The Effect of One Year Aneurysm Sac Dynamics on Five Year Mortality and Continued Aneurysm Sac Evolution.

OBJECTIVE: One year aneurysm sac dynamics after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) were independently associated with greater risk of all-cause mortality in prior registry studies but were limited in completeness and granularity. This retrospective analysis aimed to study the impact of sac dynamics on survival within the Endurant Stent Graft Global Registry (ENGAGE) with five year follow up. METHODS: A total of 1 263 subjects were enrolled in the ENGAGE Registry between March 2009 and April 2011. One year aneurysm sac changes were calculated from one month post-operative imaging scans and the scan closest to the time of one year follow up. Sac regression was defined as a sac decrease of ≥ 5 mm and sac expansion as aneurysm sac growth ≥ 5 mm. The primary outcome was rate of five year all-cause mortality. Kaplan-Meier estimates for freedom from all-cause mortality were calculated. Multivariable Cox regression was used to determine the association between sac dynamics and all-cause mortality. RESULTS: At one year, 441 of the 949 study participants with appropriate imaging (46%) had abdominal aortic aneurysm sac regression, 462 (49%) remained stable, and 46 (4.8%) had sac expansion. For patients with sac regression, five year all-cause mortality was 20%, compared with 28% for stable sac (p = .007) and 37% for the sac expansion (p = .010) cohorts. After adjustment, sac expansion and stable sac cohorts were associated with greater all-cause mortality (expansion: hazard ratio [HR] 1.8; 95% CI 1.1 - 3.2; p = .032; stable: HR 1.4; 95% CI 1.1 - 1.9; p = .019). CONCLUSION: In the ENGAGE Global Registry, one year rate of sac regression was 46%, and one year sac regression was observed to be associated with greater five year survival, corroborating prior findings utilising data from vascular registries. Sac regression could become the new standard for success after EVAR.

An international, multispecialty, expert-based Delphi Consensus document on controversial issues in the management of patients with asymptomatic and symptomatic carotid stenosis.

OBJECTIVE: Despite the publication of various national/international guidelines, several questions concerning the management of patients with asymptomatic (AsxCS) and symptomatic (SxCS) carotid stenosis remain unanswered. The aim of this international, multi-specialty, expert-based Delphi Consensus document was to address these issues to help clinicians make decisions when guidelines are unclear. METHODS: Fourteen controversial topics were identified. A three-round Delphi Consensus process was performed including 61 experts. The aim of Round 1 was to investigate the differing views and opinions regarding these unresolved topics. In Round 2, clarifications were asked from each participant. In Round 3, the questionnaire was resent to all participants for their final vote. Consensus was reached when ≥75% of experts agreed on a specific response. RESULTS: Most experts agreed that: (1) the current periprocedural/in-hospital stroke/death thresholds for performing a carotid intervention should be lowered from 6% to 4% in patients with SxCS and from 3% to 2% in patients with AsxCS; (2) the time threshold for a patient being considered "recently symptomatic" should be reduced from the current definition of "6 months" to 3 months or less; (3) 80% to 99% AsxCS carries a higher risk of stroke compared with 60% to 79% AsxCS; (4) factors beyond the grade of stenosis and symptoms should be added to the indications for revascularization in AsxCS patients (eg, plaque features of vulnerability and silent infarctions on brain computed tomography scans); and (5) shunting should be used selectively, rather than always or never. Consensus could not be reached on the remaining topics due to conflicting, inadequate, or controversial evidence. CONCLUSIONS: The present international, multi-specialty expert-based Delphi Consensus document attempted to provide responses to several unanswered/unresolved issues. However, consensus could not be achieved on some topics, highlighting areas requiring future research.

