Indications, technical aspects, and outcomes of stent placement in chronic iliofemoral venous obstruction.

BACKGROUND: Iliofemoral Venous Stent Placement (IVS) has evolved to a well-established endovascular treatment modality for chronic iliofemoral venous obstruction (CIVO). Dedicated venous stents gained FDA approval in 2019 and solidified IVS as a defined intervention with clear indications, contraindications, risks, benefits, and procedural management principles. This review focuses on the indications, technical aspects and outcomes of stenting for CIVO. Other aspects pertaining to IVS are covered in manuscripts that are part of this series. METHODS: This study conducted a literature search limited to English articles. Three search strategies were employed, and references were managed in Covidence software. Four investigators independently screened and evaluated articles, excluding meta-analyses, clinical trial protocols, and non-relevant studies. Eligible studies, focused on clinical outcomes and stent patencies, underwent thorough review. RESULTS: The literature search yielded 1,704 studies, with 147 meeting eligibility criteria after screening and evaluation. Exclusions were based on duplicates, irrelevant content, and non-iliac vein stent placement. CONCLUSION: Successful IVS for CIVO relies on meticulous patient selection, consistent use of IVUS during procedures, and attention to the technical details of IVS.

Determinants of Mortality and Mid-Term Outcomes After Transcarotid Artery Revascularization and Transfemoral Carotid Artery Stenting.

OBJECTIVES: The potential benefit of transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) over transfemoral carotid artery stenting (tfCAS) has been studied in the perioperative period with lower rates of stroke and death; however, data on mid-term outcomes are limited. We aimed to evaluate 3-year outcomes after TCAR and tfCAS and determine the primary predictors of 30-day and 1-year mortality following TCAR. METHODS: Data from the Vascular Quality Initiative for patients undergoing TCAR or tfCAS from January 2016 to December 2022 were analyzed. 1:1 propensity score matching using the nearest-neighbor method was used to adjust baseline demographics and clinical characteristics. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox Proportional Hazard Regression were used to evaluate long-term outcomes. Iterative stepwise multiple logistic regression analysis and Cox Proportional Hazard Regression were used to identify predictors of 30-day and 1-year mortality, respectively, based upon preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative factors. RESULTS: A total of 70 237 patients were included in analysis (TCAR=58.7%, tfCAS=41.3%). Transcarotid artery revascularization patients were older and had higher rates of comorbid conditions and high-risk medical and anatomic features than tfCAS patients. Propensity score matching yielded 22 322 pairs with no major differences between groups except that TCAR patients were older (71.6 years vs 70.8 years). At 3 years, TCAR was associated with a 24% reduction in hazard of death compared with tfCAS (hazard ratio [HR]=0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.71-0.82, p<0.001), for both symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. This survival advantage was established in the first 6 months (HR=0.59, 95% CI=0.53-0.62, p<0.001), with no difference in mortality risk from 6 months to 36 months (HR=0.95, 95% CI=0.86-1.05, p=0.31). Transcarotid artery revascularization was also associated with decreased hazard for 3-year stroke (HR=0.81, 95% CI=0.66-0.99, p=0.04) and stroke or death (HR=0.81, 95% CI=0.76-0.87, p<0.001) compared with tfCAS. The top predictors for 30-day and 1-year mortality were postoperative complications. The primary independent predictor was the occurrence of postoperative stroke. CONCLUSIONS: Transcarotid artery revascularization had a sustained mid-term survival advantage associated over tfCAS, with the benefit being established primarily within the first 6 months. Notably, our findings highlight the importance of postoperative stroke as the primary independent predictor for 30-day and 1-year mortal. CLINICAL IMPACT: The ongoing debate over the superiority of TCAR compared to tfCAS and CEA has been limited by a lack of comparative studies examining the impact of pre-operative symptoms on outcomes. Furthermore, data are scarce on mid-term outcomes for TCAR beyond the perioperative period. As a result, it remains uncertain whether the initial benefits of stroke and death reduction observed with TCAR over tfCAS persist beyond one year. Our study addresses these gaps in the literature, offering evidence to enable clinicians to assess the efficacy of TCAR for up to three years. Additionally, our study seeks to identify risk factors for postoperative mortality following TCAR, facilitating optimal patient stratification.

Effect of junctional reflux on the venous clinical severity score in patients with insufficiency of the great saphenous vein (JURY study).

OBJECTIVE: Effective treatment options are available for chronic venous insufficiency associated with superficial venous reflux. Although many patients with C2 and C3 disease based on the CEAP (Clinical-Etiological-Anatomical-Pathophysiological) classification have combined great saphenous vein (GSV) and saphenofemoral junction (SFJ) reflux, some may not have concomitant SFJ reflux. Several payors have determined that symptom severity in patients without SFJ reflux does not warrant treatment. In patients planned for venous ablation, we tested whether Venous Clinical Severity Scores (VCSS) are equivalent in those with GSV reflux alone compared with those with both GSV and SFJ reflux. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted at 10 centers. Inclusion criteria were: candidate for endovenous ablation as determined by treating physician; 18 to 80 years of age; GSV reflux with or without SFJ reflux on ultrasound; and C2 or C3 disease. Exclusion criteria were prior deep vein thrombosis; prior vein ablation on the index limb; ilio-caval obstruction; and renal, hepatic, or heart failure requiring prior hospitalization. An a priori sample size was calculated. We used multiple linear regression (adjusted for patient characteristics) to compare differences in VCSS scores of the two groups at baseline, and to test whether scores were equivalent using a priori equivalence boundaries of +1 and -1. In secondary analyses, we tested differences in VCSS scores in patients with C2 and C3 disease separately. RESULTS: A total of 352 patients were enrolled; 64.2% (n = 226) had SFJ reflux, and 35.8% (n = 126) did not. The two groups did not differ by major clinical characteristics. The mean age of the cohort was 53.9 ± 14.3 years; women comprised 74.2%; White patients 85.8%; and body mass index was 27.8 ± 6.1 kg/m2. The VCSS scores in patients with and without SFJ reflux were found to be equivalent; SFJ reflux was not a significant predictor of VCSS score; and mean VCSS scores did not differ significantly (6.4 vs 6.6, respectively, P = .40). In secondary subset analyses, VCSS scores were equivalent between C2 patients with and without SFJ reflux, and VCSS scores of C3 patients with SFJ reflux were lower than those without SFJ reflux. CONCLUSIONS: Symptom severity is equivalent in patients with GSV reflux with or without SFJ reflux. The absence of SFJ reflux alone should not determine the treatment paradigm in patients with symptomatic chronic venous insufficiency. Patients with GSV reflux who meet clinical criteria for treatment should have equivalent treatment regardless of whether or not they have SFJ reflux.

