Evaluating pharmacological THRomboprophylaxis in Individuals undergoing superficial endoVEnous treatment across NHS and private clinics in the UK: a multi-centre, assessor-blind, randomised controlled trial-THRIVE trial.

INTRODUCTION: Endovenous therapy is the first choice management for symptomatic varicose veins in NICE guidelines, with 56-70 000 procedures performed annually in the UK. Venous thromboembolism (VTE), including deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), is a known complication of endovenous therapy, occurring at a rate of up to 3.4%. Despite 73% of UK practitioners administering pharmacological thromboprophylaxis to reduce VTE, no high-quality evidence supporting this practice exists. Pharmacological thromboprophylaxis may have clinical and cost benefit in preventing VTE; however, further evidence is needed. This study aims to establish whether when endovenous therapy is undertaken: a single dose or course of pharmacological thromboprophylaxis alters the risk of VTE; pharmacological thromboprophylaxis is associated with an increased rate of bleeding events; pharmacological prophylaxis is cost effective. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A multi-centre, assessor-blind, randomised controlled trial (RCT) will recruit 6660 participants from 40 NHS and private sites across the UK. Participants will be randomised to intervention (single dose or extended course of pharmacological thromboprophylaxis plus compression) or control (compression alone). Participants will undergo a lower limb venous duplex ultrasound scan at 21-28 days post-procedure to identify asymptomatic DVT. The duplex scan will be conducted locally by blinded assessors. Participants will be contacted remotely for follow-up at 7 days and 90 days post-procedure. The primary outcome is imaging-confirmed lower limb DVT with or without symptoms or PE with symptoms within 90 days of treatment. The main analysis will be according to the intention-to-treat principle and will compare the rates of VTE at 90 days, using a repeated measures analysis of variance, adjusting for any pre-specified strongly prognostic baseline covariates using a mixed effects logistic regression. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was granted by Brent Research Ethics Committee (22/LO/0261). Results will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at national and international conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN18501431.

Understanding the current acute aortic syndrome (AAS) pathways-The Collaborative Acute Aortic Syndrome Project (CAASP) protocol.

BACKGROUND: Acute aortic syndrome (AAS) is an emergency associated with high peri-hospital mortality rates. Variable clinical presentation makes timely diagnosis challenging and such delays in diagnosis directly impact patient outcomes. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: The aims of the Collaborative Acute Aortic Syndrome Project (CAASP) are to characterise and evaluate the current AAS pathways of a cohort of hospitals in the UK, USA and New Zealand to determine if patient outcomes are influenced by the AAS pathway (time to hospital admission, diagnosis and management plan) and demographic, social, geographic and patient-specific factors (clinical presentation and comorbidities). The objectives are to describe different AAS pathways and time duration between hospital admission to diagnosis and management plan instigation, and to compare patient outcomes between pathways. METHODS: The study is a multicentre, retrospective service evaluation project of adult patients diagnosed on imaging with AAS. It will be coordinated by the UK National Interventional Radiology Trainee Research (UNITE) network and Vascular and Endovascular Research Network (VERN) in conjunction with The Aortic Dissection Charitable Trust (TADCT). All AAS cases diagnosed on imaging between 1st January 2018 to 1st June 2021 will be included and followed-up for 6 months. Eligibility criteria include aortic dissection (AD) Type A, Type B, non A/B, penetrating aortic ulcer, and intramural haematoma. Exclusion criteria are non-AAS pathology, acute on chronic AAS, and age<18. This project will evaluate patient demographics, timing of presentation, patient symptoms, risk factors for AD, physical examination findings, timing to imaging and treatment, hospital stay, and mortality. Univariate and multivariate analysis will be used to identify predictors associated with prolonged time to diagnosis or treatment and mortality at 30 days.

