The Impact of Ejection Fraction on Major Adverse Limb Events after Lower Extremity Revascularization.

BACKGROUND: Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) is commonly associated with coronary artery disease, and echocardiography is frequently performed before lower extremity revascularization (LER). However, the incidence of various echocardiographic findings in patients with PAD and their impact on the outcomes of LER has not been well studied. Reduced ejection fraction (EF) ≤ 40% is associated with increased major adverse limb events (MALE) after LER. METHODS: The electronic medical records of patients undergoing LER in a single center were reviewed. Patients were divided based on the presence or absence of reduced EF. Patient, transthoracic echocardiogram, procedural characteristics, and outcomes were compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: A total of 1,114 patients (N = 131, 11.8% with reduced EF) underwent LER between 2013 and 2019. Patients with reduced EF were more likely to be male and have a history of coronary artery disease and heart failure. Furthermore, they were more likely to have diastolic dysfunction with moderate to severe mitral and tricuspid valve regurgitation. Patients with reduced EF were more likely to undergo LER for chronic limb-threatening ischemia, and to be treated with endovascular procedures. Perioperatively, patients with reduced EF were more likely to develop myocardial infarction. Lastly, the 2 groups had no difference in overall MALE or major amputation. However, on Kaplan-Meier curves, MALE-free survival was significantly lower for patients with reduced EF. Regression analysis demonstrated that indication and not EF was associated with MALE and MALE-free survival. CONCLUSIONS: Reduced EF is associated with decreased MALE-free survival for patients with PAD undergoing LER.

Perioperative complications of minor and major reinterventions for peripheral arterial disease.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD) frequently require reinterventions after lower-extremity revascularization (LER) to maintain perfusion. Current Society for Vascular Surgery guidelines define reinterventions as major or minor based on the magnitude of the procedure. While prior studies have compared primary LER procedures of different magnitudes, similar studies for reinterventions have not been performed. The objective of this study is to compare perioperative outcomes associated with major and minor reinterventions. METHODS: Patients undergoing LER for PAD at a tertiary care center from 2013 to 2017 were included. A retrospective review of electronic medical records was performed, and reinterventions were categorized as major or minor based on the procedure magnitude. Minor reinterventions included endovascular procedures and open revision with patch angioplasty, while major reinterventions were characterized by open surgical or endovascular LER with catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT). Perioperative outcomes following LER were captured and compared for major and minor reinterventions. An additional subgroup analysis was performed comparing outcomes associated with major reinterventions stratified into open major surgical reinterventions and CDT. RESULTS: This study included 713 patients over a mean follow-up of 2.5 years. A total of 291 patients underwent 696 ipsilateral reinterventions (range = 1-12 reinterventions). Most reinterventions were minor (72.1%, N = 502) and 27.9% (N = 194) were major. Patients receiving reinterventions had an average age of 67.2 ± 11.5 and most were white (73.5%) males (60.1%) initially treated for claudication (58.2%) and CLTI (41.8%). There was significantly higher post-operative bleeding (9.8% vs 3.4%, p = .001), arterial thrombosis (3.1% vs 1.0%, p = .047), and acute renal failure (6.2% vs 2.4%, p = .014) after major reinterventions than minor. Additionally, major reinterventions had significantly higher return to the OR (17.0% vs 11.3%, p = .046) and longer hospital stays (7.5 vs 4.3 days, p = <.0001). Overall, major reinterventions were associated with significantly increased perioperative morbidity (37.6% vs 19.7%, p ≤ .001) with no difference in perioperative mortality. In the subgroup analysis, open reinterventions resulted in significantly longer hospital stays (8.6 days vs 5.5 days, p ≤ .001) and more wound infections than CDT (11.0% vs 0%, p = .017). However, there was no other significant difference in morbidity or mortality following treatment with open surgical reinterventions or CDT. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, major reinterventions after LER were associated with greater perioperative morbidity than minor reinterventions, with no difference in mortality. Major reinterventions performed via open surgery and CDT had similar morbidity and mortality.

Etiology of lung cancer: Evidence from epidemiologic studies.

Lung cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer incidence and mortality worldwide. While smoking, radon, air pollution, as well as occupational exposure to asbestos, diesel fumes, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, nickel, and silica are well-established risk factors, many lung cancer cases cannot be explained by these known risk factors. Over the last two decades the incidence of adenocarcinoma has risen, and it now surpasses squamous cell carcinoma as the most common histologic subtype. This increase warrants new efforts to identify additional risk factors for specific lung cancer subtypes as well as a comprehensive review of current evidence from epidemiologic studies to inform future studies. Given the myriad exposures individuals experience in real-world settings, it is essential to investigate mixture effects from complex exposures and gene-environment interactions in relation to lung cancer and its subtypes.