Editor's Choice - Prevalence of Smoking and Impact on Peri-Operative Outcomes After Elective Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair.

OBJECTIVE: The contemporary burden of smoking in patients undergoing elective abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair in the UK is unknown. This study aimed to quantify the prevalence of smoking in patients undergoing AAA repair in the UK and determine the association between smoking and peri-operative outcomes. METHODS: This was an observational cohort study. The National Vascular Registry was interrogated for adults undergoing elective infrarenal AAA repair from 2014 to 2021 for prevalence of current smokers, former smokers, and non-smokers over time. The primary outcomes were post-operative complications by smoking status. Secondary outcomes were variation in smoking rates over time and by hospital, in hospital mortality, and length of stay by smoking status. All analyses were adjusted using the validated British Aneurysm Repair score. RESULTS: Overall, 26 916 patients undergoing elective AAA repair were included (21.9% smokers, 62.2% former smokers, 15.9% non-smokers). The prevalence of smoking did not change over time, with a 2.4 fold variation between UK hospitals (range 13.0 - 31.8% excluding outliers). In hospital mortality was not significantly different between smokers, former smokers, and non-smokers (p > .050 for all comparisons). Compared with non-smokers, smoking was associated with increased overall (odds ratio [OR] 1.40, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.24 - 1.57) and respiratory complications (OR 1.98, 95% CI 1.63 - 2.39), limb ischaemia (OR 1.63, 95% CI 1.19 - 2.23), bowel ischaemia (OR 1.64, 95% CI 1.06 - 2.54), return to theatre (OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.11 - 1.71), and intensive care admission (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.31 - 1.56). Compared with former smokers, smoking was associated with increased overall (OR 1.24, 95% CI 1.14 - 1.36), respiratory (OR 1.44, 95% CI 1.27 - 1.63) and limb ischaemia complications (OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.19 - 1.84), and intensive care admission (OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.28 - 1.46). On analysis of the endovascular aneurysm repair subgroup, active smoking was associated with significantly higher rates of limb ischaemia compared with former and non-smokers (OR 2.12, 95% CI 1.49 - 3.01 and OR 1.94, 95% CI 1.19 - 3.16 respectively). CONCLUSION: The prevalence of smoking remains high in patients undergoing elective AAA repair with no evidence of a decline in active smokers from 2014 to 2021 compared with the general UK population. Smoking is associated with increased peri-operative complication rates.

Antithrombotic Therapy for Aortic Aneurysms: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The role of antithrombotic therapy in the management of aortic and peripheral aneurysms is unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the impact of antithrombotics on clinical outcomes for aortic and peripheral aneurysms. METHODS: Medline, Embase, and CENTRAL databases were searched. Randomised controlled trials and observational studies investigating the effect of antithrombotic therapy on clinical outcomes for patients with any aortic or peripheral artery aneurysm were included. RESULTS: Fifty-nine studies (28 with antiplatelet agents, 12 anticoagulants, two intra-operative heparin, and 16 any antithrombotic agent) involving 122 102 patients were included. Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) growth rate was not significantly associated with the use of antiplatelet therapy (SMD -0.36 mm/year; 95% CI -0.75 - 0.02; p = .060; GRADE certainty: very low). Antithrombotics were associated with increased 30 day mortality for patients with AAAs undergoing intervention (OR 2.30; 95% CI 1.51 - 3.51; p < .001; GRADE certainty: low). Following intervention, antiplatelet therapy was associated with reduced long term all cause mortality (HR 0.84; 95% CI 0.76 - 0.92; p < .001; GRADE certainty: moderate), whilst anticoagulants were associated with increased all cause mortality (HR 1.64; 95% CI 1.14 - 2.37; p = .008; GRADE certainty: very low), endoleak within three years (OR 1.99; 95% CI 1.10 - 3.60; p = .020; I2 = 60%; GRADE certainty: very low), and an increased re-intervention rate at one year (OR 3.25; 95% CI 1.82 - 5.82; p < .001; I2 = 35%; GRADE certainty: moderate). Five studies examined antithrombotic therapy for popliteal aneurysms. Meta-analysis was not possible due to heterogeneity. CONCLUSIONS: There was a lack of high quality data examining antithrombotic therapy for patients with aneurysms. Antiplatelet therapy was associated with a reduction in post-intervention all cause mortality for AAA, whilst anticoagulants were associated with an increased risk of all cause mortality, endoleak, and re-intervention. Large, well designed trials are still required to determine the therapeutic benefits of antithrombotic agents in this setting.

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on the Impact of High On-Treatment Platelet Reactivity on Clinical Outcomes for Patients Taking ADP Receptor Inhibitors Following Lower Limb Arterial Endovascular Intervention.

OBJECTIVE: Adenosine diphosphate (ADP) receptor inhibitors such as clopidogrel are known to be less effective at reducing platelet function for some patients because of a phenomenon called high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HTPR). However, the clinical effect of this for patients undergoing endovascular intervention for peripheral arterial disease is unclear. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of ADP receptor inhibitor HTPR on clinical outcomes following lower limb arterial endovascular intervention for peripheral arterial disease. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. Primary outcomes included all cause mortality and major bleeding. Secondary outcomes were major adverse cardiovascular events, major adverse limb events, restenosis, and target lesion revascularisation. Outcome quality was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) tool. RESULTS: There were 10 eligible studies including 1 444 patients included in the meta-analysis. The most commonly tested ADP receptor inhibitor was clopidogrel (seven studies). The pooled rate of ADP receptor inhibitor HTPR was 29% (95% CI 27 - 32). The meta-analysis showed that ADP receptor inhibitor HTPR was associated with a greater risk of major adverse limb events (OR 6.25, 95% CI 2.09 - 18.68, p = .001) and a trend towards a higher all cause mortality (OR 1.71, 95% CI 0.99 - 2.94, p = .050) and more major adverse cardiovascular events (OR 4.23, 95% CI 0.46 - 38.92, p = .20) after endovascular intervention. Overall strength of evidence was very low for all outcomes. CONCLUSION: ADP receptor inhibitor HTPR was associated with worse clinical outcomes after lower limb endovascular intervention for peripheral arterial disease. Prospective studies are required to determine the impact of modifying the antithrombotic regimen on clinical outcomes.