Sarcopenia and Sarcopenic Obesity on Body Composition Analysis is a Significant Predictor of Mortality in Severe Acute Pancreatitis: A Longitudinal Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence and impact of sarcopenia and sarcopenic obesity noted on body composition analysis in severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) is unknown. This study investigates the prevalence of sarcopenia at different timepoints and its effect on post-pancreatitis complications and mortality. METHODS: A prospective database of SAP admissions with organ failure at a single institution from 2015 to 2019 were analysed. Sarcopenia was determined by IMAGE J software on CT. Database was further queried for post-pancreatitis complications and mortality. RESULTS: 141 patients with a median age of 59 (range 18-88) and M:F ratio 1.52:1 of were analysed. Sarcopenia was present in 111/141 (79%) patients at admission, 78/79 (99%) at 3 months and 26/36 (72%) at 12 months. 67/111 patients with sarcopenia on admission had sarcopenic obesity. The mortality at 30 days, 3 months and 12 months was 16/141 (11%), 30/141 (21%) and 42/141 (30%) respectively. Mortality was significantly higher in sarcopenic patients at admission (35.14%) compared to the non-sarcopenic group (10%), P = 0.008). Mortality in the sarcopenic obesity group was significantly higher (45%) compared to the sarcopenic non-obese group (20%), P = 0.009) at admission. Multivariate logistic regression identified sarcopenic obesity (OR: 2.880), age (OR: 1.048) and number of organ failures (OR: 3.225) as significant predictors of mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Sarcopenia and Sarcopenic obesity are highly prevalent in SAP patients on admission and during follow up. Furthermore, sarcopenic obesity was shown to be a significant predictor of mortality at admission, suggesting that body composition analysis could be a potential predictive marker of mortality in SAP patients.

The Impact of Pre-Operative Anaemia on One Year Amputation Free Survival and Re-Admissions in Patients Undergoing Vascular Surgery for Peripheral Arterial Disease: a National Vascular Registry Study.

OBJECTIVE: Anaemia is common among patients undergoing surgery, but its association with post-operative outcomes in patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD) is unclear. The aim of this observational population based study was to examine the association between pre-operative anaemia and one year outcomes after surgical revascularisation for PAD. METHODS: This study used data from the National Vascular Registry, linked with an administrative database (Hospital Episode Statistics), to identify patients who underwent open surgical lower limb revascularisation for PAD in English NHS hospitals between January 2016 and December 2019. The primary outcome was one year amputation free survival. Secondary outcomes were one year re-admission rate, 30 day re-intervention rate, 30 day ipsilateral major amputation rate and 30 day death. Flexible parametric survival analysis and generalised linear regression were performed to assess the effect of anaemia on one year outcomes. RESULTS: The analysis included 13 641 patients, 57.9% of whom had no anaemia, 23.8% mild, and 18.3% moderate or severe anaemia. At one year follow up, 80.6% of patients were alive and amputation free. The risk of one year amputation or death was elevated in patients with mild anaemia (adjusted HR 1.3; 95% CI 1.15 - 1.41) and moderate or severe anaemia (aHR 1.5; 1.33 - 1.67). Patients with moderate or severe anaemia experienced more re-admissions over one year (adjusted IRR 1.31; 1.26 - 1.37) and had higher odds of 30 day re-interventions (aOR 1.22; 1.04 - 1.45), 30 day ipsilateral major amputation (aOR 1.53; 1.17 - 2.01), and 30 day death (aOR 1.39; 1.03 - 1.88) compared with patients with no anaemia. CONCLUSION: Pre-operative anaemia is associated with lower one year amputation free survival and higher one year re-admission rates following surgical revascularisation in patients with PAD. Research is required to evaluate whether interventions to correct anaemia improve outcomes after lower limb revascularisation.

Social deprivation does not impact on acute pancreatitis severity and mortality: a single-centre study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The incidence of acute pancreatitis (AP) is increasing in the UK. Patients with severe AP require a significant amount of resources to support them during their admission. The ability to predict which patients will develop multiorgan dysfunction remains poor leading to a delay in the identification of these patients and a window of opportunity for early intervention is missed. Social deprivation has been linked with increased mortality across surgical specialties. Its role in predicting mortality in patients with AP remains unclear but would allow high-risk patients to be identified early and to focus resources on high-risk populations. METHODS: A prospectively collected single-centre database was analysed. English Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) was calculated based on postcode. Patients were grouped according to their English IMD quintile. Outcomes measured included all-cause mortality, Intestive care unit (ITU) admission, overall length of stay (LOS) and local pancreatitis-specific complications. RESULTS: 398 patients with AP between 2018 and 2021 were identified. There were significantly more patients with AP in Q1 (IMD 1-2) compared with Q5 (IMD 9-10) (156 vs 38, p<0.001). Patients who were resident in the most deprived areas were significantly younger (52.4 in Q1 vs 65.2 in Q5, p<0.001), and more often smokers (39.1% in Q1 vs 23.7% in Q5, p=0.044) with IHD (95.0% vs 92.1% in Q5, p<0.001). In multivariate modelling, there was no significance difference in pancreatitis-related complications, number of ITU visits, number of organs supported and overall, LOS by IMD quintile. CONCLUSIONS: Although there was a significantly higher number of patients admitted to our unit with AP from the most socially deprived quintiles, there was no correlation between social economic deprivation and mortality following AP.

