Predicting Outcomes Following Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair Using Machine Learning.

OBJECTIVE: To develop machine learning (ML) models that predict outcomes following endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). BACKGROUND: EVAR carries non-negligible perioperative risks; however, there are no widely used outcome prediction tools. METHODS: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program targeted database was used to identify patients who underwent EVAR for infrarenal AAA between 2011 and 2021. Input features included 36 preoperative variables. The primary outcome was 30-day major adverse cardiovascular event (composite of myocardial infarction, stroke, or death). Data were split into training (70%) and test (30%) sets. Using 10-fold cross-validation, 6 ML models were trained using preoperative features. The primary model evaluation metric was area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. Model robustness was evaluated with calibration plot and Brier score. Subgroup analysis was performed to assess model performance based on age, sex, race, ethnicity, and prior AAA repair. RESULTS: Overall, 16,282 patients were included. The primary outcome of 30-day major adverse cardiovascular event occurred in 390 (2.4%) patients. Our best-performing prediction model was XGBoost, achieving an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (95% CI) of 0.95 (0.94-0.96) compared with logistic regression [0.72 [0.70-0.74)]. The calibration plot showed good agreement between predicted and observed event probabilities with a Brier score of 0.06. Model performance remained robust on all subgroup analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Our newer ML models accurately predict 30-day outcomes following EVAR using preoperative data and perform better than logistic regression. Our automated algorithms can guide risk mitigation strategies for patients being considered for EVAR.

Using Machine Learning (XGBoost) to Predict Outcomes After Infrainguinal Bypass for Peripheral Artery Disease.

OBJECTIVE: To develop machine learning (ML) algorithms that predict outcomes after infrainguinal bypass. BACKGROUND: Infrainguinal bypass for peripheral artery disease carries significant surgical risks; however, outcome prediction tools remain limited. METHODS: The Vascular Quality Initiative database was used to identify patients who underwent infrainguinal bypass for peripheral artery disease between 2003 and 2023. We identified 97 potential predictor variables from the index hospitalization [68 preoperative (demographic/clinical), 13 intraoperative (procedural), and 16 postoperative (in-hospital course/complications)]. The primary outcome was 1-year major adverse limb event (composite of surgical revision, thrombectomy/thrombolysis, or major amputation) or death. Our data were split into training (70%) and test (30%) sets. Using 10-fold cross-validation, we trained 6 ML models using preoperative features. The primary model evaluation metric was the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). The top-performing algorithm was further trained using intraoperative and postoperative features. Model robustness was evaluated using calibration plots and Brier scores. RESULTS: Overall, 59,784 patients underwent infrainguinal bypass, and 15,942 (26.7%) developed 1-year major adverse limb event/death. The best preoperative prediction model was XGBoost, achieving an AUROC (95% CI) of 0.94 (0.93-0.95). In comparison, logistic regression had an AUROC (95% CI) of 0.61 (0.59-0.63). Our XGBoost model maintained excellent performance at the intraoperative and postoperative stages, with AUROCs (95% CI's) of 0.94 (0.93-0.95) and 0.96 (0.95-0.97), respectively. Calibration plots showed good agreement between predicted and observed event probabilities with Brier scores of 0.08 (preoperative), 0.07 (intraoperative), and 0.05 (postoperative). CONCLUSIONS: ML models can accurately predict outcomes after infrainguinal bypass, outperforming logistic regression.

Development and evaluation of a prediction model for peripheral artery disease-related major adverse limb events using novel biomarker data.

OBJECTIVE: Prognostic tools for individuals with peripheral artery disease (PAD) remain limited. We developed prediction models for 3-year PAD-related major adverse limb events (MALE) using demographic, clinical, and biomarker data previously validated by our group. METHODS: We performed a prognostic study using a prospectively recruited cohort of patients with PAD (n = 569). Demographic/clinical data were recorded including sex, age, comorbidities, previous procedures, and medications. Plasma concentrations of three biomarkers (N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide [NT-proBNP], fatty acid binding protein 3 [FABP3], and FABP4) were measured at baseline. The cohort was followed for 3 years. MALE was the primary outcome (composite of open/endovascular vascular intervention or major amputation). We trained three machine learning models with 10-fold cross-validation using demographic, clinical, and biomarker data (random forest, decision trees, and Extreme Gradient Boosting [XGBoost]) to predict 3-year MALE in patients. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was the primary model evaluation metric. RESULTS: Three-year MALE was observed in 162 patients (29%). XGBoost was the top-performing predictive model for 3-year MALE, achieving the following performance metrics: AUROC = 0.88 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.84-0.94); sensitivity, 88%; specificity, 84%; positive predictive value, 83%; and negative predictive value, 91% on test set data. On an independent validation cohort of patients with PAD, XGBoost attained an AUROC of 0.87 (95% CI, 0.82-0.90). The 10 most important predictors of 3-year MALE consisted of: (1) FABP3; (2) FABP4; (3) age; (4) NT-proBNP; (5) active smoking; (6) diabetes; (7) hypertension; (8) dyslipidemia; (9) coronary artery disease; and (10) sex. CONCLUSIONS: We built robust machine learning algorithms that accurately predict 3-year MALE in patients with PAD using demographic, clinical, and novel biomarker data. Our algorithms can support risk stratification of patients with PAD for additional vascular evaluation and early aggressive medical management, thereby improving outcomes. Further validation of our models for clinical implementation is warranted.