Diabetes, Hypertension, and Smoking Do Not Affect Outcomes of Iliofemoral Vein Stenting for Chronic Proximal Venous Outflow Obstruction.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes, hypertension, and smoking are well-recognized risk factors for peripheral artery disease (PAD), but little is known of their impact on chronic venous insufficiency (CVI). This study evaluates these factors in patients undergoing iliac vein stenting (IVS) for CVI. METHODS: A registry of 708 patients who underwent IVS from August 2011 to June 2021 was retrospectively analyzed. Symptoms were quantified using venous clinical severity score (VCSS) and CEAP classification. Both major and minor reinterventions were recorded. Logistic regression models were used to determine the unadjusted and adjusted odds ratio of any reintervention. Log-rank test was used to assess differences in reintervention-free survival. RESULTS: The prevalence of hypertension was 51.1% (N = 362), diabetes was 23.0% (N = 163), and smoking was 22.2% (N = 157). Patients with diabetes (3.6 vs. 3.4; P = 0.062), hypertension (3.6 vs. 3.3; P < 0.001), and smoking (3.7 vs. 3.4; P = 0.003) had higher CEAP scores than those without these comorbidities. Improvement in VCSS composite scores showed no differences postoperatively (diabetes: P = 0.513; hypertension: P = 0.053; smoking: P = 0.608), at 1-year follow-up (diabetes: P = 0.666; hypertension: P = 0.681; smoking: P = 0.745), or at 5-year follow-up (diabetes: P = 0.525; hypertension: P = 0.953; smoking: P = 0.146). Diabetes (P = 0.454), smoking (P = 0.355), and hypertension (P = 0.727) were not associated with increased odds of major reintervention. Log-rank test similarly showed no differences in reintervention-free survival for major or minor reoperations between those with and without diabetes (P = 0.79), hypertension (P = 0.14), and smoking (P = 0.80). CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes, hypertension, and smoking were prevalent among CVI patients, but unlike in PAD patients, they had little to no impact on long-term outcomes or reinterventions after IVS.

A comparison of below-knee vs above-knee endovenous ablation of varicose veins.

OBJECTIVE: Varicose veins have a significant impact on quality of life and can commonly occur in the thigh and calves. However, there has been no large-scale investigation examining the relationship between anatomic distribution and outcomes after varicose vein treatment. This study sought to compare below-the-knee (BTK) and above-the-knee (ATK) varicose vein treatment outcomes. METHODS: Employing the Vascular Quality Initiative Varicose Vein Registry, 13,731 patients undergoing varicose vein ablation for either BTK or ATK lesions were identified. Outcomes were assessed using patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and the Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS). Continuous variables were compared using the t-test, and categorical variables were analyzed using the χ2 test. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the odds of improvement after intervention. The multivariable model controlled for age, gender, race, preoperative VCSS composite score, and history of deep vein thrombosis. RESULTS: Patients who received below-knee treatment had a lower preoperative VCSS composite (7.0 ± 3.3 vs 7.7 ± 3.3; P < .001) and lower PROs composite scores (11.1 ± 6.4 vs 13.0 ± 6.6; P < .001) compared with those of patients receiving above-knee treatment. However, on follow-up, patients receiving below-knee intervention had a higher postoperative VCSS composite score (4.4 ± 3.3 vs 3.9 ± 3.5; P < .001) and PROs composite score (6.1 ± 4.4 vs 5.8 ± 4.5; P = .007), the latter approaching statistical significance. Patients receiving above-knee interventions also demonstrated more improvement in both composite VCSS (3.8 ± 4.0 vs 2.9 ± 3.7; P < .001) and PROs (7.1 ± 6.8 vs 4.8 ± 6.6; P < .001). Multivariable logistic regression analysis similarly revealed that patients receiving above-knee treatment had significantly higher odds of improvement in VCSS composite in both the unadjusted (odds ratio [OR], 1.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.28-1.65; P < .001 and adjusted (OR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.14-1.50; P < .001) models. Patients receiving above-knee treatment also had a significantly higher odds of reporting improvement in PROs composite in both the unadjusted (OR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.64-2.11; P < .001) and adjusted (OR, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.45-1.88; P < .001) models. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment region has a significant association with PROs and VCSS composite scores after varicose vein interventions. Preoperatively, there were significant differences in the composite scores of VCSS and PROs with patients receiving BTK treatment exhibiting less severe symptoms. Yet, the association appeared to reverse postoperatively, with those receiving BTK treatments exhibiting worse PROs, worse VCSS composites scores, and less improvement in VCSS composite scores. Therefore, BTK interventions pose a unique challenge compared with ATK interventions in ensuring commensurate clinical improvement after treatment.