The adverse impact of pre-operative anaemia on survival following major lower limb amputation.

INTRODUCTION: Approximately 5000 major lower-limb amputations (MLLA) for PAD occur per-annum in the UK with clinical outcomes being poor for this high-risk cohort of patients. Existing evidence suggests that anaemic surgical patients have an increased 30-day mortality, but this has not been explored in the context of MLLA. Recent prioritization processes suggested that MLLAs are a target area for research into outcome improvement. This cohort study evaluates the impact of anaemia on the outcome of MLLA to understand if optimization might improve outcomes. METHODS: All PAD patients undergoing MLLA during 2015-2018 at a tertiary vascular centre were reviewed. Patients were stratified into groups; non-anaemia (>12 g/dL), mild-anaemia (12-10 g/dL) and severe-anaemia (<10 g/dL) by pre-operative haemoglobin (Hb). Primary outcome was overall survival by Kaplan-Meier. Secondary outcomes included length of stay (LOS), post-operative blood-transfusion, surgical-site infection (SSI) and myocardial infarction (MI). Cox-proportional-hazard and receiver-operator characteristics (ROC) analyses were conducted. RESULTS: 345 patients were followed up over (mean) 23 months. 105 were non-anaemic, 111 mildly anaemic and 129 severely anaemic. Patients with severe-anaemia had a higher incidence of heart and renal failure (p = 0.003) than those with non- or mild-anaemia. Overall survival worsened significantly with increasing anaemia (p = 0.001). LOS was significantly longer in mild-anaemia which is 26 (16-43) days, (p = 0.006) and severe-anaemia of 28 days (17-40), (p < 0.001) compared to non-anaemia of 18 (10-30) days. Post-operative blood-transfusion (RBC) was required more frequently in 70.5% of severely anaemic patients (p < 0.001), compared to mildly anaemic (24.3%) and non-anaemic (7.6%) patients, with those receiving RBCs having a significantly worse survival. There was no difference in MI, SSI or wound dehiscence. Anaemia was significantly associated with mortality; (HR 1.7 (1.04-2.78), p = 0.03). A minimum-Hb of 10.4 g/L (by ROC) was identified as a cutoff Hb for an increased risk of mortality. CONCLUSION: Pre-operative anaemia is associated with worse outcome following MLLA, with increasing severity of anaemia associated with increasing mortality and RBC transfusion being potentially detrimental. More work is required to prospectively evaluate this relationship in this complex and multi-morbid cohort of patients.

Evaluating the feasibility and acceptability of an exercise and behaviour change intervention in socioeconomically deprived patients with peripheral arterial disease: The textpad study protocol.

This pilot randomised controlled trial aims to assess the feasibility and acceptability of a 12-week home-based telehealth exercise and behavioural intervention delivered in socioeconomically deprived patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD). The study will also determine the preliminary effectiveness of the intervention for improving clinical and health outcomes. Sixty patients with PAD who meet the inclusion criteria will be recruited from outpatient clinic at the Freeman Hospital, United Kingdom. The intervention group will undergo telehealth behaviour intervention performed 3 times per week over 3 months. This program will comprise a home-based exercise (twice a week) and an individual lifestyle program (once per week). The control group will receive general health recommendations and advice to perform unsupervised walking training. The primary outcome will be feasibility and acceptability outcomes. The secondary outcomes will be objective and subjective function capacity, quality of life, dietary quality, physical activity levels, sleep pattern, alcohol and tobacco use, mental wellbeing, and patients' activation. This pilot study will provide preliminary evidence of the feasibility, acceptability and effectiveness of home-based telehealth exercise and behavioural intervention delivered in socioeconomically deprived patients with PAD. In addition, the variance of the key health outcomes of this pilot study will be used to inform the sample size calculation for a future fully powered, multicentre randomized clinical trial.

Frail patients having vascular surgery during the early COVID-19 pandemic experienced high rates of adverse perioperative events and amputation.

