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.

Amputation of the Unsalvageable Leg in Vascular Patients with Cancer.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of major lower limb amputation (MLA) in patients with and without cancer and with cancer patients receiving palliation over amputation for their unsalvageable limb. METHODS: Cancer patients who underwent a major amputation or palliation between 2013 and 2018 were included. Comparison groups were cancer-MLA (active/managed cancers), non-cancer MLA (historic cancer or no cancer history) and cancer-palliation at presentation with unsalvageable limbs. Prospectively collected data was retrospectively analysed for outcomes including survival, postoperative complications, length of stay, suitability for rehabilitation and discharge destination. RESULTS: 262 (cancer and non-cancer) patients underwent MLA and 18 patients with cancer received palliation. Of those amputated, 26 (9.9%) had active or managed cancer, of which 12 were diagnosed in the 6 months before MLA. Cancer-MLA patients presented with more acute ischaemia compared to non-cancer patients. Median survival was significantly different between the cancer-MLA (14.1 [9.5 - 29.5, 95% CI] months), non-cancer MLA (57.7 [45 - 73.6, 95% CI] months) and cancer-palliation (.6 [.4 - 2.3, 95% CI] months) groups, P < .001. A significantly higher proportion of cancer-MLA patients (10/26, 38.5%) were deemed unsuitable for rehabilitation in post-operative assessment compared to non-cancer MLA (21/236, 8.9%) patients, P < .001. There was a variation in destinations of discharge, with a greater proportion of cancer-MLA patients (4/26, 15.4%) going to a nursing home compared to non-cancer MLA (10/236, 4.2%) patients, P = .016. CONCLUSION: Cancer is prevalent among vascular amputees, with a large proportion being occult diagnoses. Cancer is associated with poorer outcomes following amputation, but survival remains significantly better compared to palliation in cancer patients presenting with unsalvageable limbs.

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.

Screening results from a large United Kingdom abdominal aortic aneurysm screening center in the context of optimizing United Kingdom National Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Screening Programme protocols.

BACKGROUND: After its introduction in six pilot centers in 2009, the National Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Screening Programme (NAAASP) is now established across the United Kingdom, demonstrating significant benefit in terms of fewer emergency surgeries and reduced 30-day surgical mortality. However, according to publication of data on annual screened abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) detection, a lower incidence than predicted in the original screening trials has been found. In this audit we assessed features and risk factors of men found to have a positive scan result in the southwest London AAA screening program, to determine screening yield for subgroups of populations and assess the case for a more targeted screening program. METHODS: Data from the NAAASP screening database for England were extracted for all men who attended screening from the April 1, 2009 through October 16, 2013 in the southwest London area. Primary outcomes were aneurysm prevalence, risk factors, and incidence within subgroups. Results were reviewed against nationally reported data and London census data. RESULTS: Of 24,891 men who were screened in the southwest London program during this period, 292 AAAs were identified (1.18%). Patients were asked to categorize their ethnic background according to classifications provided by the office of national statistics. Those at highest risk of AAA were white-British (1.35%), followed by black and black British (0.65%), and Asian/Asian British (0.23%). Number needed to screen to identify one AAA was calculated as 78, 154, and 431, respectively. The relative proportions of patients screened were similar to that described in the most recent United Kingdom census, except for white-British patients, indicating a shortfall in acceptance of screening invitations in this group. There were no AAA identified in Chinese men. A positive smoking history was found in 90%, a confirmed diagnosis of hypertension in 50%, hypercholesterolemia in 34%, and ischemic heart disease in 21%. CONCLUSIONS: Within southwest London, AAA was most strongly associated with being white-British, a previous or current smoker, and known hypertension. Targeted education in patient groups with identified risk factors for AAA should be considered to improve screening yield without excluding any subgroup from the screening program. This could draw on resources released by unused scans because of lower than predicted prevalence. AAA diagnosis should be seen as an opportunity to address the increased all-cause mortality associated with aortic aneurysmal disease.

The BASIL survival prediction model in patients with peripheral arterial disease undergoing revascularization in a university hospital setting and comparison with the FINNVASC and modified PREVENT scores.

BACKGROUND: Critical limb ischemia carries a significant risk of morbidity and mortality. The development of scores to predict risk can aid clinical decision making. The Bypass versus Angioplasty in Severe Ischaemia of the Leg (BASIL) trial investigators developed a model to predict death, which has not been previously validated. METHODS: Data were collected in a prospectively maintained database on all patients who underwent angioplasty or arterial bypass for peripheral artery disease in a university hospital between January 2008 and June 2010. The main outcome measures were all-cause mortality and amputation-free survival at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after the index intervention. The BASIL survival predictor, Finland National Vascular (FINNVASC) registry, and Edifoligide for the Prevention of Infrainguinal Vein Graft Failure (PREVENT) models were applied and receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to evaluate their predictive power. RESULTS: Data on 342 patients were collected. Patients with isolated iliac disease or claudication were excluded. The 6-, 12-, and 24-month all-cause mortality rates were 11.6%, 17.9%, and 26.8%, respectively. The area under the ROC curve (95% confidence interval) using the BASIL score to predict mortality at 6, 12, and 24 months was 0.700 (0.60-0.80; P<.001), 0.651 (0.56-0.74; P<.003), and 0.681 (0.59-0.74; P<.001), respectively. ROC curve analysis indicated that the performance of the BASIL score in this cohort was comparable to other validated predictive scores. CONCLUSIONS: The BASIL survival prediction model can moderately predict short-term and medium-term mortality in patients with limb ischemia and may be a useful adjunct to decision making in everyday clinical practice.