Systematic review and narrative synthesis of surveillance practices after endovascular intervention for lower limb peripheral arterial disease.

OBJECTIVE: The optimal timing and modality of surveillance after endovascular intervention for peripheral arterial disease is controversial, and no randomized trial to assess the value of peripheral endovascular intervention has ever been performed. The aim of this systematic review was to examine the practice of surveillance after peripheral endovascular intervention in randomized trials. METHODS: We used the Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and WHO trial registry databases in this systematic review of the literature to capture surveillance strategies used in randomized trials comparing endovascular interventions. Surveillance protocols were assessed for completeness, modalities used, duration, and intensity. RESULTS: Ninety-six different surveillance protocols were reported in 103 trials comparing endovascular interventions. Protocol specification was incomplete in 32% of trials. The majority of trials used multiple surveillance modalities (mean of 3.46 modalities), most commonly clinical examination (96%), ankle-brachial index (80%), duplex ultrasound examination (75%), and digital subtraction angiography (51%). Trials involving infrapopliteal lesions used more angiographic surveillance than trials with femoropopliteal lesions (P = .006). The median number of surveillance visits in the first 12 months after intervention was three and the mean surveillance duration was 21 months. Trials treating infrapopliteal vessels had a higher surveillance intensity compared with those treating femoropopliteal lesions in the first 12 months after endovascular intervention (mean 5 vs 3 surveillance visits; P = .017). Trials with drug-eluting devices had longer surveillance duration compared with those without (mean 26 vs 19 months; P = .020). CONCLUSIONS: There is a high level of variation in the modality, duration, and intensity of surveillance protocols used in randomized trials comparing different types of peripheral endovascular arterial intervention. Further research is required to determine the value and impact of postprocedural surveillance on patient outcomes.

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.

Correction to: The CLEAR (Considering Leading Experts' Antithrombotic Regimes around peripheral angioplasty) survey: an international perspective on antiplatelet and anticoagulant practice for peripheral arterial endovascular intervention.

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article.

Antiplatelet and Anticoagulant Use in Randomised Trials of Patients Undergoing Endovascular Intervention for Peripheral Arterial Disease: Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis.

OBJECTIVE: Randomised trials of new devices for peripheral arterial endovascular intervention are published regularly. The evidence for which antiplatelet and/or anticoagulant (antithrombotic) therapy to use after an intervention is lacking. The aim of this systematic review was to examine the antithrombotic regimens in randomised trials for peripheral arterial endovascular intervention to understand choices made and trends with time or type of device. METHODS: Data sources were the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases. Randomised trials including participants with peripheral arterial disease undergoing any endovascular arterial intervention were included. Trial methods were assessed to determine whether an antithrombotic protocol had been specified, its completeness, and the agent(s) prescribed. Antithrombotic therapy protocols were classed as peri-procedural (preceding and during intervention), immediate post-procedural (up to 30 days following intervention), and maintenance post-procedural (therapy continuing beyond 30 days). RESULTS: Ninety-four trials were included in narrative synthesis. Study quality was low. None of the trials justified their antithrombotic therapy protocol. Only 29% of trials had complete peri-procedural antithrombotic protocols, and 34% had complete post-procedural protocols. In total, 64 different peri-procedural protocols, and 51 separate post-procedural protocols were specified. Antiplatelet monotherapy and unfractionated heparin were the most common regimen choices in the peri-procedural setting, and dual antiplatelet therapy (55%) was most commonly utilised post procedure. Over time there has been an increasing tendency to use dual therapy (p < .001). This corresponds with the introduction of newer technologies and trials focussed on below knee intervention. CONCLUSION: Randomised trials comparing different types of peripheral endovascular arterial intervention have a high level of heterogeneity in their antithrombotic regimens. Antiplatelet therapy needs to be standardised in trials comparing endovascular technologies to reduce potential confounding. To do this, an independent randomised trial specifically examining antiplatelet therapy following peripheral arterial endovascular intervention is needed.

The CLEAR (Considering Leading Experts' Antithrombotic Regimes around peripheral angioplasty) survey: an international perspective on antiplatelet and anticoagulant practice for peripheral arterial endovascular intervention.

BACKGROUND: Antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy are commonly used before, during and after peripheral arterial endovascular intervention. This survey aimed to establish antiplatelet and anticoagulant choice for peripheral arterial endovascular intervention in contemporary clinical practice. METHODS: Pilot-tested questionnaire distributed via collaborative research networks. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty-two complete responses were collected from responders in 22 countries, predominantly the UK (48%) and the rest of the European Union (44%). Antiplatelet monotherapy was the most common choice pre-procedurally (62%). In the UK, there was no difference between dual and single antiplatelet therapy use post procedure (50% vs. 37% p = 0.107). However, a significant majority of EU respondents used dual therapy (68% vs. 20% p < 0.001). There was variation in choice of antiplatelet therapy by the device used and the anatomical location of the intervention artery. The majority (82%) of respondents believed there was insufficient evidence to guide antithrombotic therapy after peripheral endovascular intervention and most (92%) would support a randomised trial. CONCLUSIONS: There is widespread variation in the use of antiplatelet therapy, especially post peripheral arterial endovascular intervention. Clinicians would support the development of a randomised trial comparing dual antiplatelet therapy with monotherapy.