BACKGROUND: Frailty predicts adverse perioperative outcomes and increased mortality in patients having vascular surgery. Frailty assessment is a potential tool to inform resource allocation, and shared decision-making about vascular surgery in the resource constrained COVID-19 pandemic environment. This cohort study describes the prevalence of frailty in patients having vascular surgery and the association between frailty, mortality and perioperative outcomes. METHODS: The COVID-19 Vascular Service in Australia (COVER-AU) prospective cohort study evaluates 30-day and six-month outcomes for consecutive patients having vascular surgery in 11 Australian vascular units, March-July 2020. The primary outcome was mortality, with secondary outcomes procedure-related outcomes and hospital utilization. Frailty was assessed using the nine-point visual Clinical Frailty Score, scores of 5 or more considered frail. RESULTS: Of the 917 patients enrolled, 203 were frail (22.1%). The 30 day and 6 month mortality was 2.0% (n = 20) and 5.9% (n = 35) respectively with no significant difference between frail and non-frail patients (OR 1.68, 95%CI 0.79-3.54). However, frail patients stayed longer in hospital, had more perioperative complications, and were more likely to be readmitted or have a reoperation when compared to non-frail patients. At 6 months, frail patients had twice the odds of major amputation compared to non-frail patients, after adjustment (OR 2.01; 95% CI 1.17-3.78), driven by a high rate of amputation during the period of reduced surgical activity. CONCLUSION: Our findings highlight that older, frail patients, experience potentially preventable adverse outcomes and there is a need for targeted interventions to optimize care, especially in times of healthcare stress.

The PReliMinAry (Pain Relief in Major Amputation) Survey.

OBJECTIVES: Major Lower Limb Amputation (MLLA) is associated with significant peri- and post-operative pain and has been identified as a research priority by patient and healthcare groups. The PReliMinAry survey was designed to evaluate existing MLLA analgesia strategies; identifying areas of equipoise and informing future research. METHODS: A targeted multi-national, multi-disciplinary survey was conducted via SurveyMonkey® (October 5, 2020-November 3, 2020) and advertised via social media and society email lists. The 10-questions explored 'pain-team' services, pre-operative neuroleptic medication, pre-incision peripheral nerve blocks and catheters, surgically placed nerve catheters, post-operative adjunctive regimens, future research engagement and equipoise. RESULTS: Seventy-six responses were received from 60 hospitals worldwide. Twelve hospitals(20%) had a dedicated MLLA pain team, 7(12%) had none. Most pain teams (n = 52; 87%) assessed pain with a 0-10 numerical rating scale. Over half of respondents "never" preloaded patients with oral neuroleptic agents(n= 42/76; 55%). Forty-seven hospitals(78%) utilized patient controlled opioid analgesia. Most hospitals are able to provide pre-incision loco-regional peripheral nerve blocks, nerve catheters and surgical nerve catheters (95%, 77%, and 90% respectively), but use was variable. Ultrasound(US) guided peripheral nerve catheters were "infrequently" or "never" used in 57% of hospitals, whilst 23% "infrequently" or "never" utilize surgically placed nerve catheters. CONCLUSIONS: The survey revealed a preference towards 'single-shot' nerve blocks and surgical catheters. A difference between the use of US guided nerve catheters and those surgically placed likely reflects the difference of literature evaluating these techniques. Most respondents felt there was equipoise surrounding future trials evaluating nerve blocks/catheters, but less so for surgical catheters.

Anaemia: A risk factor for death and adverse outcomes following surgery for acute lower limb ischaemia.

INTRODUCTION: Acute limb ischaemia (ALI) forms a significant part of the vascular surgery workload and carries with it high rates of morbidity and mortality. Anaemia is also common amongst vascular surgical patients and has been linked with poor outcomes in some subgroups. We aimed to assess the frequency of anaemia in patients with ALI and its impact on survival and complications following revascularisation to help direct future efforts to optimise outcomes in this patient group. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected departmental data on patients undergoing surgical intervention for ALI between 2014 and 2018 was performed. Anaemia was defined as a pre-operative haemoglobin (Hb) of <120 g/L for women and <130 g/L for men. The primary outcome was overall survival, assessed with the Kaplan-Meier estimator, with application of Cox proportional hazard modelling to adjust for confounding covariates. RESULTS: There were 158 patients who underwent treatment for ALI: 89 (56.3%) of these were non-anaemic with a mean Hb of 146 (SD = 18.4), and 69 (43.7%) were anaemic with a mean Hb of 106 (SD = 13.4). Anaemic patients had a significantly higher risk of death than their non-anaemic counterparts on univariate analysis (HR = 2.11, 95% CIs, 1.28-3.5, p = 0.0036). There was ongoing divergence in survival up to around 6 months between anaemic and non-anaemic groups. Under the Cox model, anaemia was similarly significant as a predictor of death (HR = 2.15, 95% CIs, 1.17-3.95, p = 0.013), accounting for recorded comorbidities, medication use and blood transfusion. CONCLUSIONS: Anaemia is a significant and independent risk factor for death following revascularisation for ALI and can be potentially be modified. Vascular surgical centres should ensure they have robust pathways in place to identify and consider treating anaemia. There is scope for further work to assess how to best optimise a patient's levels of circulating haemoglobin.