Predicting Prosthetic Mobility at Discharge From Rehabilitation Following Major Amputation in Vascular Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to construct a decision aid to estimate the likelihood of independence with a prosthesis following rehabilitation for limb loss secondary to advanced ischaemia (acute or chronic limb threatening ischaemia) or diabetic foot disease (DFD). A secondary aim was to determine whether prosthetic independence is a surrogate marker of long term survival. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of a prospectively maintained database of unilateral amputations due to ischaemia or DFD entering rehabilitation between 2007 and 2020 was performed. Predictors of independent prosthetic mobility (IPM) were used in construction of the IPM prediction model, which underwent bootstrap internal and criterion validation through correlation with predictors of other measures of function: Timed Up and Go (TUG) and two minute walk test. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses were performed to address the secondary aim. RESULTS: Of the 771 patients included, only 49.9% of amputees achieved IPM. Independent negative predictors of IPM were age > 75 years, female sex, higher amputation level, active malignancy, cerebrovascular disease, end stage renal disease, and cognitive impairment. The model yielded high discrimination (C statistic 0.778), and internal validation was demonstrated with bootstrapping (C statistic 0.778), confirming no over optimism. There was a strong correlation between IPM, TUG, and two minute distance and their predictors, confirming strong criterion validity. The IPM group had a median survival of 93.7 (80.7, 105) months, whereas the non-IPM group fared worse with a median survival of 56.6 (48.5, 66.7) months (p < .001). CONCLUSION: An internally validated decision aid for estimating the likelihood of independence with a prosthesis after major amputation was constructed. A strong association between female sex and poorer prosthetic mobility was observed. Prosthetic function was shown to be a surrogate marker of long term survival. Future research will involve external validation studies to confirm the generalisability of the decision aid in clinical practice.

Association between statin-use and mobility and long-term survival after major lower limb amputation.

AIM: The aim of this study was to determine if there is an association between statin-use and prosthetic mobility and long-term survival in patients receiving rehabilitation after major amputation for lower limb arterial disease. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of prospectively maintained data (2008-2020) from a centre for rehabilitation was performed. Patients were grouped by statin-use status and sub-grouped by the combination of statin and antithrombotic drugs (antiplatelets or anticoagulants). Outcomes were prosthetic mobility (SIGAM score, timed-up-go and 2-min walking distance) and long-term survival. Regression, Kaplan-Meier and Cox-proportional hazard analyses were performed to test associations adjusted to confounders. RESULTS: Of 771 patients, 499 (64.7%) were on a statin before amputation or prescribed a statin peri-operatively. Rate of statin-use was significantly lower among female (53.3%) compared to male (68.2%) patients, P < 0.001. Statin-use was associated with significantly better prosthetic independence (53.1% vs 44.1%, P = 0.017), timed-up-go (mean difference of 4 s, P = 0.04) and long-term survival HR 0.59 (0.48-0.72, P < 0.001). Significance persisted after adjusting for confounding factors and in subgroup analyses. The combination of statin with antiplatelet was associated with the most superior survival, HR 0.51 (0.40-0.65, P < 0.001). Sensitivity analysis (exclusion of non-users of prosthesis) showed that statin-use remained a significant indicator of longer survival, maximally when combined with antiplatelet use HR 0.52 (0.39-0.68, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Statin-use is associated with better mobility and long-term survival in rehabilitees after limb loss, particularly when used in combination with antiplatelets. Significantly lower rates of statin-use were observed in female patients. Further research is warranted on gender disparities in statin-use and causality in their association with improved mobility and survival.

The Fate of Patients Opportunistically Screened for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms During Echocardiogram or Arterial Duplex Scans.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the long term outcomes of individuals who attended for transthoracic echocardiograms (TTEs) or lower limb arterial duplex scans (LLADS) and were opportunistically screened for abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA). METHODS: Follow up of a prospective single centre pilot cohort study conducted between December 2012 and September 2014 at a tertiary vascular centre in the United Kingdom. Men and Women aged 65 and over were invited to undergo AAA screening when attending hospital for TTE or LLADS. Screening was performed by ultrasonographic examination of the abdomen at the end of their planned scans. AAA was defined as an abdominal aorta outer wall to outer wall anteroposterior diameter of 30 mm or more. Patients were excluded if they had a known AAA or previous abdominal aorta intervention. Follow up outcomes were evaluated in December 2020. RESULTS: 762 patients were enrolled in this study; 486 had TTE and 276 patients had LLADS. The overall incidence of AAA was 54 (7.1%) in the combined cohort, 25 (5.1%) in the TTE group, and 29 (10.5%) in the LLADS group. After a median 7.6 years, two of the 54 AAAs received intervention in the form of endovascular repair. Three others reached treatment threshold but were managed conservatively. The overall intervention rate was 3.7% of detected AAAs. Adjusted mortality rates in those with AAA vs. without was 64.8% and 36%, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] 2.02, p < .001). Diabetes (HR 1.35, p = .015) and older age (HR 1.18, p = .17) were the other factors associated with death. CONCLUSION: AAA is associated with a significantly increased mortality rate. Populations attending hospital for TTE or LLADS demonstrate a higher prevalence of AAA than population based screening; however, the proportion offered AAA intervention was low. Further research into opportunistic screening should target those more likely to undergo AAA repair, unless other interventions are demonstrated, to reduce the general increased mortality in AAA patients.