Predicting the need for subclavian artery revascularization in thoracic endovascular aortic repair: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to investigate the effectiveness of left subclavian artery revascularization compared with non-revascularization in thoracic endovascular aortic repair, and to summarize the current evidence on its indications. METHODS: A computerized search was conducted across multiple databases, including MEDLINE, SCOPUS, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science, for studies published up to November 2023. Study selection, data abstraction, and quality assessment (using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale) were independently conducted by two reviewers, with a third author resolving discrepancies. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random-effects models and publication bias was assessed using funnel plots. RESULTS: In the 76 included studies, left subclavian artery revascularization was associated with reduced risks of stroke (OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.45-0.98; n = 15,331), spinal cord ischemia (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.56-0.99; n = 11,995), and arm ischemia (OR, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.01-0.59; n = 8438). No significant reduction in paraplegia (OR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.21-1.47; n = 1802) or mortality (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.53-1.12; n = 11,831) was observed. Moreover, the risk of endoleak was comparable in both groups (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.55-2.84; P = .60; n = 793), whereas the risk of reintervention was significantly higher in the revascularization group (OR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.03-3.83; P = .04; n = 272). Both groups had similar risks of major (OR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.19-1.09; P = .08; n = 1113), minor (OR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.01-3.45; P = .27; n = 183), renal (OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.12-3.06; P = .55; n = 310), and pulmonary (OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.16-2.15; P = .42; n = 8083) complications. The most frequent indications for left subclavian artery revascularization were primary prevention of spinal cord ischemia, augmentation of the landing zone, and primary stroke prevention. CONCLUSIONS: Left subclavian artery revascularization in thoracic endovascular aortic repair was associated with reduced neurological complications but was not found to impact mortality. The study highlights important indications for revascularization as well as significant predictors of complications, providing a basis for clinical decision-making and future research.

Using machine learning to predict outcomes following suprainguinal bypass.

OBJECTIVE: Suprainguinal bypass for peripheral artery disease (PAD) carries important surgical risks; however, outcome prediction tools remain limited. We developed machine learning (ML) algorithms that predict outcomes following suprainguinal bypass. METHODS: The Vascular Quality Initiative database was used to identify patients who underwent suprainguinal bypass for PAD between 2003 and 2023. We identified 100 potential predictor variables from the index hospitalization (68 preoperative [demographic/clinical], 13 intraoperative [procedural], and 19 postoperative [in-hospital course/complications]). The primary outcomes were major adverse limb events (MALE; composite of untreated loss of patency, thrombectomy/thrombolysis, surgical revision, or major amputation) or death at 1 year following suprainguinal bypass. Our data were split into training (70%) and test (30%) sets. Using 10-fold cross-validation, we trained six ML models using preoperative features (Extreme Gradient Boosting [XGBoost], random forest, Naïve Bayes classifier, support vector machine, artificial neural network, and logistic regression). The primary model evaluation metric was area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). The best performing algorithm was further trained using intra- and postoperative data. Model robustness was evaluated using calibration plots and Brier scores. Performance was assessed on subgroups based on age, sex, race, ethnicity, rurality, median Area Deprivation Index, symptom status, procedure type, prior intervention for PAD, concurrent interventions, and urgency. RESULTS: Overall, 16,832 patients underwent suprainguinal bypass, and 3136 (18.6%) developed 1-year MALE or death. Patients with 1-year MALE or death were older (mean age, 64.9 vs 63.5 years; P < .001) with more comorbidities, had poorer functional status (65.7% vs 80.9% independent at baseline; P < .001), and were more likely to have chronic limb-threatening ischemia (67.4% vs 47.6%; P < .001) than those without an outcome. Despite being at higher cardiovascular risk, they were less likely to receive acetylsalicylic acid or statins preoperatively and at discharge. Our best performing prediction model at the preoperative stage was XGBoost, achieving an AUROC of 0.92 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.91-0.93). In comparison, logistic regression had an AUROC of 0.67 (95% CI, 0.65-0.69). Our XGBoost model maintained excellent performance at the intra- and postoperative stages, with AUROCs of 0.93 (95% CI, 0.92-0.94) and 0.98 (95% CI, 0.97-0.99), respectively. Calibration plots showed good agreement between predicted and observed event probabilities with Brier scores of 0.12 (preoperative), 0.11 (intraoperative), and 0.10 (postoperative). Of the top 10 predictors, nine were preoperative features including chronic limb-threatening ischemia, previous procedures, comorbidities, and functional status. Model performance remained robust on all subgroup analyses. CONCLUSIONS: We developed ML models that accurately predict outcomes following suprainguinal bypass, performing better than logistic regression. Our algorithms have potential for important utility in guiding perioperative risk mitigation strategies to prevent adverse outcomes following suprainguinal bypass.