Social Deprivation and the Association With Survival Following Fenestrated Endovascular Aneurysm Repair.

BACKGROUND: Social deprivation is associated with poor clinical outcomes. It is known to have an impact on length of stay and post-operative mortality across a number of other surgical specialties. This study evaluates the impact of social deprivation on outcomes following fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (FEVAR). METHODS: All elective FEVARs performed between 2010 and 2018 at a tertiary vascular center were analyzed. Deprivation (index of multiple deprivation [IMD]) data was sourced from the English indices of deprivation 2019, by postcode. Primary outcome was overall survival by Kaplan-Meier. Secondary outcomes included length of hospital stay (LOS) and complications. Cox-proportional hazard analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Some 132 FEVAR patients were followed-up for 3.7 (SD 2.2) years. Fifty-seven patients lived in areas with high levels of deprivation (IMD 1-3), 34 in areas with moderate deprivation (IMD 4-6) and 41 in areas with the lowest level (IMD 7-10) of deprivation. Groups were comparable for Age, BMI, AAA diameter and co-morbidity. A higher proportion of patients from deprived areas had renal failure (15% [26.3%] vs. 9% [11.8%] P = 0.019) but no overall difference in procedure time was observed (200 min [155-250] vs. 180 min [145-240] P = 0.412). Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated significantly poorer survival for patients living in areas with high levels of deprivation (IMD 1-3) (P = 0.03). Mortality was comparable for IMD 4-6 and 7-10 groups. Patients from the most deprived areas had longer hospital stay (6 days [4-9] vs. 5 [3-7] P = 0.005) and higher all-cause complication rates (21 [36.8%] vs. 14 [18.4%] P = 0.02). Decreasing IMD was associated with worse survival (HR -0.85 [0.75-0.97] [P = 0.02]). CONCLUSIONS: Social deprivation was associated with increased mortality, length of stay and all-cause complication rates in patients undergoing FEVAR for complex abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). These results may help direct preoptimization measures to improve outcomes in higher risk sub-groups.

Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence.

