptomatic: 10,333, and asymptomatic with a remote history of neurologic symptoms: 1495). Regardless of symptom status, the mean patient age was 73 years for TCAR and 69 years for TFCAS. A total of 64% of patients in the study were male and 36% of patients were female. The mean long-term follow-up data ranged between 208 and 331 days within the three patient groups. Carotid stenosis patients with a remote history of neurologic symptoms had higher rates of TIA, stroke, TIA/stroke, stroke/death, and stroke/death/myocardial infarction than asymptomatic patients, and these rates were similar to those of symptomatic patients. Comparing TCAR and TFCAS among patients with a remote history of neurologic symptoms, there were statistically significant reductions in the odds of stroke/death (odds ratio: 0.46, 95% confidence interval: 0.27-0.84, P = .011) and stroke/death/myocardial infarction (odds ratio: 0.51, 95% confidence interval: 0.30-0.87, P = .013) after TCAR. This was likely driven by the increased rate of death after TFCAS in patients with a remote history of neurologic symptoms (0.9%) compared with asymptomatic patients (0.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Asymptomatic patients with a remote history of TIA/stroke do not have the same outcomes as asymptomatic patients without a history of TIA/stroke and are at higher risk of adverse in-hospital events. Patients with a remote history of TIA/stroke have increased risk of in-hospital death after TFCAS and may benefit from TCAR.

Follow-up after acute thrombotic events following COVID-19 infection.

OBJECTIVE: COVID-19 infection results in a hypercoagulable state predisposing patients to thrombotic events. We report the 3- and 6-month follow-up of 27 patients who experienced acute arterial thrombotic events in the setting of COVID-19 infection. METHODS: Data were prospectively collected and maintained for all vascular surgery consultations in the Mount Sinai Health System from patients who presented between March 16 and May 5, 2020. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients experienced arterial thrombotic events. The average length of stay was 13.3 ± 15.4 days. Fourteen patients were treated with open surgical intervention, six were treated with endovascular intervention, and seven were treated with anticoagulation only. At 3-month follow-up, 11 patients (40.7%) were deceased. Nine patients who expired did so during the initial hospital stay. The 3-month cumulative primary patency rate for all interventions was 72.2%, and the 3-month primary patency rates for open surgical and endovascular interventions were 66.7 and 83.3, respectively. There were 9 (33.3%) readmissions within 3 months. Six-month follow-up was available in 25 (92.6%) patients. At 6-month follow-up, 12 (48.0%) patients were deceased, and the cumulative primary patency rate was 61.9%. The 6-month primary patency rates of open surgical and endovascular interventions were 66.7% and 55.6%, respectively. The limb-salvage rate at both 3 and 6 months was 89.2%. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with COVID-19 infections who experienced thrombotic events saw high complication and mortality rates with relatively low patency rates.

Symptom Relief and Reintervention after Iliac Vein Stenting Stratified by CEAP Clinical Classification.

BACKGROUND: This study sought to evaluate long-term symptom relief and reintervention rates after iliac vein stenting (IVS) in patients with chronic venous outflow obstruction. METHODS: A single-institution database of patients undergoing IVS from August 2011 to June 2021 was analyzed. Patients were stratified into three cohorts based on the clinical component of the clinical, etiology, anatomical, and pathophysiology (CEAP) classification: C3, C4, and C5/6. Symptoms were quantified using the venous clinical severity score (VCSS). Reintervention was defined as any procedure using venography. Edema, pigmentation, and ulceration progression-free survival as well as reintervention-free survival were assessed with Kaplan Meier analysis. RESULTS: Among 737 total patients, there were 435 C3, 206 C4, and 96 C5/6 patients. The C5/6 cohort had the highest percentage of patients undergo reoperation (36.4%). C5/6 patients yielded the poorest ulceration progression-free survival (P < 0.001) while C3 patients had the poorest skin pigmentation progression-free survival (P = 0.009). On adjusted analysis there was no significant difference in odds of reintervention between study cohorts. Mean composite VCSS scores were significantly different at each yearly post-operative follow-up visit up to 6 years. CONCLUSIONS: The present study is one of the largest investigations of long-term outcomes in IVS patients. Most patients with long-term follow-up experienced an improvement in their composite VCSS. CEAP clinical classification at the time of IVS had a significant influence on the likelihood and quantity of reintervention.