Neck radiation is not associated with increased risk of perioperative adverse events after transcarotid artery revascularization or transfemoral carotid artery stenting.

OBJECTIVE: It is unclear whether patients with prior neck radiation therapy (RT) are at high risk for carotid artery stenting (CAS). We aimed to delineate 30-day perioperative and 3-year long-term outcomes in patients treated for radiation-induced stenotic lesions by the transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TFCAS) or transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) approach to determine comparative risk and to ascertain the optimal intervention in this cohort. METHODS: Data were extracted from the Vascular Quality Initiative CAS registry for patients with prior neck radiation who had undergone either TCAR or TFCAS. The Student t-test and the χ2 test were used to compare baseline patient characteristics. Multivariable logistic regression and Cox Hazard Proportional analysis were used to compare perioperative and long-term differences between patients with and without prior neck radiation following TCAR and TFCAS. Kaplan-Meier estimator was used to determine the incidence of 3-year adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 72,656 patients (TCAR, 40,879; TFCAS, 31,777) were included in the analysis. Of these, 4151 patients had a history of neck radiation. Patients with a history of neck radiation were more likely to be younger, white, and have fewer comorbidities than patients with no neck radiation history. After adjustment for confounding factors, there was no difference in relative risk of 30-day perioperative stroke (P = .11), death (P = .36), or myocardial infarction (MI) (P = .61) between TCAR patients with or without a history of neck radiation. The odds of stroke/death (P = .10) and stroke/death/MI (P = .07) were also not statistically significant. In patients with prior neck radiation, TCAR had lower odds for in-hospital stroke/death/MI (odds ratio, 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.35-0.99; P = .05) and access site complications than TFCAS. At year 3, patients with prior neck radiation had an increased hazard for mortality after TCAR (hazard ratio [HR], 1.24; 95% CI, 1.02-1.51; P = .04) and TFCAS (HR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.12-1.58; P = .001). Patients with prior neck radiation also experienced an increased hazard for reintervention after TCAR (HR, 2.16; 95% CI, 1.45-3.20; P < .001) and TFCAS (HR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.02-2.73; P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with prior neck radiation had a similar relative risk of 30-day perioperative adverse events as patients with no neck radiation after adjustment for baseline demographics and disease characteristics. In these patients, TCAR was associated with reduced odds of perioperative stroke/death/MI as compared with TFCAS. However, patients with prior neck radiation were at increased risk for 3-year mortality and reintervention.

Variations and inconsistencies in venous ablation coverage policies between single-state and multistate carriers in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Vein ablation is a common and effective treatment for patients with chronic venous insufficiency. The overuse of vein ablation despite the existence of evidence-based guidelines has resulted in insurance companies developing restrictive policies for coverage that create barriers to appropriate care. This study compares the insurance coverage by single-state carriers (SSCs) and multistate carriers (MSCs), highlighting the variations and inconsistencies in the various policies. METHODS: The American Venous Forum Venous Policy Navigator was reviewed for the various policies available in the United States. The policies were divided into SSCs and MSCs. The characteristics of the policies, including the anatomic and hemodynamic criteria for specific veins, duration of conservative treatment, disease severity, symptoms, and types of procedures covered, were compared between the two groups. SAS, version 9.4 (SAS Institute Inc) was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: A total of 122 policies were analyzed and divided between SSCs (n = 85; 69.7%) and MSCs (n = 37; 30.3%). A significant variation was found in the size requirement for great saphenous vein ablation. Although 48% of the policies did not specify a size criterion, the remaining policies indicated a minimal size, ranging from 3 to 5.5 mm. However, no significant differences were found between SSCs and MSCs. Similar findings were encountered for the small and anterior accessory saphenous veins. MSCs were more likely to define a saphenous reflux time >500 ms compared with SSCs (81.1% vs 58.8%; P = .04). A significant difference was found between the SSCs and MSCs in the criteria for perforator ablation in terms of size and reflux time. MSCs were significantly more likely to provide coverage for mechanochemical ablation than were SSCs (24.3% vs 8.2%; P = .03). SSCs were more likely to require ≥12 weeks of compression stocking therapy than were MSCs (76.5% vs 48.7%; P = .01). No significant differences were found in the clinical indications between the two groups; however, MSCs were more likely to mention major hemorrhage than were SSCs. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study highlight the variations in policies for venous ablation, in particular, the striking inconsistencies in size criteria. MSCs were more likely to cover mechanochemical ablation and require a shorter duration of conservative therapy before intervention compared with SSCs. Evidence-based guidance is needed to develop more coherent policies for venous ablation coverage.

Body Mass Index Impacts Indication But Not Outcomes of Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair.

BACKGROUND: There are limited studies looking at thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) outcomes in obese and overweight patients. Our objective was to determine the rate of complications, reintervention, and short-term mortality in normal weight, overweight, and obese patients undergoing TEVAR. METHODS: Patients undergoing TEVAR at a large tertiary hospital from October 2007 to January 2020 were analyzed. Patients were stratified into 3 cohorts based on body mass index (BMI): normal (18.5-25 kg/m2), overweight (25-30 kg/m2), and obese (>30 kg/m2). Primary outcomes were 30-day and 1-year survival. Intraoperative, in-hospital, and postdischarge complications were assessed as secondary outcomes using the Clavian-Dindo classification system. In addition, reinterventions associated with the index TEVAR procedure as a secondary outcome. RESULTS: Among 204 patients fitting the study criteria, we identified 65 with normal BMI, 78 overweight, and 61 obese patients. Obese patients were younger than the overweight and normal BMI patients (mean age 62.2 vs. 66.7 vs. 70.7, respectively, P = 0.003). In terms of TEVAR indication, the obese cohort had the highest percentage of patients with type B aortic dissection (36.4%), while the normal BMI cohort had the higher proportion of patients undergoing TEVAR for isolated thoracic aortic aneurysm (63.9%). Intraoperative complications did not significantly differ between cohorts. Postoperatively, in-hospital complications, postdischarge complications and 30-day return to the operative room did not differ significantly between study cohorts. Odds of reintervention did not differ significantly between cohorts, both on univariate and multivariate analysis. Log-rank test of Kaplan Meier analysis revealed no difference in reintervention-free survival (P = 0.22). Thirty-day mortality and 1-year overall survival were similar across cohorts. Both univariate and multivariate logarithmic regression revealed no difference in likelihood of 30-day mortality between the obese and normal cohort. CONCLUSIONS: There were no measurable differences in complications, reinterventions, or mortality, suggesting that vascular surgeons can perform TEVAR across a spectrum of BMI without compromising outcomes.