Regional variation in lower extremity revascularization and amputation for peripheral artery disease.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to quantify the recent and historical extent of regional variation in revascularization and amputation for peripheral artery disease (PAD). METHODS: This was a repeated cross-sectional analysis of all Ontarians aged 40 years or greater between 2002 and 2019. The co-primary outcomes were revascularization (endovascular or open) and major (above-ankle) amputation for PAD. For each of 14 health care administrative regions, rates per 100,000 person-years (PY) were calculated for 6-year time periods from the fiscal years 2002 to 2019. Rates were directly standardized for regional demographics (age, sex, income) and comorbidities (congestive heart failure, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic kidney disease). The extent of regional variation in revascularization and major amputation rates for each time period was quantified by the ratio of 90th over the 10th percentile (PRR). RESULTS: In 2014 to 2019, there were large differences across regions in demographics (rural living [range, 0%-39.4%], lowest neighborhood income quintile [range, 10.1%-25.5%]) and comorbidities (diabetes [range, 14.2%-22.0%], chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [range, 7.8%-17.9%]), and chronic kidney disease [range, 2.1%-4.0%]. Standardized revascularization rates ranged across regions from 52.6 to 132.6/100,000 PY and standardized major amputation rates ranged from 10.0 to 37.7/100,000 PY. The extent of regional variation was large (PRR ≥2.0) for both revascularization and major amputation. From 2002-2004 to 2017-2019, the extent of regional variation increased from moderate to large for revascularization (standardized PRR, 1.87 to 2.04) and major amputation (standardized PRR, 1.94 to 3.07). CONCLUSIONS: Significant regional differences in revascularization and major amputation rates related to PAD remain after standardizing for regional differences in demographics and comorbidities. These differences have not improved over time.

Racial and ethnic differences in presentation severity and postoperative outcomes in vascular surgery.

BACKGROUND: We assessed the effect of race and ethnicity on presentation severity and postoperative outcomes in those with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs), carotid artery stenosis (CAS), peripheral arterial disease (PAD), and type B aortic dissection (TBAD). METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception until December 2020. Two reviewers independently selected randomized controlled trials and observational studies reporting race and/or ethnicity and presentation severity and/or postoperative outcomes for adult patients who had undergone major vascular procedures. They independently extracted the study data and assessed the risk of bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. The meta-analysis used random effects models to derive the odds ratios (ORs) and risk ratios (RRs) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The primary outcome was presentation severity stratified by the proportion of patients with advanced disease, including ruptured vs nonruptured AAA, symptomatic vs asymptomatic CAS, chronic limb-threatening ischemia vs claudication, and complicated vs uncomplicated TBAD. The secondary outcomes included postoperative all-cause mortality and disease-specific outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 81 studies met the inclusion criteria. Black (OR, 4.18; 95% CI, 1.31-13.26), Hispanic (OR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.85-2.19), and Indigenous (OR, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.39-2.80) patients were more likely to present with ruptured AAAs than were White patients. Black and Hispanic patients had had higher symptomatic CAS (Black: OR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.04-1.38; Hispanic: OR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.20-1.45) and chronic limb-threatening ischemia (Black: OR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.14-2.43; Hispanic: OR, 1.73; 95% CI 1.13-2.65) presentation rates. No study had evaluated the effect of race or ethnicity on complicated TBAD. All-cause mortality was higher for Black (RR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.01-1.51), Hispanic (RR, 1.90; 95% CI, 1.57-2.31), and Indigenous (RR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.12-1.37) patients after AAA repair. Postoperatively, Black (RR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.19-2.00) and Hispanic (RR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.31-1.81) patients were associated with stroke/transient ischemic attack after carotid revascularization and lower extremity amputation (RR, 1.90; 95% CI, 1.76-2.06; and RR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.48-1.94, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Certain visible minorities were associated with higher morbidity and mortality across various vascular surgery presentations. Further research to understand the underpinnings is required.

Evaluating national guideline concordance of recurrent interventions after radiocephalic arteriovenous fistula creation.