Comparison of Transcarotid Artery Revascularization and Transfemoral Carotid Artery Stenting Based on High Risk Anatomic Characteristics.

BACKGROUND: Anatomic details affecting the adverse outcomes following carotid artery stenting have not been well characterized. We compared in-hospital outcomes following transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) and transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TFCAS) among symptomatic and asymptomatic patients stratified by degree of lesion calcification and aortic arch type. METHODS: Data from patients in the Society for Vascular Surgery's Vascular Quality Initiative database undergoing TCAR (January 2017 to April 2020) or TFCAS (May 2005 to April 2020) and had non-missing grading on carotid artery calcification or aortic arch type was analyzed. Degree of calcification was stratified into 3 groups: none, ≤ 50% calcification, and >50% calcification. Arch type was stratified as Type I, Type II, and Type III. RESULTS: A total of 9,868 patients (TCAR: 4,224; TFCAS: 5,644) were included in the calcification analysis. TCAR patients were generally older, white, smokers, and had more comorbidities than TFCAS patients. Among the symptomatic patients, there was no difference in rates of stroke, stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA), and myocardial infarction (MI) by calcification severity between TCAR and TFCAS. However, there was a trend towards increased risk in all 3 events with higher calcification only after TFCAS. Symptomatic patients with severe (>50%) calcification had lower rates of death (TCAR: 0.9% vs. TFCAS: 2.8%, P = 0.013), stroke/death (TCAR: 2.7% vs. TFCAS: 5.8%, P = 0.006), stroke/death/MI (TCAR: 3.3% vs. TFCAS: 6.5%, P = 0.007), and postop complications (TCAR: 6.0% vs. TFCAS: 12.4%, P < 0.001) after TCAR compared to TFCAS. Furthermore, TCAR had lower risk of mortality at all degrees of calcification compared to TFCAS. Similar findings were noted among asymptomatic TCAR patients with >50% calcification, in which the rates of death (TCAR: 0.4% vs. TFCAS: 1.1%, P = 0.080) and stroke/death (TCAR: 1.5% vs. TFCAS: 3.1%, P = 0.029) were reduced. A comparison of TCAR to TFCAS by arch type showed that rates of stroke/death after TCAR were similar regardless of arch complexity (Type I: 2.6% vs. Type II: 2.8%), but increased after TFCAS with complex, high risk anatomy (Type I: 4.2% vs. Type II: 5.2%). CONCLUSIONS: While increased calcification increased rates of adverse events after TFCAS, this trend was not observed after TCAR, which also had lower rates of death and stroke/death among patients with severe calcification. Furthermore, TCAR had lower risk of mortality than TFCAS across all degrees of calcification. TFCAS was associated with increased risk of stroke/death with complex aortic arch anatomy, however, rates of stroke/death after TCAR were similar regardless of arch complexity. Our results suggests that TCAR should be preferentially considered in revascularization of patients with anatomy considered high-risk for TFCAS.

Compression Stocking Compliance Does Not Impact Reintervention or Symptom Change after Iliac Vein Stenting in Patients with Moderate to Severe Lower Extremity Edema.

BACKGROUND: Medical compression stocking (MCS) therapy remains a core treatment for chronic venous disease, particularly in patients with lower extremity edema. This study investigated the impact of postoperative MCS adherence on patients with moderate to severe edema who underwent iliac vein stenting (IVS). METHODS: Patients at a large tertiary care center who underwent IVS from August 2011 to June 2021 were analyzed. Symptoms were quantified using the venous clinical severity score (VCSS) and clinical assessment score (CAS). The criterion for inclusion was moderate or severe lower extremity edema at the time of IVS. Patients were stratified into two cohorts: complete postoperative compression therapy compliance (MCS+) and no postoperative compression therapy use (MCS-). RESULTS: Among 376 patients fitting our study criteria, we identified 168 MCS+ and 208 MCS- patients. The VCSS edema score did not significantly differ between groups (P = 0.179). Postoperatively, the mean changes in VCSS edema at the first postoperative visit, the one-year follow-up, and the two-year follow-up were not significantly different between the MCS+ and MCS- cohorts (P = 0.123, 0.296, and 0.534, respectively). An analysis of CAS for edema revealed that the MCS+ cohort had a modestly better improvement in edema at the 90-day follow-up visit versus the MCS- cohort (P = 0.018), but this difference was not observed in the 30-day (P = 0.834) or six-month follow-up visit (P = 0.755). A multivariate analysis revealed no difference in the need for major intervention (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.50, P = 0.504). A Kaplan-Meier analysis via log-rank test revealed no difference in reintervention-free survival between groups (P = 0.77). CONCLUSIONS: Many patients with moderate to severe lower extremity edema experience a reduction in their edema after IVS. In our study, compression stocking compliance after surgery had a little impact on edema relief in this population.