Identifying venous clinical severity score thresholds for Clinical-Etiology-Anatomy-Pathophysiology classifications of venous edema and higher.

OBJECTIVE: Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS) is a widely used standard for assessing and grading the severity of chronic venous disease (CVD). Prior research highlighted its high validity in detecting and quantifying venous disease. However, there is little, if any, known about the precise thresholds at which VCSS discriminates important stages of deep venous disease. This study sought to elucidate the diagnostic accuracy, thresholds, and correlation at which VCSS detects salient CEAP (Clinical-Etiology-Anatomy-Pathophysiology) classes in deep venous disease progression. METHODS: A registry of 840 patients who presented with chronic proximal venous outflow obstruction (PVOO) secondary to non-thrombotic iliac vein lesions from August 2011 to June 2021 was retrospectively analyzed. VCSS and CEAP classifications were used to evaluate preoperative symptoms. VCSS was compared to CEAP classes to determine the precise VCSS composite values at which the instrument was able to detect CEAP C3 and higher, C4 and higher, and C5 and higher. Receiver operative characteristic (ROC) curve and area under the curve (AUC) were used to evaluate VCSS for its ability to discriminate disease at these stages of CEAP classification. Spearman's rank coefficient was used to determine the correlation between CEAP VCSS composite as well as individual VCSS components (pain, varicose vein, edema, pigmentation, inflammation, induration, ulcer number, ulcer size, ulcer duration, compression). RESULTS: VCSS composite was able to detect venous edema (C3) and higher at a sensitivity of 68.9% and a specificity of 54.8% at an optimized threshold of 8.5 (AUC = 0.648; 95% C.I. = 0.575-0.721). To detect changes in skin and subcutaneous tissue from CVD (C4) and higher, an optimal threshold of 11.5 was found with a sensitivity of 51.7% and specificity of 76.5% (AUC = 0.694; 95% C.I. = 0.656-0.731). Healed venous ulcer (C4) and higher was detectable at an optimized threshold of 13.5 at a sensitivity of 67.7% and a specificity of 88.9% (AUC = 0.819; 95% C.I. = 0.766-0.873). The correlation between VCSS composites and CEAP was weak (ρ = 0.372; p < .001). Attributes of VCSS that reflect more severe venous disease correlated more closely with CEAP classes, namely pigmentation (ρ = 0.444; p < .001), inflammation (ρ = 0.348; p < .001), induration (ρ = 0.352; p < .001), number of active ulcers (ρ = 0.497; p < .001), active ulcer size (ρ = 0.485; p < .001), and ulcer duration (ρ = 0.497; p < .001). The correlation between CEAP class and the other four components of VCSS were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: VCSS composite thresholds of 8.5, 11.5, and 13.5 are threshold values for detecting CEAP classification C3 and higher, C4 and higher, and C5 and higher, respectively. Consistent with prior work, VCSS appears to have a better ability to discriminate CVD at more severe CEAP classifications. In this registry, the correlation between VCSS and CEAP was found to be weak while components of VCSS that suggest more advanced disease exhibited the strongest correlation with CEAP.

External iliac vein dimensions can change after placement of a more proximal iliac vein stent.

OBJECTIVE: We have occasionally observed during vein stenting for proximal iliac vein stenosis, the appearance of a more distal stenosis in the iliac vein that had not been initially observed before placement of the more proximal vein stent. In the present retrospective study, we aimed to document this observation. METHODS: We identified patients in whom changes in the area measurement and linear dimensions of the external iliac vein (EIV) were observed on venography and/or intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) after stent placement for chronic nonthrombotic iliac stenosis in the common iliac vein (CIV). The images of these IVUS scans were subsequently analyzed to determine the cross-sectional area, major axis, and minor axis measurements in the EIV, before and after placement of a proximal CIV stent. RESULTS: A total of 32 limbs with complete and quality IVUS and venography images available that allowed for measurement of the EIV before and after vein stent placement in the CIV were evaluated. The patient cohort was 55% men, with a mean age of 63.8 ± 9.9 years and a mean body mass index of 27.8 ± 7.8 kg/m2. Of the 32 limbs, 18 were left sided and 14 were right sided. Most (n = 12 [60%]) of the limbs had presented with venous-related skin changes (C4 disease). The remainder of the cohort had had active (C6 disease; n = 4 [20%]) or recently healed (C5 disease; n = 1 [5%]) venous ulceration and isolated venous-related edema (C3; n = 3 [15%]). The minimal CIV area before and after CIV stenting was 28.47 ± 23.53 mm2 and 196.34 ± 42.62 mm2, respectively. The minimal mean EIV cross-sectional area before and after CIV stenting was 87.44 ± 38.55 mm2 and 50.69 ± 24.32 mm2, respectively, a statistically significant reduction of 36.75 mm2 (P < .001). The mean EIV major axis and minor axis had both decreased similarly. The minimal mean EIV major axis before and after CIV stenting was 15.22 ± 3.13 mm and 11.13 ± 3.58 mm, respectively (P < .001). The minimal mean EIV minor axis before and after CIV stenting was 7.26 ± 2.40 mm and 5.84 ± 1.42 mm, respectively (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The results from the present study have shown that the dimensions of the EIV can change significantly after placement of a proximal CIV stent. Possible explanations include masked stenosis due to distal venous distention resulting from the more proximal stenosis, vascular spasm, and anisotropy. The presence of proximal CIV stenosis can potentially lessen the appearance, or completely mask the presence, of an EIV stenosis. This phenomenon appears unique to venous stenting, and the prevalence is unknown. These findings underscore the importance of completion IVUS and venography after venous stent placement.