OBJECTIVE: Radiocephalic arteriovenous fistulas have been historically perceived as requiring multiple follow-up procedural interventions to achieve maturation and maintain patency. Recent clinical practice guidelines from the National Kidney Foundation's Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (KDOQI) emphasize a patient-centered hemodialysis access strategy with new maximum targets for intervention rates, potentially conflicting with concomitant recommendations to prioritize autogenous forearm hemodialysis access creation. The present descriptive study seeks to assess whether radiocephalic fistulas can meet the KDOQI guideline benchmarks for interventions following access creation, and to elucidate clinical and anatomic characteristics associated with the timing and frequency of interventions following radiocephalic arteriovenous fistula creation. METHODS: Prospective patient-level data from the multicenter PATENCY-1 and PATENCY-2 randomized trials, which enrolled patients undergoing new radiocephalic arteriovenous fistula creation, was analyzed (ClinicalTrials.govNCT02110901 and NCT02414841). The primary outcome was the rate of interventions at 1 year postoperatively. Incidence rates were calculated, and time to surgical or endovascular intervention following fistula creation was modeled using recurrent event extensions of the Cox proportional hazards model. Confidence intervals at the 95% level were calculated using nonparametric bootstrapping. RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 914 patients; mean age was 57 years (standard deviation, 13 years), and 22% were female. Median follow-up was 707 days (interquartile range, 447-1066 days). The incidence of interventions per person-year was 1.04 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.95-1.13) overall; 1.10 (95% CI, 0.98-1.21) before fistula use, and 0.96 (95% CI, 0.82-1.11) after fistula use. The most common interventions overall were balloon angioplasty (54.9% of all interventions), venous side-branch ligation (16.4%), and open revisions (eg, proximalization from snuffbox to wrist, 16.4%). The locations requiring balloon angioplasty included the juxta-anastomotic segment (51.7% of angioplasties), the outflow vein (29.2%), the inflow artery (14.8%), the central veins (3.8%), and the cephalic arch (0.5%). Common indications were to restore or maintain patency (75.6% of all interventions), assist maturation (14.9%), improve depth (4.4%), or improve augmentation (3.0%). In the multivariable regression analysis, female sex (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.21; 95% CI, 1.05-1.45), diabetes (HR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.01-1.46), and intraoperative vein diameter <3.0 mm (vs ≥4.0 mm: HR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.02-1.66) were associated with earlier and more frequent interventions. Patients not on hemodialysis at the time of fistula creation underwent less frequent interventions (HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.59-0.81). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with radiocephalic arteriovenous fistulas can expect to undergo one intervention, on average, in the first year after creation, which aligns with current KDOQI guidelines. Patients already requiring hemodialysis, female patients, patients with diabetes, and patients with intraoperative vein diameters <3.0 mm were at increased risk for repeated intervention. No subgroup exceeded guideline-suggested maximum thresholds for recurrent interventions. Overall, the results demonstrate that creation of radiocephalic arteriovenous fistula remains a guideline-concordant strategy when part of an end-stage kidney disease life-plan in appropriately selected patients.

Predicting outcomes following open revascularization for aortoiliac occlusive disease using machine learning.

OBJECTIVE: Open surgical treatment options for aortoiliac occlusive disease carry significant perioperative risks; however, outcome prediction tools remain limited. Using machine learning (ML), we developed automated algorithms that predict 30-day outcomes following open aortoiliac revascularization. METHODS: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) targeted vascular database was used to identify patients who underwent open aortoiliac revascularization for atherosclerotic disease between 2011 and 2021. Input features included 38 preoperative demographic/clinical variables. The primary outcome was 30-day major adverse limb event (MALE; composite of untreated loss of patency, major reintervention, or major amputation) or death. The 30-day secondary outcomes were individual components of the primary outcome, major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE; composite of myocardial infarction, stroke, or death), individual components of MACE, wound complication, bleeding, other morbidity, non-home discharge, and unplanned readmission. Our data were split into training (70%) and test (30%) sets. Using 10-fold cross-validation, we trained six ML models using preoperative features. The primary model evaluation metric was area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). Model robustness was evaluated with calibration plot and Brier score. Variable importance scores were calculated to determine the top 10 predictive features. Performance was assessed on subgroups based on age, sex, race, ethnicity, symptom status, procedure type, and urgency. RESULTS: Overall, 9649 patients were included. The primary outcome of 30-day MALE or death occurred in 1021 patients (10.6%). Our best performing prediction model for 30-day MALE or death was XGBoost, achieving an AUROC of 0.95 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.94-0.96). In comparison, logistic regression had an AUROC of 0.79 (95% CI, 0.77-0.81). For 30-day secondary outcomes, XGBoost achieved AUROCs between 0.87 and 0.97 (untreated loss of patency [0.95], major reintervention [0.88], major amputation [0.96], death [0.97], MACE [0.95], myocardial infarction [0.88], stroke [0.93], wound complication [0.94], bleeding [0.87], other morbidity [0.96], non-home discharge [0.90], and unplanned readmission [0.91]). The calibration plot showed good agreement between predicted and observed event probabilities with a Brier score of 0.05. The strongest predictive feature in our algorithm was chronic limb-threatening ischemia. Model performance remained robust on all subgroup analyses of specific demographic/clinical populations. CONCLUSIONS: Our ML models accurately predict 30-day outcomes following open aortoiliac revascularization using preoperative data, performing better than logistic regression. They have potential for important utility in guiding risk-mitigation strategies for patients being considered for open aortoiliac revascularization to improve outcomes.