A Multi-Centre, Single-Arm Clinical Study to Confirm Safety and Performance of PuraStat®, for the Management of Bleeding in Elective Carotid Artery Surgery.

Anastomotic bleeding in vascular surgery can be difficult to control. Patients, in particular those undergoing carotid surgery, have often been started on treatment with dual antiplatelet agents and receive systemic heparinization intraoperatively. The use of local hemostatic agents as an adjunct to conventional methods is widely reported. 3-D Matrix's absorbable hemostatic material RADA16 (PuraStat®), is a fully synthetic resorbable hemostatic agent. The aim of this study is to confirm the safety and performance of this agent when used to control intraoperative anastomotic bleeding during carotid endarterectomy (CEA). A prospective, single-arm, multicenter study involving 65 patients, undergoing CEA, in whom the hemostatic agent was applied to the suture line after removal of arterial clamps. Patients were followed up at 24 h, discharge, and one month after surgery. Time to hemostasis was measured as the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints included hemostasis efficacy and safety outcomes, blood loss, intraoperative and postoperative administration of blood products, and incidence of reoperation for bleeding. A total of 65 cases (51 male and 14 female) undergoing CEA, utilizing patch reconstruction (90. 8%), eversion technique (6.1%), and direct closure (3.1%) were analyzed. All patients received dual antiplatelet therapy preoperatively and were administered systemic intravenous heparin intraoperatively, as per local protocol. The mean time to hemostasis was 83 s ± 105 s (95% CI: 55-110 s). Primary hemostatic efficacy was 90.8%. The mean volume of product used was 1.7 mL ± 1.1 mL. Hemostasis was achieved with a single application of the product in 49 patients (75.3%). Two patients required a transfusion of blood products intraoperatively. There were no blood product transfusions during the postoperative period. The intraoperative mean blood loss was 127 mL ± 111.4 mL and postoperatively, the total mean drainage volume was 49.0 mL ± 51.2 mL. The mean duration of surgery was 119 ± 35 min, and the mean clamp time was 35 min 12 s ± 19 min 59 s. In 90.8% of patients, there was no presence of hematoma at 24 h postoperatively. Three returned to theatre due to bleeding (2 in the first 24 h), however, none of these cases were considered product related. Overall, there were no device-related serious adverse events (SAE) or unanticipated device-related SAEs reported. Use of the hemostatic agent PuraStat® is associated with a high rate of hemostatic efficacy (90.8%) and a short time to hemostasis. The safety of the product for use on vascular anastomoses has been demonstrated.

Optimal periprocedural antithrombotic treatment in carotid interventions: An international, multispecialty, expert review and position statement.

BACKGROUND: The optimal antithrombotic (antiplatelet or anticoagulant) treatment of patients undergoing extracranial carotid artery interventions is a subject of debate. The aim of this multidisciplinary document was to critically review the recommendations of current guidelines, taking into consideration the results of recently published studies. METHODS: The various antithrombotic strategies reported were evaluated for asymptomatic and symptomatic patients undergoing extracranial carotid artery interventions (endarterectomy, transfemoral carotid artery stenting [CAS] or transcarotid artery revascularization [TCAR]). Based on a critical review, a series of recommendations were formulated by an international expert panel. RESULTS: For asymptomatic patients, we recommend low-dose aspirin (75-100 mg/day) or clopidogrel (75 mg/day) with the primary goal to reduce the risk of myocardial infarction and cardiovascular event rates rather than to reduce the risk of stroke. For symptomatic patients, we recommend dual antiplatelet treatment (DAPT) initiated within 24 h of the index event to reduce the risk of recurrent events. We suggest that following transfemoral CAS or TCAR, patients continue DAPT for 1 month after which a single antiplatelet agent is used. High level of evidence to support anticoagulant treatment for patients with carotid artery disease is lacking. CONCLUSIONS: The antithrombotic treatment offered to carotid patients should be individualized, taking into account the presence of symptoms, the type of intervention and the goal of the treatment. The duration and type of DAPT (ticagrelor instead of clopidogrel) should be evaluated in future trials.