The Venous Thrombectomy Armamentarium: An Expanding World.

Acute deep venous thrombosis (DVT) is a common and important public health problem. It affects more than 350,000 people in the United States annually and has a substantial economic impact. Without adequate treatment, there is significant risk of development of post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS) resulting in patient morbidity, worse quality of life, and costly long-term medical care. Over the past decade, the treatment algorithm for patients with acute DVT has significantly changed. Prior to 2008, the treatment recommendation for patients with acute DVT was limited to anticoagulation and conservative management. In 2008, national clinical practice guidelines were updated to include interventional strategies such as surgical- and catheter-based techniques for the treatment of acute DVT. Early strategies for debulking of extensive acute DVT primarily consisted of open surgical thrombectomy and administration of thrombolytics. In the intervening period, a plethora of advanced endovascular techniques and technologies have been developed which reduced the morbidity of operative intervention and risks of hemorrhage associated with thrombolysis. This review will focus on the novel technologies commercially available for management of acute DVT, denoting unique features inherent to each device. This expanded armamentarium gives vascular surgeons and proceduralists the opportunity to individualize their treatment approach to the specific patient's anatomy, lesion, and history.

Venous Clinical Severity Score has a suboptimal ability to detect improvement after iliac vein stenting across three years of follow-up.

OBJECTIVE: Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS) is currently the gold standard for measuring the severity of chronic venous disease, especially in patients with chronic proximal venous outflow obstruction (PVOO) secondary to non-thrombotic iliac vein lesions. Change in VCSS composite scores is often used to quantitatively measure the degree of clinical improvement after venous interventions. This study sought to assess the discriminative ability, sensitivity, and specificity of change in VCSS composites for detecting clinical improvement after iliac venous stenting. METHODS: A registry of 433 patients who underwent iliofemoral vein stenting for chronic PVOO from August 2011 to June 2021 was retrospectively analyzed. These 433 patients had follow-up exceeding 1 year after the index procedure. Change in VCSS composite and clinical assessment scores (CAS) were used to quantify improvement after venous interventions. CAS is an assessment by the operating surgeon based on patient self-reporting to assess the degree of improvement at each clinic visit compared with before the index procedure longitudinally across the treatment course of a patient. Patients are rated as worse (-1), no change (0), mildly improved (+1), significantly improved (+2), and asymptomatic/complete resolution (+3) at every follow-up visit as compared with their disease severity prior to the procedure based on patient self-report. This study defined improvement as CAS >0 and no improvement as CAS ≤0. VCSS was then compared with CAS. Receiver operative characteristic curve and area under the curve (AUC) were used to evaluate change in VCSS composite for its ability to discriminate between improvement and no improvement after intervention at each year of follow-up. RESULTS: Change in VCSS was a suboptimal measure for discriminating clinical improvement (1-year AUC, 0.764; 2-year AUC, 0.753; 3-year AUC, 0.715). Across all three time points, a change in VCSS threshold of +2.5 maximized the sensitivity and specificity of the instrument to detect clinical improvement. At 1 year, change in VCSS at this threshold was able to detect clinical improvement at a sensitivity of 74.9% and specificity of 70.0%. At 2 years, VCSS change had a sensitivity of 70.7% and specificity of 66.7%. At 3 years of follow-up, VCSS change had a sensitivity of 76.2% and specificity of 58.1%. CONCLUSIONS: Across 3 years, change in VCSS exhibited a suboptimal ability to detect clinical improvement in patients undergoing iliac vein stenting for chronic PVOO with considerable sensitivity but variable specificity at a threshold of 2.5.

Gender Differences in Iliofemoral Vein Stenting for Chronic Venous Insufficiency.

INTRODUCTION: Little is known about gender's role in chronic venous insufficiency (CVI). The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of gender on outcomes of iliac vein stenting(IVS) for CVI. METHODS: 866 patients who underwent vein stenting for CVI at one institution from August 2011 to June 2021 were analyzed via retrospective review. Patients were followed up to 5 years after initial stent placement. Presenting symptoms were quantified using Venous Clinical Severity Score(VCSS), Clinical Assessment Score(CAS), and Clinical, Etiology, Anatomy, and Pathophysiology (CEAP) class. Reoperations after initial IVS were recorded. Major reoperations were defined as iliac interventions using venography. Minor reoperations were defined as thermal ablation. Multivariate logistic regression models were used determine odds of any and major reintervention. RESULTS: Compared to females, males pre-operatively presented with a higher mean CEAP class (3.6 vs .3.3; P < .001), VCSS composite (11.3 vs .9.9; P < .001), and smoking history (134 vs .49; P < .001). The 2 groups were similar in age (P = .125), BMI(P = .898), previous DVT (P = .085), diabetes (P = .386), hypertension (P = 1.0), and CAD (P = .499). Multivariate analyses revealed no association between gender and any reintervention (OR, 1.02; 95%CI, .71-1.46; P = .935) or gender and major reintervention (OR, 1.39; 95% CI, .86-2.23 P = .177). There were no differences in number of stents placed (P = .736) or symptomatic improvement at 1 month (P = .951), 3 months (P = .233), 6 months(P = .068), and greater than 1 year (P = .287). At the 1 year follow-up, the male cohort had higher CAS values than females P = .034). Males had larger reduction in composite VCSS than women at 1 year (5.1 vs. 3.8; P = .003) and 3 years (5.3 vs .3.7; P = .031) of follow-up and similar levels of improvement in post-op (4.0 vs .3.5; P = .059), 2 years (4.3 vs .3.8; P = .295), 4-years (5.1 vs .4.6; P = .529), 5 years (5.6 vs .4.2; P = .174), and 6 years (5.93vs.3.3 P = .089). CONCLUSIONS: In a single site study of IVS in patients with CVI, males tended to present worse symptoms than females. After surgery, however, both cohorts showed improvement, and both seemed to improve to the same degree of residual symptoms.