BACKGROUND: Great saphenous vein (GSV) incompetence, causing varicose veins and venous insufficiency, makes up the majority of lower-limb superficial venous diseases. Treatment options for GSV incompetence include surgery (also known as high ligation and stripping), laser and radiofrequency ablation, and ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy. Newer treatments include cyanoacrylate glue, mechanochemical ablation, and endovenous steam ablation. These techniques avoid the need for a general anaesthetic, and may result in fewer complications and improved quality of life (QoL). These treatments should be compared to inform decisions on treatment for varicosities in the GSV. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2011. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of endovenous laser ablation (EVLA), radiofrequency ablation (RFA), endovenous steam ablation (EVSA), ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS), cyanoacrylate glue, mechanochemical ablation (MOCA) and high ligation and stripping (HL/S) for the treatment of varicosities of the great saphenous vein (GSV). SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and AMED databases, and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to 2 November 2020. We undertook reference checking to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) treating participants for varicosities of the GSV using EVLA, RFA, EVSA, UGFS, cyanoacrylate glue, MOCA or HL/S. Key outcomes of interest are technical success, recurrence, complications and QoL. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials, applied Cochrane's risk of bias tool, and extracted data. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 11 new RCTs for this update. Therefore, we included 24 RCTs with 5135 participants. Duration of follow-up ranged from five weeks to eight years. Five comparisons included single trials. For comparisons with more than one trial, we could only pool data for 'technical success' and 'recurrence' due to heterogeneity in outcome definitions and time points reported. All trials had some risk of bias concerns. Here we report the clinically most relevant comparisons. EVLA versus RFA Technical success was comparable up to five years (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.41 to 2.38; 5 studies, 780 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); over five years, there was no evidence of a difference (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.30 to 2.41; 1 study, 291 participants; low-certainty evidence). One study reported recurrence, showing no clear difference at three years (OR 1.53, 95% CI 0.78 to 2.99; 291 participants; low-certainty evidence), but a benefit for RFA may be seen at five years (OR 2.77, 95% CI 1.52 to 5.06; 291 participants; low-certainty evidence). EVLA versus UGFS Technical success may be better in EVLA participants up to five years (OR 6.13, 95% CI 0.98 to 38.27; 3 studies, 588 participants; low-certainty evidence), and over five years (OR 6.47, 95% CI 2.60 to 16.10; 3 studies, 534 participants; low-certainty evidence). There was no clear difference in recurrence up to three years and at five years (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.20 to 2.36; 2 studies, 443 participants; and OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.40 to 2.87; 2 studies, 418 participants; very low-certainty evidence, respectively). EVLA versus HL/S Technical success may be better in EVLA participants up to five years (OR 2.31, 95% CI 1.27 to 4.23; 6 studies, 1051 participants; low-certainty evidence). No clear difference in technical success was seen at five years and beyond (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.50; 5 studies, 874 participants; low-certainty evidence). Recurrence was comparable within three years and at 5 years (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.29; 7 studies, 1459 participants; and OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.76; 7 studies, 1267 participants; moderate-certainty evidence, respectively). RFA versus MOCA There was no clear difference in technical success (OR 1.76, 95% CI 0.06 to 54.15; 3 studies, 435 participants; low-certainty evidence), or recurrence (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.21 to 4.81; 3 studies, 389 participants; low-certainty evidence). Long-term data are not available. RFA versus HL/S No clear difference in technical success was detected up to five years (OR 5.71, 95% CI 0.64 to 50.81; 2 studies, 318 participants; low-certainty evidence); over five years, there was no evidence of a difference (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.29 to 2.69; 1 study, 289 participants; low-certainty evidence). No clear difference in recurrence was detected up to three years (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.51; 4 studies, 546 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); but a possible long-term benefit for RFA was seen (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.75; 1 study, 289 participants; low-certainty evidence). UGFS versus HL/S Meta-analysis showed a possible benefit for HL/S compared with UGFS in technical success up to five years (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.94; 4 studies, 954 participants; low-certainty evidence), and over five years (OR 0.09, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.30; 3 studies, 525 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). No clear difference was detected in recurrence up to three years (OR 1.81, 95% CI 0.87 to 3.77; 3 studies, 822 participants; low-certainty evidence), and after five years (OR 1.24, 95% CI 0.57 to 2.71; 3 studies, 639 participants; low-certainty evidence). Complications were generally low for all interventions, but due to different definitions and time points, we were unable to draw conclusions (very-low certainty evidence). Similarly, most studies evaluated QoL but used different questionnaires at variable time points. Rates of QoL improvement were comparable between interventions at follow-up (moderate-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Our conclusions are limited due to the relatively small number of studies for each comparison and differences in outcome definitions and time points reported. Technical success was comparable between most modalities. EVLA may offer improved technical success compared to UGFS or HL/S. HL/S may have improved technical success compared to UGFS. No evidence of a difference was detected in recurrence, except for a possible long-term benefit for RFA compared to EVLA or HL/S. Studies which provide more evidence on the breadth of treatments are needed. Future trials should seek to standardise clinical terminology of outcome measures and the time points at which they are measured.

Dissecting the Management and Outcomes of Thoracic Aortovascular Disease During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has forced the cancellation of planned surgery and led to significant surgical service reductions. Early intervention in aortovascular disease is often critical and cannot be deferred despite these reductions. There is urgent need to evaluate the provision and outcomes of thoracic aortovascular intervention during the peak of the pandemic. METHODS: Prospective data was collected for patients receiving open and endovascular thoracic aortovascular intervention over two-time points; January-May 2020 and January-May 2019 at three tertiary cardiovascular centres. Baseline demographics, cardiovascular risk and COVID-19 screening results were noted. Primary outcomes were median length of intensive care unit and hospital stay, intra-operative mortality, 30-day mortality, post-operative stroke, and spinal cord injury. RESULTS: Patients operated in 2020 (41) had significantly higher median EuroSCORE II than 2019 (53) (7.44 vs. 5.86, P = 0.032) and rates of previous cardiac (19.5% vs. 3.8%, P = 0.019), aortic (14.6% vs. 1.9%, P = 0.041), and endovascular (22.0% vs. 3.8%, P = 0.009) intervention. There was an increase in proportion of urgent cases in 2020 (31.7% vs. 18.9%). There were no intra-operative deaths in 2020 and 1 in 2019 (P = 1.00). There were no significant differences (P ≥ 0.05) in 30-day mortality (4.9% vs. 13.2%), median intensive care unit length of stay (72 vs. 70 hr), median hospital length of stay (8 vs. 9 days), post-operative stroke (3 vs. 6), or spinal cord injury (2 vs. 1) between 2020 and 2019 respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the increased mortality risk of patients and urgency of cases during COVID-19, complicated by the introduction of cohorting and screening regimens, thoracic aortovascular intervention remained safe with comparable in outcomes to pre-COVID-19.