Race differences in iliofemoral vein stenting for chronic venous insufficiency.

INTRODUCTION: Major disparities in outcomes by race are present throughout vascular surgery, yet little has been published on iliac vein stent outcomes by race. This retrospective study assessed iliac vein stent outcomes by patient race. METHODS: Patients who underwent iliac vein stenting at a single institution for chronic venous insufficiency (CVI) from 2011 to 2021 were reviewed. Demographic, preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative data were collected. Self-reported race groups included Asian, Black, Hispanic, and White. Univariate differences were analyzed using χ2 tests for categorical variables and 1-way ANOVA for continuous variables. Outcomes included change in Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS) at interval timepoints relative to a preoperative baseline and reinterventions. Logistic regression models were used to determine the unadjusted and adjusted odds ratio (OR) of any minor and major reintervention. Multivariate regression models controlled for demographic and comorbidity characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 827 patients were included. Asian patients were younger and had a greater proportion of male patients, lower Body mass index (BMI), less smoking history, and fewer comorbidities. White patients were more likely to have a history of deep vein thrombosis (DVT). White patients presented with the most severe CVI symptoms as defined by both Clinical-Etiological-Anatomical-Pathophysiological (CEAP) classification and preoperative VCSS composite scores. There were no differences in acute DVT, number of stents deployed, and bilateral versus unilateral stent placement. Black patients had the longest average days of follow-up, followed sequentially by Hispanic, White, and Asian. Black patients had the most reinterventions, while Asian patients had the fewest. Asian patients were less likely to have a major reintervention. No differences in VCSS composite or change in VCSS were observed. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with CVI, Asian patients presented younger and healthier, while White patients presented with the most severe symptoms. No differences were observed in VCSS outcomes, though Black patients had the most reinterventions.

Trends, factors, and disparities associated with length of stay after lower extremity bypass for tissue loss.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine predictors of increased length of stay (LOS) in patients who underwent lower extremity bypass for tissue loss. METHODS: Using 2011 to 2016 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program vascular targeted databases, we compared demographics, comorbidities, procedural characteristics, and 30-day outcomes of patients who had expected LOS vs extended LOS (>75th percentile, 9 days) after nonemergent lower extremity bypass for tissue loss. We also compared factors associated with short LOS (<25th percentile, 4 days) and extended LOS (>75th percentile, 9 days) vs the interquartile range of LOS (4-9 days). Yearly trends and independent predictors were determined by linear and logistic regression. This study was exempt from Institutional Review Board approval. RESULTS: In 4964 analyzed patients, there were no significant yearly trends or changes in LOS in the recent 5 years (P > .05). Overall 30-day mortality, major amputation, and reintervention rates were 1.6%, 4.5%, and 4.8%, respectively, also with no significant yearly trends (all P > .05). On univariate analysis, nonwhite race, dependent functional status, transfers, dialysis, congestive heart failure, hypertension, beta blockers, distal bypass targets, and extended operative time were associated with extended LOS (P < .05). Extended LOS was also associated with higher rates of 30-day major adverse limb and cardiac events, additional procedures related to wound care, deep venous thrombosis, complications (pulmonary, renal, septic, bleeding, and wound), and discharge to facility but lower 30-day readmission rates. After adjustment for covariates, the independent factors for extended LOS included dialysis, beta blockers, prolonged operative time, reintervention, major amputation, additional procedures related to wound care, deep venous thrombosis, complications (pulmonary, renal, septic, bleeding, and wound), and discharge to facility (P < .05). On the other hand, multivariable analysis showed that patients with expected LOS were significantly more likely to have been of white race or readmitted postoperatively (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: From 2011 to 2016, there were no significant changes in LOS. Efforts to decrease LOS without increasing readmission rates while focusing on some of the identified factors, including preventable postoperative complications and pre-existing socioeconomic factors, may improve the overall vascular care of these challenging patients.