Review of Malpractice Litigation in the Diagnosis and Treatment of Venous & Lymphatic Disease.

BACKGROUND: Malpractice claims involving nonthrombotic venous and lymphatic diseases and interventions have not been reported previously. We investigated common reasons for litigation, medical specialties involved, patient injuries, and case outcomes in malpractice litigation involving venous and lymphatic disease. METHODS: Litigation cases entered into the Westlaw database from June 8th, 1984 to February 15th, 2018 were analyzed. Search terms included relevant words and phrases related to nonthrombotic venous, thoracic outlet syndrome, and lymphatic disease and treatment. Data on physician specialty, malpractice claims, and patient injuries jury outcomes, amount awarded to the plaintiff, and jury fees were collected and compared for each category. RESULTS: A total of 144 cases were identified. 41 cases involved varicose veins, 11 spider veins, 35 thoracic outlet syndrome (TOS), 17 other venous diseases, and 40 lymphatic diseases. Physician defendants were frequently vascular surgeons (23%) and general surgeons (15%). The majority of litigation claims involved "post-procedure complication" (77%), "lack of informed consent" (25%), "failure to diagnose & treat" (15%), and "intraoperative complications" (13%). The most common injuries were skin damage (27.8%), nerve damage (25%), and lymphedema (24%). Patient death occurred in 6% of cases. Out of venous malpractice cases with post-procedure complications, stab phlebectomy (27%) was the most common intervention followed by foam sclerotherapy (21%), rib resection (21%), laser spider vein removal (5%), and endovenous laser ablation therapy (EVLT)(3%). Of varicose vein cases, 15% included deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism as post-procedure complications. In TOS rib resections, 65% of cases referenced nerve damage and 12% involved arterial injury. For lymphatic disease cases, general surgeons were frequently identified defendants (25%). Lymphedema (93%) and lymphangitis (7%) occurred as post-procedure complications after breast, gynecologic, orthopedic, and radiation procedures. A majority of complications occurred after breast cases (40%). Verdicts overall ruled in favor of the defendant in 71% (102/144) of cases and the plaintiff in 20% (29/144) of cases. Out of cases ruled in favor of the plaintiff, 31% were lymphatics, 24% varicose veins, and 24% TOS cases. Only 8% (12/144) of cases were settled and one outcome was unknown. The mean award was $820,193 (standard deviation SD $1,226,008, Range $12,853 - $6,500,000). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of venous and lymphatic litigation cases involve claims of post-procedure complications. Venous complications occurred after open and endovascular treatment of varicose veins, spider vein treatment, and surgical management of TOS. Lymphedema occurred after breast, oncology, and orthopedic procedures. These cases reflect opportunities for intervention to help potentially prevent litigation.

Sentiment Analysis of Online Patient-Written Reviews of Vascular Surgeons.

BACKGROUND: Online patient reviews influence a patient's choice of a vascular surgeon. The aim of this study is to examine underlying factors that contribute to positive and negative patient reviews by leveraging sentiment analysis and machine learning methods. METHODS: The Society of Vascular Surgeons publicly accessible member directory was queried and cross-referenced with a popular patient-maintained physician review website, healthgrades.com. Sentiment analysis and machine learning methods were used to analyze several parameters. Demographics (gender, age, and state of practice), star rating (of 5 stars), and written reviews were obtained for corresponding vascular surgeons. A sentiment analysis model was applied to patient-written reviews and validated against the star ratings. Student's t-test or one-way analysis of variance assessed demographic relationships with reviews. Word frequency assessments and multivariable logistic regression analyses were conducted to identify common and determinative components of written reviews. RESULTS: A total of 1,799 vascular surgeons had public profiles with reviews. Female gender of surgeon was associated with lower star ratings (male = 4.19, female = 3.95, P < 0.01) and average sentiment score (male = 0.50, female = 0.40, P < 0.01). Younger physician age was associated with higher star rating (P = 0.02) but not average sentiment score (P = 0.12). In the Best reviews, the most commonly used one-words were Care (N = 999), Caring (N = 767), and Kind (N = 479), while the most commonly used two-word pairs were Saved/Life (N = 189), Feel/Comfortable (N = 106), and Kind/Caring (N = 104). For the Worst reviews, the most commonly used one-words were Pain (N = 254) and Rude (N = 148), while the most commonly used two-word pairs were No/One (N = 27), Waste/Time (N = 25), and Severe/Pain (N = 18). In a multiple logistic regression, satisfactory reviews were associated with words such as Confident (odds ratio [OR] = 8.93), Pain-free (OR = 4.72), Listens (OR = 2.55), and Bedside Manner (OR = 1.70), while unsatisfactory reviews were associated with words such as Rude (OR = 0.01), Arrogant (OR = 0.09), Infection (OR = 0.20), and Wait (OR = 0.48). CONCLUSIONS: Female surgeons received significantly worse reviews and younger surgeons tended to receive better reviews. The positivity and negativity of reviews were largely related to words associated with the patient-doctor experience and pain. Vascular surgeons should focus on these 2 areas to improve patient experiences and their own reviews.