Using machine learning to predict outcomes following open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: Prediction of outcomes following open abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair remains challenging with a lack of widely used tools to guide perioperative management. We developed machine learning (ML) algorithms that predict outcomes following open AAA repair. METHODS: The Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) database was used to identify patients who underwent elective open AAA repair between 2003 and 2023. Input features included 52 preoperative demographic/clinical variables. All available preoperative variables from VQI were used to maximize predictive performance. The primary outcome was in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE; composite of myocardial infarction, stroke, or death). Secondary outcomes were individual components of the primary outcome, other in-hospital complications, and 1-year mortality and any reintervention. We split our data into training (70%) and test (30%) sets. Using 10-fold cross-validation, six ML models were trained using preoperative features (Extreme Gradient Boosting [XGBoost], random forest, Naïve Bayes classifier, support vector machine, artificial neural network, and logistic regression). The primary model evaluation metric was area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). Model robustness was evaluated with calibration plot and Brier score. The top 10 predictive features in our final model were determined based on variable importance scores. Performance was assessed on subgroups based on age, sex, race, ethnicity, rurality, median area deprivation index, proximal clamp site, prior aortic surgery, and concomitant procedures. RESULTS: Overall, 12,027 patients were included. The primary outcome of in-hospital MACE occurred in 630 patients (5.2%). Compared with patients without a primary outcome, those who developed in-hospital MACE were older with more comorbidities, demonstrated poorer functional status, had more complex aneurysms, and were more likely to require concomitant procedures. Our best performing prediction model for in-hospital MACE was XGBoost, achieving an AUROC of 0.93 (95% confidence interval, 0.92-0.94). Comparatively, logistic regression had an AUROC of 0.71 (95% confidence interval, 0.70-0.73). For secondary outcomes, XGBoost achieved AUROCs between 0.84 and 0.94. The calibration plot showed good agreement between predicted and observed event probabilities with a Brier score of 0.05. These findings highlight the excellent predictive performance of the XGBoost model. The top three predictive features in our algorithm for in-hospital MACE following open AAA repair were: (1) coronary artery disease; (2) American Society of Anesthesiologists classification; and (3) proximal clamp site. Model performance remained robust on all subgroup analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Open AAA repair outcomes can be accurately predicted using preoperative data with our ML models, which perform better than logistic regression. Our automated algorithms can help guide risk-mitigation strategies for patients being considered for open AAA repair to improve outcomes.

Using machine learning to predict outcomes following carotid endarterectomy.

OBJECTIVE: Prediction of outcomes following carotid endarterectomy (CEA) remains challenging, with a lack of standardized tools to guide perioperative management. We used machine learning (ML) to develop automated algorithms that predict outcomes following CEA. METHODS: The Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) database was used to identify patients who underwent CEA between 2003 and 2022. We identified 71 potential predictor variables (features) from the index hospitalization (43 preoperative [demographic/clinical], 21 intraoperative [procedural], and 7 postoperative [in-hospital complications]). The primary outcome was stroke or death at 1 year following CEA. Our data were split into training (70%) and test (30%) sets. Using 10-fold cross-validation, we trained six ML models using preoperative features (Extreme Gradient Boosting [XGBoost], random forest, Naïve Bayes classifier, support vector machine, artificial neural network, and logistic regression). The primary model evaluation metric was area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). After selecting the best performing algorithm, additional models were built using intra- and postoperative data. Model robustness was evaluated using calibration plots and Brier scores. Performance was assessed on subgroups based on age, sex, race, ethnicity, insurance status, symptom status, and urgency of surgery. RESULTS: Overall, 166,369 patients underwent CEA during the study period. In total, 7749 patients (4.7%) had the primary outcome of stroke or death at 1 year. Patients with an outcome were older with more comorbidities, had poorer functional status, and demonstrated higher risk anatomic features. They were also more likely to undergo intraoperative surgical re-exploration and have in-hospital complications. Our best performing prediction model at the preoperative stage was XGBoost, achieving an AUROC of 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.89-0.91). In comparison, logistic regression had an AUROC of 0.65 (95% CI, 0.63-0.67), and existing tools in the literature demonstrate AUROCs ranging from 0.58 to 0.74. Our XGBoost models maintained excellent performance at the intra- and postoperative stages, with AUROCs of 0.90 (95% CI, 0.89-0.91) and 0.94 (95% CI, 0.93-0.95), respectively. Calibration plots showed good agreement between predicted and observed event probabilities with Brier scores of 0.15 (preoperative), 0.14 (intraoperative), and 0.11 (postoperative). Of the top 10 predictors, eight were preoperative features, including comorbidities, functional status, and previous procedures. Model performance remained robust on all subgroup analyses. CONCLUSIONS: We developed ML models that accurately predict outcomes following CEA. Our algorithms perform better than logistic regression and existing tools, and therefore, have potential for important utility in guiding perioperative risk mitigation strategies to prevent adverse outcomes.

Machine learning to predict outcomes following endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

BACKGROUND: Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) carries important perioperative risks; however, there are no widely used outcome prediction tools. The aim of this study was to apply machine learning (ML) to develop automated algorithms that predict 1-year mortality following EVAR. METHODS: The Vascular Quality Initiative database was used to identify patients who underwent elective EVAR for infrarenal AAA between 2003 and 2023. Input features included 47 preoperative demographic/clinical variables. The primary outcome was 1-year all-cause mortality. Data were split into training (70 per cent) and test (30 per cent) sets. Using 10-fold cross-validation, 6 ML models were trained using preoperative features with logistic regression as the baseline comparator. The primary model evaluation metric was area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). Model robustness was evaluated with calibration plot and Brier score. RESULTS: Some 63 655 patients were included. One-year mortality occurred in 3122 (4.9 per cent) patients. The best performing prediction model for 1-year mortality was XGBoost, achieving an AUROC (95 per cent c.i.) of 0.96 (0.95-0.97). Comparatively, logistic regression had an AUROC (95 per cent c.i.) of 0.69 (0.68-0.71). The calibration plot showed good agreement between predicted and observed event probabilities with a Brier score of 0.04. The top 3 predictive features in the algorithm were 1) unfit for open AAA repair, 2) functional status, and 3) preoperative dialysis. CONCLUSIONS: In this data set, machine learning was able to predict 1-year mortality following EVAR using preoperative data and outperformed standard logistic regression models.