Acute thrombotic manifestations of coronavirus disease 2019 infection: Experience at a large New York City health care system.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a novel coronavirus that has typically resulted in upper respiratory symptoms. However, we have encountered acute arterial and venous thrombotic events after COVID-19 infection. Managing acute thrombotic events from the novel virus has presented unprecedented challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic. In our study, we have highlighted the unique treatment required for these patients and discussed the role of anticoagulation for patients diagnosed with COVID-19. METHODS: The data from 21 patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 disease and acute venous or arterial thrombosis were collected. The demographics, comorbidities, home medications, laboratory markers, and outcomes were analyzed. The primary postoperative outcome of interest was mortality, and the secondary outcomes were primary patency and morbidity. To assess for significance, a univariate analysis was performed using the Pearson χ2 and Fisher exact tests for categorical variables and the Student t test for continuous variables. RESULTS: A total of 21 patients with acute thrombotic events met our inclusion and exclusion criteria. Most cases were acute arterial events (76.2%), with the remainder venous cases (23.8%). The average age for all patients was 64.6 years, and 52.4% were male. The most prevalent comorbidity in the group was hypertension (81.0%). Several markers were markedly abnormal in both arterial and venous cases, including an elevated neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio (8.8) and D-dimer level (4.9 µg/mL). Operative intervention included percutaneous angiography in 25.00% of patients and open surgical embolectomy in 23.8%. Most of the patients who had undergone arterial intervention had developed a postoperative complication (53.9%) compared with a 0% complication rate after venous interventions. Acute kidney injury on admission was a factor in 75.0% of those who died vs 18.2% in the survivors (P = .04). CONCLUSIONS: We have described our experience in the epicenter of the pandemic of 21 patients who had experienced major thrombotic events from infection with COVID-19. The findings from our cohort have highlighted the need for increased awareness of the vascular manifestations of COVID-19 and the important role of anticoagulation for these patients. More data are urgently needed to optimize treatment and prevent further vascular complications of COVID-19 infections.

Endotheliitis in Coronavirus Disease 2019-Positive Patients After Extremity Amputation for Acute Thrombotic Events.

BACKGROUND: Both arterial and venous thrombotic events of the extremities occur in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection, but the etiology of these events remains unclear. This study sought to evaluate pathology specimens of COVID-19-positive patients postamputation, who were found to have Rutherford 3 acute limb ischemia requiring amputation. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of all vascular surgery emergency room and inpatient consultations in patients who presented to the Mount Sinai Health System from March 26, 2020, to May 10, 2020. Pathology specimens were examined using hematoxylin and eosin stain. The specimens were assessed for the following: inflammatory cells associated with endothelium/apoptotic bodies, mononuclear cells, small vessel congestion, and lymphocytic endotheliitis. Of the specimens evaluated, 2 patients with a known history of peripheral vascular disease were excluded. RESULTS: Inflammatory cells associated with endothelium/apoptotic bodies were seen in all 4 patients and in 4 of 5 specimens. Mononuclear cells were found in 2 of 4 patients. Small vessel congestion was seen in all patients. Lymphocytic endotheliitis was seen in 1 of 4 patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows endotheliitis in amputation specimens of four patients with COVID-19 disease and Rutherford Class 3 acute limb ischemia. The findings in these patients is more likely an infectious angiitis because of COVID-19.

Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio Associated With Adverse Events After Endovascular Aneurysm Repair (EVAR).