Sarcopenia in Patients Undergoing Lower Limb Bypass Surgery is Associated with Higher Mortality and Major Amputation Rates.

BACKGROUND: Sarcopenia is adversely associated with survival in several diseases. Vasculopathy is often associated with multimorbidity and consequent deconditioning with poor long-term outcomes. This study examined the impact of sarcopenia on clinical outcome in patients with and without critical limb-threatening ischaemia who underwent infrainguinal bypass surgery. METHODS: All patients undergoing infra-inguinal surgical revascularisation in 2016-2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Sarcopenia was defined as a skeletal muscle area at the L3 vertebral level (defined as L3 muscle area < 114cm2 for men or <89.8cm2 for women) on CT angiography. The primary outcome was overall survival by analysed by time to event analysis. Secondary outcomes included ipsilateral major lower-limb amputation, length of hospital stay, myocardial infarction and surgical-site infection. RESULTS: A total of 116 patients with a mean age of 66.9 years were included, with a mean follow-up of 21 months. 14 (12%) of patients were sarcopenic; there were more patients with diabetes (40% vs 7%) in the sarcopenic group, p=0.018. Age, gender, Rutherford grade at presentation, other co-morbidities, other laboratory tests, conduit material and Rutherford grade at presentation were similar in those with and without sarcopenia and were statistically insignificant upon testing. Overall survival was worse for sarcopenic patients (Log Rank P=0.001) and Hazard Ratio for death 5.8; 95%CI 1.8-19.1; P=0.001. Major lower-limb amputation occurred more frequently in patients with sarcopenia (7/14 [50%] vs 23/102 [23%]; P=0.046). There was no difference in other secondary outcomes including rates of graft occlusion, myocardial infarction, surgical site infection and length of stay. Adding SMA measurement to a multivariate generalised linear model including age, sex, diabetes, and haemoglobin improved the AUROC from 0.75-0.85. CONCLUSION: In this cohort of patients undergoing vascular surgery, sarcopenia defined using L3 muscle area was significantly associated with overall mortality and major lower-limb amputation.

Editor's Choice - Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Wound Adjuncts for the Prevention of Groin Wound Surgical Site Infection in Arterial Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Groin incision surgical site infections (SSIs) following arterial surgery are common and are a source of considerable morbidity. This review evaluates interventions and adjuncts delivered immediately before, during, or after skin closure, to prevent SSIs in patients undergoing arterial interventions involving a groin incision. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases were searched. REVIEW METHODS: This review was undertaken according to established international reporting guidelines and was registered prospectively with the International prospective register of systematic reviews (CRD42020185170). The MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases were searched using pre-defined search terms without date restriction. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies recruiting patients with non-infected groin incisions for arterial exposure were included; SSI rates and other outcomes were captured. Interventions reported in two or more studies were subjected to meta-analysis. RESULTS: The search identified 1 532 articles. Seventeen RCTs and seven observational studies, reporting on 3 747 patients undergoing 4 130 groin incisions were included. A total of seven interventions and nine outcomes were reported upon. Prophylactic closed incision negative pressure wound therapy (ciNPWT) reduced groin SSIs compared with standard dressings (odds ratio [OR] 0.34, 95% CI 0.23 - 0.51; p < .001, GRADE strength of evidence: moderate). Local antibiotics did not reduce groin SSIs (OR 0.60 95% CI 0.30 - 1.21 p = .15, GRADE strength: low). Subcuticular sutures (vs. transdermal sutures or clips) reduced groin SSI rates (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.17 - 0.65, p = .001, GRADE strength: low). Wound drains, platelet rich plasma, fibrin glue, and silver alginate dressings did not show any significant effect on SSI rates. CONCLUSION: There is evidence that ciNPWT and subcuticular sutures reduce groin SSI in patients undergoing arterial vascular interventions involving a groin incision. Local antibiotics did not reduce groin wound SSI, although the strength of this evidence is lower. No other interventions demonstrated a significant effect.