The influence of diabetes on temporal trends in lower extremity revascularisation and amputation for peripheral artery disease: A population-based repeated cross-sectional analysis.

AIM/HYPOTHESIS: To describe the influence of diabetes on temporal changes in rates of lower extremity revascularisation and amputation for peripheral artery disease (PAD) in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: In this population-based repeated cross-sectional study, we calculated annual rates of lower extremity revascularisation (open or endovascular) and amputation (toe, foot or leg) related to PAD among Ontario residents aged ≥40 years between 2002 and 2019. Annual rate ratios (relative to 2002) adjusted for changes in diabetes prevalence alone, as well as fully adjusted for changes in demographics, diabetes and other comorbidities, were estimated using generalized estimating equation models to model population-level effects while accounting for correlation within units of observation. RESULTS: Compared with 2002, the Ontario population in 2019 exhibited a significantly higher prevalence of diabetes (18% vs. 10%). Between 2002 and 2019, the crude rate of revascularisation increased from 75.1 to 90.7/100,000 person-years (unadjusted RR = 1.10, 95% CI = 1.07-1.13). However, after adjustment, there was no longer an increase in the rate of revascularisation (diabetes-adjusted RR = 0.98, 95% CI = 0.96-1.01, fully-adjusted RR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.91-0.96). The crude rate of amputation decreased from 2002 to 2019 from 49.5 to 45.4/100,000 person-years (unadjusted RR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.75-0.81), but was more pronounced after adjustment (diabetes-adjusted RR = 0.62, 95% CI = 0.60-0.64; fully-adjusted RR = 0.58, 95% CI = 0.56-0.60). CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Diabetes prevalence rates strongly influenced rates of revascularisation and amputation related to PAD. A decrease in amputations related to PAD over time was attenuated by rising diabetes prevalence rates.

A novel Canadian multidisciplinary acute care pathway for people hospitalised with a diabetic foot ulcer.

This manuscript describes the implementation and initial evaluation of a novel Canadian acute care pathway for people with a diabetic foot ulcer (DFU). A multidisciplinary team developed and implemented an acute care pathway for patients with a DFU who presented to the emergency department (ED) and required hospitalisation at a tertiary care hospital in Canada. Processes of care, length of stay (LOS), and hospitalisation costs were considered through retrospective cohort study of all DFU hospitalizations from pathway launch in December 2018 to December 2020. There were 82 DFU-related hospital admissions through the ED of which 55 required invasive intervention: 28 (34.1%) minor amputations, 16 (19.5%) abscess drainage and debridement, 6 (7.3%) lower extremity revascularisations, 5 (6.1%) major amputations. Mean hospital LOS was 8.8 ± 4.9 days. Mean hospitalisation cost was $20 569 (±14 143): $25 901 (±15 965) when surgical intervention was required and $9279 (±7106) when it was not. LOS and hospitalisation costs compared favourably to historical data. An acute care DFU pathway can support the efficient evaluation and management of patients hospitalised with a DFU. A dedicated multidisciplinary DFU care team is a valuable resource for hospitals in Canada.

Management and In-hospital Mortality of 2203 Patients With a Traumatic Intimal Tear of the Thoracic Aorta.

OBJECTIVE: Our goal was to describe contemporary management and inhospital mortality associated with blunt thoracic aortic intimal tears (IT) within the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: The evidence basis for nonoperative expectant management of traumatic iT of the thoracic aorta remains weak. METHODS: All adult patients with a thoracic aortic IT following blunt trauma were captured from Level I and II North American Centers enrolled in Trauma Quality Improvement Program from 2010 to 2017. For each patient, we extracted demographics, injury characteristics, the timing and approach of thoracic aortic repair and in-hospital mortality. Mortality attributable to IT was calculated by comparing IT patients to a propensity-score matched control cohort of severely injured blunt trauma patients without aortic injury. RESULTS: There were 2203 IT patients across 315 facilities. Injury most often resulted from motor vehicle collision (75%). A total of 758 patients (34%) underwent operative management, with 93% (N = 708) of repairs performed via an endovascular approach. Median time to surgery was 11 hours (IQR 4- 40). The frequency of operative management was higher in patients without traumatic brain injury (TBI) (35%, N = 674) compared to those with TBI (29%, N = 84) (P = 0.024). Compared to severely injured blunt trauma patients without aortic injury, ITwas not associated with additional in-hospital mortality (10.7% for IT vs 11.7% for no IT, absolute risk difference: -1.0%, 95% CI: -2.9% to 0.8%). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of blunt thoracic IT are managed nonoperatively and IT does not confer additional in-hospital mortality risk. Future studies should focus on the risk of injury progression.

Trends in operative case volumes of Canadian vascular surgery trainees.