Benefits and drawbacks of statins and non-statin lipid lowering agents in carotid artery disease.

International guidelines strongly recommend statins alone or in combination with other lipid-lowering agents to lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels for patients with asymptomatic/symptomatic carotid stenosis (AsxCS/SCS). Lowering LDL-C levels is associated with significant reductions in transient ischemic attack, stroke, cardiovascular (CV) event and death rates. The aim of this multi-disciplinary overview is to summarize the benefits and risks associated with lowering LDL-C with statins or non-statin medications for Asx/SCS patients. The cerebrovascular and CV beneficial effects associated with statins, proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors and other non-statin lipid-lowering agents (e.g. fibrates, ezetimibe) are reviewed. The use of statins and PCSK9 inhibitors is associated with several beneficial effects for Asx/SCS patients, including carotid plaque stabilization and reduction of stroke rates. Ezetimibe and fibrates are associated with smaller reductions in stroke rates. The side-effects resulting from statin and PCSK9 inhibitor use are also highlighted. The benefits associated with lowering LDL-C with statins or non-statin lipid lowering agents (e.g. PCSK9 inhibitors) outweigh the risks and potential side-effects. Irrespective of their LDL-C levels, all Asx/SCS patients should receive high-dose statin treatment±ezetimibe or PCSK9 inhibitors for reduction not only of LDL-C levels, but also of stroke, cardiovascular mortality and coronary event rates.

Comparison of Recent Practice Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis.

Despite the publication of several national/international guidelines, the optimal management of patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis (AsxCS) remains controversial. This article compares 3 recently released guidelines (the 2020 German-Austrian, the 2021 European Stroke Organization [ESO], and the 2021 Society for Vascular Surgery [SVS] guidelines) vs the 2017 European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) guidelines regarding the optimal management of AsxCS patients.The 2017 ESVS guidelines defined specific imaging/clinical parameters that may identify patient subgroups at high future stroke risk and recommended that carotid endarterectomy (CEA) should or carotid artery stenting (CAS) may be considered for these individuals. The 2020 German-Austrian guidelines provided similar recommendations with the 2017 ESVS Guidelines. The 2021 ESO Guidelines also recommended CEA for AsxCS patients at high risk for stroke on best medical treatment (BMT), but recommended against routine use of CAS in these patients. Finally, the SVS guidelines provided a strong recommendation for CEA+BMT vs BMT alone for low-surgical risk patients with >70% AsxCS. Thus, the ESVS, German-Austrian, and ESO guidelines concurred that all AsxCS patients should receive risk factor modification and BMT, but CEA should or CAS may also be considered for certain AsxCS patient subgroups at high risk for future ipsilateral ischemic stroke.

Optimal Management of Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis in 2021: The Jury is Still Out. An International, Multispecialty, Expert Review and Position Statement.

OBJECTIVES: The recommendations of international guidelines for the management of asymptomatic carotid stenosis (ACS) often vary considerably and extend from a conservative approach with risk factor modification and best medical treatment (BMT) alone, to a more aggressive approach with a carotid intervention plus BMT. The aim of the current multispecialty position statement is to reconcile the conflicting views on the topic. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A literature review was performed with a focus on data from recent studies. RESULTS: Several clinical and imaging high-risk features have been identified that are associated with an increased long-term ipsilateral ischemic stroke risk in patients with ACS. Such high-risk clinical/imaging features include intraplaque hemorrhage, impaired cerebrovascular reserve, carotid plaque echolucency/ulceration/ neovascularization, a lipid-rich necrotic core, a thin or ruptured fibrous cap, silent brain infarction, a contralateral transient ischemic attack/stroke episode, male patients < 75 years and microembolic signals on transcranial Doppler. There is growing evidence that 80-99% ACS indicate a higher stroke risk than 50-79% stenoses. CONCLUSIONS: Although aggressive risk factor control and BMT should be implemented in all ACS patients, several high-risk features that may increase the risk of a future cerebrovascular event are now documented. Consequently, some guidelines recommend a prophylactic carotid intervention in high-risk patients to prevent future cerebrovascular events. Until the results of the much-anticipated randomized controlled trials emerge, the jury is still out regarding the optimal management of ACS patients.

Optimal management of asymptomatic carotid stenosis in 2021: the jury is still out. An international, multispecialty, expert review and position statement.