Double-barrel iliocaval reconstruction using closed-cell dedicated venous stents.

OBJECTIVE: Double-barrel iliocaval reconstruction is performed by deploying two stents simultaneously in a side-by-side, or "double-barrel," configuration in the inferior vena cava (IVC) with extension into the bilateral common iliac veins. The aim of this study was to examine the outcomes of double-barrel reconstruction using closed-cell dedicated venous stents for the treatment of iliocaval deep venous thrombosis and iliac vein compression syndrome. METHODS: All endovascular procedural reports comprising vascular surgery and interventional radiology operators from a single urban academic hospital between May 1, 2019, and April 30, 2021, were retrospectively searched. A cohort of 22 consecutive patients who underwent double-barrel iliocaval stenting with closed-cell dedicated venous stents for chronic or acute-on-chronic iliocaval venous disease without prior endovascular iliocaval repair was identified. Baseline characteristics, procedural data, and patient outcomes were determined via a manual review of preprocedure clinical notes, diagnostic imaging studies, procedure notes and images, and follow-up clinical notes. RESULTS: The median (range) age was 59 (27-81) years, and the cohort consisted of 59.1% female. The most common presenting symptoms of venous disease were lower extremity swelling (90.9%) and pain (50.0%). CEAP clinical classification was C3 in 86.4% of patients, whereas the remainder had C4 disease. Most patients (72.7%) had post-thrombotic syndrome, 22.7% had a nonthrombotic iliac vein lesion, and one patient (4.5%) had the congenital absence of the infrarenal IVC. A total of 40.9% of patients had a pre-existing IVC filter at the time of treatment. Six of the 22 patients underwent concurrent pharmacomechanical thrombectomy during the index iliocaval reconstruction and stenting procedure. The number of stents placed ranged from 2 to 5. With a mean follow-up period of 7.1 months, ranging from 12 days to 16.7 months, the freedom from reintervention rate was 90.9%. Twenty of 22 patients achieved subjective improvement or resolution of symptoms. The major adverse event rate was 9.1%, as two patients had access site complications requiring intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Double-barrel iliocaval reconstruction with closed-cell dedicated venous stents for the treatment of post-thrombotic syndrome or iliac vein compression syndrome is technically feasible and clinically effective with a low reintervention rate.

Race differences in iliofemoral vein stenting for chronic venous insufficiency.

INTRODUCTION: Major disparities in outcomes by race are present throughout vascular surgery, yet little has been published on iliac vein stent outcomes by race. This retrospective study assessed iliac vein stent outcomes by patient race. METHODS: Patients who underwent iliac vein stenting at a single institution for chronic venous insufficiency (CVI) from 2011 to 2021 were reviewed. Demographic, preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative data were collected. Self-reported race groups included Asian, Black, Hispanic, and White. Univariate differences were analyzed using χ2 tests for categorical variables and 1-way ANOVA for continuous variables. Outcomes included change in Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS) at interval timepoints relative to a preoperative baseline and reinterventions. Logistic regression models were used to determine the unadjusted and adjusted odds ratio (OR) of any minor and major reintervention. Multivariate regression models controlled for demographic and comorbidity characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 827 patients were included. Asian patients were younger and had a greater proportion of male patients, lower Body mass index (BMI), less smoking history, and fewer comorbidities. White patients were more likely to have a history of deep vein thrombosis (DVT). White patients presented with the most severe CVI symptoms as defined by both Clinical-Etiological-Anatomical-Pathophysiological (CEAP) classification and preoperative VCSS composite scores. There were no differences in acute DVT, number of stents deployed, and bilateral versus unilateral stent placement. Black patients had the longest average days of follow-up, followed sequentially by Hispanic, White, and Asian. Black patients had the most reinterventions, while Asian patients had the fewest. Asian patients were less likely to have a major reintervention. No differences in VCSS composite or change in VCSS were observed. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with CVI, Asian patients presented younger and healthier, while White patients presented with the most severe symptoms. No differences were observed in VCSS outcomes, though Black patients had the most reinterventions.

Iliac vein stenting outcomes for patients with superficial venous insufficiency concurrent with deep venous disease.

OBJECTIVE: Many patients will present with chronic proximal venous outflow obstruction (PVOO) and superficial venous insufficiency (SVI) at the time of iliac vein stenting. In the present study, we aimed to determine whether differences in outcomes were present for patients receiving an iliac vein stent according to whether concurrent SVI was present. METHODS: A registry of 553 patients who had undergone iliac vein stent placement for chronic PVOO from 2011 to 2021 was retrospectively analyzed. Two groups of patients were followed for ≤6 years after initial vein stent placement: group 1 (n = 178; 32.2%) had not had SVI before or after stent placement and group 2 (n = 375; 67.8%) had had SVI at initial iliac vein stent procedure. The patients' symptoms were evaluated using the venous clinical severity score (VCSS). Postoperative procedures after initial stent placement were recorded. Postoperative procedures included any operation performed after the index iliac vein stent procedure. Endovenous thermal ablation was classified as a minor postoperative procedure, and any intervention with venography was classified as a major postoperative reintervention. Multivariate regression models were used to determine the odds of a major reintervention or minor procedure postoperatively. RESULTS: Across the two groups, the mean age (group 1, 65.3 years; group 2, 59.9 years; P < .001), body mass index (27.6 vs 26.1 kg/m2; P = .004), diabetes (32.6% vs 17.6%; P < .001), arterial hypertension (68.5% vs 42.1%; P < .001), and coronary artery disease (16.9% vs 9.6%; P = .048) differed significantly. The time to follow-up was similar between the two groups (P = .915). Longitudinally, both groups had had similar improvements in the composite VCSSs. After multivariable adjustment, group 2 was more likely than group 1 (odds ratio, 5.26; 95% confidence interval, 3.33-8.59; P < .001) to have required a postoperative minor procedure, but not a major reintervention. Group 2 had also averaged a shorter interval from the index procedure to a postoperative procedure than group 1 (525.7 days vs 258.1 days; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with patients without SVI, those with SVI and chronic PVOO were younger, had had fewer comorbidities, and fared similarly in the change in the composite VCSSs but were more likely to have required a minor procedure and less likely to have required a major reintervention after the index iliac vein stent procedure.