OBJECTIVE: Vascular surgery has evolved with increasing use of endovascular therapies and a decline in open surgery. The influence of these changes, in addition to a new vascular surgery training program introduced in 2012, on case volumes of vascular trainees is not known. We sought to evaluate trends in operative case volumes of Canadian vascular surgery trainees. METHODS: A survey was administered to graduates of the Canadian Royal College-accredited Vascular Fellowships (VFs) and Integrated Vascular Surgery Residency (IVSR) programs (2007-2019) to record cases performed during their final 2 years of training. Procedures of interest were open abdominal aortic aneurysm (oAAA) repair, open thoracic/thoracoabdominal aortic (oTAA/TAAA) repair, lower extremity bypass (LEB), carotid endarterectomy (CEA), lower extremity endovascular intervention (LEEI), and endovascular abdominal, advanced, and thoracic aortic repair (EVAR, aEVAR, and TEVAR). Case volumes were analyzed overall, and by graduation year, type of training program, and resident demographics. RESULTS: A total of 60 participants (10% female) from all the 10 Canadian training institutions responded (response rate, 63%). There was a declining trend in overall procedures performed since the introduction of IVSR in 2012 (median, 427 [interquartile range (IQR), 304-496] in 2007-2012 vs median, 342 [IQR, 279-405] in 2013-2019; P = .055), driven by a significant decline in open vascular surgery cases (median, 273 [IQR, 221-339] in 2007-2012 vs median, 156 [IQR, 128-181] in 2013-2019; P = .001). Case volumes of oAAA, LEB, and CEA declined by 44%, 40%, and 45%, respectively. Compared with vascular fellows, IVSR residents logged ∼2.5 times more aEVARs (median, 8; IQR, 2-11 vs median, 19; IQR, 8-27; P = .001) and ∼1.5 times more LEEIs (median, 60; IQR, 40-99 vs median, 93; IQR, 69-120; P = .018). Trainees were most confident (range, 90%-100%) in performing oAAA, EVAR, LEB, LEEI, and CEA after training, and least confident in performing oTAA/TAAA and aEVAR (20% and 49% confidence, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Operative case volumes of Canadian vascular surgery trainees since the introduction of IVSR program in 2012 have decreased, driven by declining exposure to open cases. However, trainees continue to receive adequate operative exposure to perform most standard vascular procedures confidently upon graduation.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of sex- and gender-based differences in presentation severity and outcomes in adults undergoing major vascular surgery.

BACKGROUND: Studies have investigated the effects of gender on vascular surgery care. However, to the best of our knowledge, no comprehensive synthesis of the literature has been performed on the presentation severity and postoperative outcomes for abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs), carotid artery stenosis (CAS), peripheral artery disease (PAD), and type B aortic dissection (TBAD). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the sex and gender differences in the presentation severity and outcomes for patients who had undergone major vascular surgery. METHODS: The MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases were searched from their inception to December 2020. All observational studies and randomized controlled trials that had evaluated the gender differences in presentation severity or outcomes for patients who had undergone open or endovascular AAA or TBAD repair, carotid endarterectomy or stenting, or lower extremity bypass or angioplasty were included. The presentation severity was defined as follows: AAA (symptomatic or ruptured vs asymptomatic), carotid artery disease (symptomatic vs asymptomatic), PAD (chronic limb-threatening ischemia [CLTI] vs claudication), and TBAD (complicated vs uncomplicated). The postoperative outcomes included long-term mortality, stroke, amputation, revascularization, and graft and/or stent thrombosis. A random effects model was used to derive the odds ratios (ORs), risk ratios (RRs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: A total of 236 studies met the inclusion criteria for our systematic review. Of the 236 studies, 86 (n = 2,099,534 patients), 62 (n = 2,300,888 patients), 28 (n = 2,394,143 patients), and 4 (n = 4525 patients) had evaluated the effects of gender on the outcomes for patients with AAA, CAS, PAD, and TBAD, respectively. The female patients were more likely to have presented with a ruptured AAA (OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.09-1.28) and CLTI (OR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.02-1.19) than were the male patients. The all-cause mortality for those with an AAA (RR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.20-1.52) and those with PAD (RR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.05-1.23) was higher for the women. However, the female patients with CAS had had lower all-cause mortality (RR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.76-0.94). No sex differences were found in the TBAD outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: We found that female patients who had undergone vascular surgery were associated with more severe disease at presentation, with a greater proportion of ruptured AAAs and CLTI. This potentially contributes to the higher mortality rates for female patients with AAAs and PAD compared with male patients. Future studies are needed to evaluate the reasons for these disparities, and greater efforts are required to support women in receiving more timely vascular surgical care.

Cardiovascular efficacy of liraglutide and semaglutide in individuals with diabetes and peripheral artery disease.