Volume-outcome relationships in lower extremity arterial bypass surgery.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to investigate whether a volume-outcome relationship exists for lower extremity arterial bypass (LEAB) surgery. METHODS: All LEAB procedures performed in England between 2002 and 2006 were identified from Hospital Episode Statistics data. A Charlson-type risk profile, including operating hospital annual case volume, was identified per patient. Outcome measures of revision bypass, amputation, death and a composite measure were established during the index admission and at 1 year.Quintile analysis and multilevel multivariate modeling were used to identify the existence of a volume-outcome relationship and allow adjustment of results for significant determinants of outcome. RESULTS: A total of 27,660 femoropopliteal bypass and 4161 femorodistal bypass procedures were identified.As volume increased, in-hospital mortality after popliteal bypass decreased from 6.5% to 4.9% (P = 0.0045), with a corresponding odds ratio of 0.980 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.929-0.992; P = 0.014] for every increase of 50 patients per year. Major amputation decreased from 4.1% to 3.2% (P = 0.006) in high-volume hospitals, with a reduction in risk of 0.955 (95% CI, 0.928-0.983; P = 0.002) at 1 year.For distal bypass, in-hospital mortality decreased from 9.8% to 5.5% (P = 0.004) and 1-year major amputation decreased from 25.4% to 18.2% (P < 0.001), with a corresponding odds ratio of 0.658 (95% CI, 0.517-0.838; P < 0.0001) as the volume increased.An increase in the chance of revision surgery (10.6% vs 8.2%, P < 0.001) was seen with higher volume, with an increased odds ratio of 1.031 (95% CI, 1.005-1.057; P = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS: A positive volume-outcome relationship exists for LEAB procedures even after employing multilevel risk adjustment models. There are benefits in terms of mortality and limb salvage both in the short-term and at 1 year postsurgery.

A prospective double-blind randomized controlled trial of radiofrequency versus laser treatment of the great saphenous vein in patients with varicose veins.

BACKGROUND: Endovenous ablation of varicose veins using radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and endovenous laser therapy (EVLT) has reported advantages over traditional open surgical treatment. There is little evidence comparing the efficacy and patient-reported outcomes between the 2 endovenous solutions. This study compares the RFA and EVLT strategies in a prospective double-blind clinical trial. METHODS: Consecutive patients with primary unilateral great saphenous vein (GSV) reflux undergoing endovenous treatment were randomized to RFA (VNUS ClosureFAST) or EVLT (810-nm diode laser). The primary outcome measure was GSV occlusion at 3 months after treatment. Secondary outcome measures were occlusion at 7 days, postoperative pain, analgesic requirement, and bruising, assessed at day 7 after surgery. Quality of life (QoL) was assessed preoperatively and 3 months after surgery using the Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire (AVVQ) and EQ-5D. RESULTS: A total of 159 patients were randomized to RFA (79 patients) or EVLT (80 patients). Groups were well matched for demographics, disease extent, severity, and preoperative QoL. Duplex scanning confirmed 100% vein occlusion at 1 week in both groups. At 3 months, occlusion was 97% for RFA and 96% for EVLT; P = 0.67. Median (interquartile range) percentage above-knee bruise area was greater after EVLT 3.85% (6.1) than after RFA 0.6% (2); P = 0.0001. Postoperative pain assessed at each of the first 7 postoperative days was less after RFA (P = 0.001). Changes in the AVVQ (P = 0.12) and EQ-5D (P = 0.66) at 3 months were similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: RFA and EVLT offer comparable venous occlusion rates at 3 months after treatment of primary GSV varices; with neither modality proving superior. RFA is associated with less periprocedural pain, analgesic requirement, and bruising. REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN63135694 (http://www.controlled-trials.com).

Pulse oximetry and perfusion index measurement to assess uterine perfusion and viability.

This study was designed to establish if pulse oximetry (O2Sat) and perfusion index (PI) could be used to assess the contribution that uterine and ovarian vessels make to the overall perfusion of the uterus. During routine hysterectomies, the O2Sat and PI were measured over the right and left uterine cornu. These measurements were taken before any vessels were ligated (baseline), after only the ovarian vessels were clamped and then after the uterine vessels were clamped. Clamping the ovarian vessels alone decreased the uterine O2Sat and PI by a statistically significant amount. Subsequent clamping of the uterine vessels produced further significant decreases in O2Sat and PI. We concluded that both pairs of vessels contribute almost equally to uterine perfusion and that there may be a role, particularly for O2Sat and possibly for PI variables, in determining the success of uterine and ovarian vessel reanastomosis in uterine transplantation.