Patients with active venous leg ulcers at the time of iliac vein stenting require more reoperations.

OBJECTIVE: An active venous leg ulcer (VLU) caused by lower extremity venous insufficiency is challenging to treat and will often recur after initially healing. In the present study, we compared the symptomatic outcomes and need for reoperation after iliac vein stenting (IVS) in patients with an active VLU (VLU+) and those without an active VLU (VLU-). METHODS: A single-institution database of patients with chronic venous outflow obstruction who underwent IVS from August 2011 to June 2021 was analyzed. Symptoms were quantified using the venous clinical severity score. The patients were divided into two cohorts: those with (VLU+) and without (VLU-) VLUs. RESULTS: A total of 872 patients (71 VLU+ and 801 VLU-) were identified. Many of the demographics and comorbidities differed between the two cohorts, and these variables were included in the multivariable analysis. On univariate analysis, the VLU+ cohort was more likely to need a major reoperation (odds ratio, 1.94; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-3.52; P = .036). However, on multivariable analysis, the difference was not statistically significant (odds ratio, 1.17; 95% confidence interval, 0.55-2.40; P = .667). Additionally, the VLU+ cohort required a significantly greater mean total of reoperations (1.4 vs 1.0; P = .006) than the VLU- cohort. Comparatively, for patients who underwent at least one reoperation, the difference in the mean total number of reoperations was even greater for the VLU+ cohort (2.6 vs 1.8; P = .001). The results from the Kaplan-Meier log-rank test revealed no differences in the reintervention-free survival time (P = .980). Both cohorts experienced a durable mean reduction in the venous clinical severity score. The ulcer healing rates for the VLU+ cohort at 6, 12, 24, and 36 months were 38%, 47%, 52%, and 59%, respectively. The ulcer recurrence rates for the VLU+ cohort were 4%, 10%, 19%, and 30% at 6, 12, 24, and 36 months, respectively, with a median time to recurrence of 1.2 years. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with active VLUs who underwent a first reintervention after initial IVS, on average, required an additional reintervention.

Carotid stenosis patients with a remote history of cerebrovascular events have increased risk of major adverse events over asymptomatic patients.

INTRODUCTION: Asymptomatic patients with a remote history of transient ischemic attack (TIA) or stroke are not well studied as a separate population from asymptomatic patients with no prior history of TIA or stroke. We compared in-hospital outcomes after transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) and transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TFCAS) among symptomatic patients, patients with a remote history of neurologic symptoms, and asymptomatic patients. METHODS: Data from patients in the Vascular Quality Initiative database who underwent TCAR (January 2017 to April 2020) or TFCAS (May 2005 to April 2020) were analyzed. Symptomatic status was defined as TIA and/or stroke occurring within 180 days before the procedure. Asymptomatic status was divided into patients with no history of TIA/stroke (asymptomatic) and patients with a history of TIA/stroke occurring more than 180 days before the procedure (remote history of neurologic symptoms). The Student t-test and Pearson χ2 test were used to compare baseline patient characteristics and outcomes. Multivariate logistic regression was used to adjust for significant between-group differences in baseline characteristics. RESULTS: There were 7158 patients who underwent TCAR (symptomatic: 2574, asymptomatic: 3689, and asymptomatic with a remote history of neurologic symptoms: 895) and 18,023 patients who underwent TFCAS (symptomatic: 6195, asymptomatic: 10,333, and asymptomatic with a remote history of neurologic symptoms: 1495). Regardless of symptom status, the mean patient age was 73 years for TCAR and 69 years for TFCAS. A total of 64% of patients in the study were male and 36% of patients were female. The mean long-term follow-up data ranged between 208 and 331 days within the three patient groups. Carotid stenosis patients with a remote history of neurologic symptoms had higher rates of TIA, stroke, TIA/stroke, stroke/death, and stroke/death/myocardial infarction than asymptomatic patients, and these rates were similar to those of symptomatic patients. Comparing TCAR and TFCAS among patients with a remote history of neurologic symptoms, there were statistically significant reductions in the odds of stroke/death (odds ratio: 0.46, 95% confidence interval: 0.27-0.84, P = .011) and stroke/death/myocardial infarction (odds ratio: 0.51, 95% confidence interval: 0.30-0.87, P = .013) after TCAR. This was likely driven by the increased rate of death after TFCAS in patients with a remote history of neurologic symptoms (0.9%) compared with asymptomatic patients (0.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Asymptomatic patients with a remote history of TIA/stroke do not have the same outcomes as asymptomatic patients without a history of TIA/stroke and are at higher risk of adverse in-hospital events. Patients with a remote history of TIA/stroke have increased risk of in-hospital death after TFCAS and may benefit from TCAR.