AIM: To evaluate the cardiovascular (CV) efficacy of liraglutide and semaglutide in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and peripheral artery disease (PAD). MATERIALS AND METHODS: LEADER and SUSTAIN 6 trials investigated subcutaneous liraglutide (≤1.8 mg/day) and semaglutide (0.5 or 1.0 mg/week), respectively, versus placebo in patients with T2D and high CV risk (median follow-up: 3.8 and 2.1 years, respectively). The primary outcome was a composite of CV death, non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke (major adverse CV event [MACE]) according to the presence of PAD at baseline. RESULTS: Overall, 1184/9340 (12.7%) patients in LEADER and 460/3297 (14.0%) in SUSTAIN 6 had PAD at baseline. Patients with PAD were at an ~35% increased risk of MACE versus those without (LEADER: hazard ratio [HR] 1.36, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.17-1.58; SUSTAIN 6: HR 1.33, 95% CI 0.94-1.83). The effects of both therapies on MACE were consistently beneficial in patients with PAD (liraglutide: HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.58-1.01; semaglutide: 0.61, 0.33-1.13) and without (liraglutide: HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.79-1.00; semaglutide: HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.58-1.01; Pinteraction  = .34 for liraglutide and .49 for semaglutide). Absolute risk reductions for MACE were higher in patients with PAD (liraglutide: 4.13%-point, 95% CI -0.15-8.42; semaglutide: 4.63%-point, 95% CI -0.58-9.84) versus without (liraglutide:1.42%-point, 95% CI -0.03-2.87; semaglutide: 1.90%-point, 95% CI 0.00-3.80). CONCLUSION: Both liraglutide and semaglutide reduce MACE with consistent CV efficacy regardless of PAD status.

Outcomes of abdominal aortic aneurysm repair among patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: In the present study, we compared the outcomes of elective abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair in patients with and without rheumatoid arthritis (RA) stratified by the type of surgery. METHODS: A retrospective population-based cohort study was conducted from 2003 to 2016. Linked administrative health data from Ontario, Canada were used to identify all patients aged ≥65 years who had undergone elective open or endovascular AAA repair during the study period. Patients were identified using validated procedure and billing codes and matching using propensity scores. The primary outcome was survival. The secondary outcomes were major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE)-free survival (defined as freedom from death, myocardial infarction, and stroke), reintervention, and secondary rupture. RESULTS: Of 14,816 patients undergoing elective AAA repair, a diagnosis of RA was present for 309 (2.0%). The propensity-matched cohort included 234 pairs of RA and control patients. The matched cohort was followed up for a mean ± standard deviation of 4.93 ± 3.35 years, and the median survival was 6.76 and 7.31 years for the RA and control groups, respectively. Cox regression analysis demonstrated no statistically significant differences in the hazards for death, MACE, reintervention, or secondary rupture. Analysis of the differences in outcomes stratified by repair approach also showed no statistically significant differences in the hazards for death, MACE, reintervention, or secondary rupture. CONCLUSIONS: We found no statistically significant differences in survival, MACE, reintervention, or secondary rupture among patients with RA undergoing elective AAA repair compared with controls. Further studies are required to evaluate the impact of comorbidities and antirheumatic medications on the outcomes of elective AAA repair.

Health care costs of endovascular compared with open thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: To compare 1-year health care costs between endovascular and open thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA). METHODS: Population-based administrative health databases were used to capture TAAA repairs performed in Ontario, Canada, between January 2006 and February 2017. All health care costs incurred by the Ministry of Health from a single-payer universal health care system were included. Costs of the aortic endografts and ancillary devices for the index procedure were estimated as C$44,000 per endovascular case vs C$1000 for open cases, based on previous reports. Costs (2017 Canadian dollars) were calculated in phases (1, 1-3, 3-6, and 6-12 months from surgery) with censoring for death. For each phase, propensity score matching of endovascular and open cases based on preoperative patient and hospital characteristics was used. The association between preoperative characteristics (including repair approach) and the first month postprocedure cost was characterized through multivariable analysis. RESULTS: Overall 664 TAAA repairs were identified (open, n = 361 [54.5%] and endovascular, n = 303 [45.6%]). At 1 month, the median cost was higher for endovascular TAAA repair in the prematching cohort (C$64,892 vs C$36,647; P < .01). Similarly, in 241 well-balanced endovascular/open patient pairs after propensity score matching, the median health care costs were higher in endovascular TAAA cases during the first month (C$62,802 vs C$33,605; P < .01). The 1- to 3-month median cost was not statistically different between endovascular and open TAAA cases either before matching (C$2781 vs C$2618; P = .71) or after matching (C$2762 vs C$2092; P = .58). Likewise, in the 3- to 6-month and 6- to 12-month postprocedure intervals, there were no significant differences in the median health care costs between groups. On multivariable analysis, older age (5-year increments) (relative change [RC] in mean cost, 1.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-1.06; P = .01), urgent procedures (RC, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.10-1.52; P < .01), and history of stroke (RC, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.00-1.78; P = .05) were associated with higher costs in the first postoperative month, whereas open relative to endovascular TAAA repair was associated with a decreased 1-month cost (RC, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.56-0.74; P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: TAAA repair is expensive regardless of technique. Compared with open TAAA repair, endovascular repair was associated with a higher early cost, owing to the upfront cost of the endograft and aortic ancillary devices. There was no difference in cost from 1 to 12 months after repair. A decrease in the cost of endovascular devices might allow equivalent costs between endovascular and open TAAA repair.