BACKGROUND: The blood neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) is a surrogate biomarker of systemic inflammation with important prognostic significance in multiple disease processes, including cardiovascular diseases. It is inexpensive, widely available, and may be related to the outcomes of patients after surgery. We aimed to investigate the possible association of NLR with the outcomes of patients following endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). METHODS: This single-center, retrospective study of a prospectively maintained database evaluated 777 patients with a diagnosed abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) who underwent EVAR and were longitudinally followed between 2001 and 2017. NLR was defined as the ratio of absolute neutrophil count to absolute lymphocyte count. The mortality and reinterventions were used to evaluate outcomes using the appropriate univariate models, and the effect of clinical variables on NLR was further investigated using multivariate modelling. RESULTS: The median NLR for all patients was 3 IQR [2.2 - 4.6]. A cut-off point of 3.6 was uncovered in a training set of 388 patients using the maximally ranked statistic method. Patients with NLR < 3.6 had significantly improved mortality rates (P< 0.0001) in the training set, and results were internally validated in a testing set of 389 patients (P = 0.042). Multivariate analysis revealed that high NLR (HR 1.4 95% CI [1.0 - 2.0]; P< 0.05) remained an independent predictor of mortality in a multivariate analysis controlling for characteristics such as comorbidities, age, and maximal aortic diameter. 5-year mortality and 30-day, 1-year and 5-year reinterventions were all higher in the high NLR group. CONCLUSION: High NLR was significantly associated with higher rates of death at 5 years as well as higher rates of reinterventions at 30 days, 1 year and 5 years. We also suggest that an internally validated cut-off point of NLR >3.6 may be clinically important to help segregate patients into high and low NLR categories. It remains unclear whether NLR is directly linked to adverse events post-EVAR or whether it is a surrogate for an inflammatory state that predisposes patients to higher risk of death or reinterventions.

Iliac Vein Stenting for Chronic Proximal Venous Outflow Obstruction in a Predominantly Asian-American Cohort.

BACKGROUND: We investigated the outcome of vein stenting placement for chronic proximal venous outflow obstruction (PVOO) in a predominantly Asian-American cohort to improve patient selection, enhance technical approach, and better define quality measurements of this emerging vascular intervention. METHODS: A total of 462 consecutive patients, 73% Asian American (n = 336), who underwent iliac vein stenting for chronic PVOO from October 2013 to July 2016 were reviewed. Postoperative outcomes at five follow-up visits were assessed. Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis tests were run for demographic and operative variables. Ordered logistic regressions were run for the outcome at each time point, and Chi-squared tests as well as Fisher's exact tests were used for categorical variables. RESULTS: Follow-up was maintained in 90% of patients, with a mean follow-up time of 695 days. Asian-American patients were more likely to present with varicose veins (77.4% vs. 54.8%, P < 0.001), and non-Asian patients were more likely to present with active ulceration (26.2% vs. 5.1%, P < 0.001). Asian-American patients were more likely to have bilateral stents placed (61.6% vs. 50%, P = 0.026) and were less likely to have reinterventions (11.3% vs. 27.8%, P < 0.001), a history of deep vein thrombosis (8.3% vs. 29.4%, P < 0.001), or intraoperative findings of chronic postphlebitic changes (17.6% vs. 33.3%, P < 0.001). Kruskal-Wallis tests were significant for improvement in patients of all the Clinical, Etiology, Anatomy, Pathophysiology classes at 30 days (P = 0.041), 90 days (P = 0.045), 6 months (P = 0.041), and 1 year (P < 0.01). The Asian-American population had improved but comparatively lower follow-up scores at the 30-day mark (48% significantly improved or better vs. 63%, P = 0.008) but higher follow-up scores at the >1 year mark (80% significantly improved or better vs. 59%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Asian-American patients undergoing vein stent placement for chronic PVOO had comparatively worse outcomes than non-Asian patients at 30 days and better outcomes after one year. These patient groups had different outcomes postoperatively and outcomes which evolve differently over time.

The Current Role of the Percutaneous Arteriovenous Fistula for Hemodialysis Access.

Dialysis is the preferred treatment for patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) for the removal of accumulated toxins secondary to compromised renal function. Hemodialysis has traditionally been performed via a surgically created arteriovenous fistula (AVF) or arteriovenous graft (AVG). Novel endovascular techniques have allowed for the creation of percutaneous arteriovenous fistulas for hemodialysis access. Two devices, the Ellipsys® Vascular Access System (Avenu Medical, Inc., San Juan Capistrano, California) and the WavelinQ EndoAVF System (C.R. Bard, Inc., Murray Hill, New Jersey), are currently available for percutaneous AVF creation and investigation of their utility is ongoing. This paper describes the current utilization, differences, and results thus far with these devices and, additionally, investigates the contemporary advantages, disadvantages, and selection criteria for percutaneous AVFs overall.