The recommendations of international guidelines for the management of asymptomatic carotid stenosis (ACS) often vary considerably and extend from a conservative approach with risk factor modification and best medical treatment (BMT) alone, to a more aggressive approach with a carotid intervention plus BMT. The aim of the current multispecialty position statement was to reconcile the conflicting views on the topic. A literature review was performed with a focus on data from recent studies. Several clinical and imaging high-risk features have been identified that are associated with an increased long-term ipsilateral ischemic stroke risk in patients with ACS. Such high-risk clinical/imaging features include intraplaque hemorrhage, impaired cerebrovascular reserve, carotid plaque echolucency/ulceration/ neovascularization, a lipid-rich necrotic core, a thin or ruptured fibrous cap, silent brain infarction, a contralateral transient ischemic attack/stroke episode, male patients <75 years and microembolic signals on transcranial Doppler. There is growing evidence that 80-99% ACS indicate a higher stroke risk than 50-79% stenoses. Although aggressive risk factor control and BMT should be implemented in all ACS patients, several high-risk features that may increase the risk of a future cerebrovascular event are now documented. Consequently, some guidelines recommend a prophylactic carotid intervention in high-risk patients to prevent future cerebrovascular events. Until the results of the much-anticipated randomized controlled trials emerge, the jury is still out regarding the optimal management of ACS patients.

A risk-adjusted and anatomically stratified cohort comparison study of open surgery, endovascular techniques and medical management for juxtarenal aortic aneurysms-the UK COMPlex AneurySm Study (UK-COMPASS): a study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: In one-third of all abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs), the aneurysm neck is short (juxtarenal) or shows other adverse anatomical features rendering operations more complex, hazardous and expensive. Surgical options include open surgical repair and endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) techniques including fenestrated EVAR, EVAR with adjuncts (chimneys/endoanchors) and off-label standard EVAR. The aim of the UK COMPlex AneurySm Study (UK-COMPASS) is to answer the research question identified by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment (NIHR HTA) Programme: 'What is the clinical and cost-effectiveness of strategies for the management of juxtarenal AAA, including fenestrated endovascular repair?' METHODS AND ANALYSIS: UK-COMPASS is a cohort study comparing clinical and cost-effectiveness of different strategies used to manage complex AAAs with stratification of physiological fitness and anatomical complexity, with statistical correction for baseline risk and indication biases. There are two data streams. First, a stream of routinely collected data from Hospital Episode Statistics and National Vascular Registry (NVR). Preoperative CT scans of all patients who underwent elective AAA repair in England between 1 November 2017 and 31 October 2019 are subjected to Corelab analysis to accurately identify and include every complex aneurysm treated. Second, a site-reported data stream regarding quality of life and treatment costs from prospectively recruited patients across England. Site recruitment also includes patients with complex aneurysms larger than 55 mm diameter in whom an operation is deferred (medical management). The primary outcome measure is perioperative all-cause mortality. Follow-up will be to a median of 5 years. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has received full regulatory approvals from a Research Ethics Committee, the Confidentiality Advisory Group and the Health Research Authority. Data sharing agreements are in place with National Health Service Digital and the NVR. Dissemination will be via NIHR HTA reporting, peer-reviewed journals and conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN85731188.

Management of patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis may need to be individualized: a multidisciplinary call for action. Republication of J Stroke 2021;23:202-212.

The optimal management of patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis (ACS) is the subject of extensive debate. According to the 2017 European Society for Vascular Surgery Guidelines, carotid endarterectomy should (Class IIa; Level of Evidence: B) or carotid artery stenting may be considered (Class IIb; Level of Evidence: B) in the presence of one or more clinical/imaging characteristics that may be associated with an increased risk of late ipsilateral stroke (e.g. silent embolic infarcts on brain computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging, progression in the severity of ACS, a history of contralateral transient ischemic attack/stroke, microemboli detection on transcranial Doppler, etc.), provided documented perioperative stroke/death rates are <3% and the patient's life expectancy is >5 years. Besides these clinical/imaging characteristics, there are additional individual, ethnic/racial or social factors that should probably be evaluated in the decision process regarding the optimal management of these patients, such as individual patient needs/patient choice, patient compliance with best medical treatment, patient sex, culture, race/ethnicity, age and comorbidities, as well as improvements in imaging/operative techniques/outcomes. The present multispecialty position paper will present the rationale why the management of patients with ACS may need to be individualized.