Outcomes of Vascular and Endovascular Interventions Performed During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the COVER Study is to identify global outcomes and decision making for vascular procedures during the pandemic. BACKGROUND DATA: During its initial peak, there were many reports of delays to vital surgery and the release of several guidelines advising later thresholds for vascular surgical intervention for key conditions. METHODS: An international multi-center observational study of outcomes after open and endovascular interventions. RESULTS: In an analysis of 1103 vascular intervention (57 centers in 19 countries), 71.6% were elective or scheduled procedures. Mean age was 67 ±â€Š14 years (75.6% male). Suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infection was documented in 4.0%. Overall, in-hospital mortality was 11.0% [aortic interventions mortality 15.2% (23/151), amputations 12.1% (28/232), carotid interventions 10.7% (11/103), lower limb revascularisations 9.8% (51/521)]. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [odds ratio (OR) 2.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.30-3.15] and active lower respiratory tract infection due to any cause (OR 24.94, 95% CI 12.57-241.70) ware associated with mortality, whereas elective or scheduled cases were lower risk (OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.22-0.73 and 0.60, 95% CI 0.45-0.98, respectively. After adjustment, antiplatelet (OR 0.503, 95% CI: 0.273-0.928) and oral anticoagulation (OR 0.411, 95% CI: 0.205-0.824) were linked to reduced risk of in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Mortality after vascular interventions during this period was unexpectedly high. Suspected or confirmed COVID-19 cases were uncommon. Therefore an alternative cause, for example, recommendations for delayed surgery, should be considered. The vascular community must anticipate longer term implications for survival.

Study protocol for COvid-19 Vascular sERvice (COVER) study: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the provision, practice and outcomes of vascular surgery.

BACKGROUND: The novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is having a profound impact on global healthcare. Shortages in staff, operating theatre space and intensive care beds has led to a significant reduction in the provision of surgical care. Even vascular surgery, often insulated from resource scarcity due to its status as an urgent specialty, has limited capacity due to the pandemic. Furthermore, many vascular surgical patients are elderly with multiple comorbidities putting them at increased risk of COVID-19 and its complications. There is an urgent need to investigate the impact on patients presenting to vascular surgeons during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The COvid-19 Vascular sERvice (COVER) study has been designed to investigate the worldwide impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on vascular surgery, at both service provision and individual patient level. COVER is running as a collaborative study through the Vascular and Endovascular Research Network (VERN), an independent, international vascular research collaborative with the support of numerous national and international organisations). The study has 3 'Tiers': Tier 1 is a survey of vascular surgeons to capture longitudinal changes to the provision of vascular services within their hospital; Tier 2 captures data on vascular and endovascular procedures performed during the pandemic; and Tier 3 will capture any deviations to patient management strategies from pre-pandemic best practice. Data submission and collection will be electronic using online survey tools (Tier 1: SurveyMonkey® for service provision data) and encrypted data capture forms (Tiers 2 and 3: REDCap® for patient level data). Tier 1 data will undergo real-time serial analysis to determine longitudinal changes in practice, with country-specific analyses also performed. The analysis of Tier 2 and Tier 3 data will occur on completion of the study as per the pre-specified statistical analysis plan.

Reducing the risk of venous thromboembolism following superficial endovenous treatment: A UK and Republic of Ireland consensus study.

OBJECTIVES: Venous thromboembolism is a potentially fatal complication of superficial endovenous treatment. Proper risk assessment and thromboprophylaxis could mitigate this hazard; however, there are currently no evidence-based or consensus guidelines. This study surveyed UK and Republic of Ireland vascular consultants to determine areas of consensus. METHODS: A 32-item survey was sent to vascular consultants via the Vascular and Endovascular Research Network (phase 1). These results generated 10 consensus statements which were redistributed (phase 2). 'Good' and 'very good' consensus were defined as endorsement/rejection of statements by >67% and >85% of respondents, respectively. RESULTS: Forty-two consultants completed phase 1. This generated seven statements regarding risk factors mandating peri-procedural pharmacoprophylaxis and three statements regarding specific pharmacoprophylaxis regimes. Forty-seven consultants completed phase 2. Regarding venous thromboembolism risk factors mandating pharmacoprophylaxis, 'good' and 'very good' consensus was achieved for 5/7 and 2/7 statements, respectively. Regarding specific regimens, 'very good' consensus was achieved for 3/3 statements. CONCLUSIONS: The main findings from this study were that there was 'good' or 'very good' consensus that patients with any of the seven surveyed risk factors should be given pharmacoprophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin. High-risk patients should receive one to two weeks of pharmacoprophylaxis rather than a single dose.