Quality of Life in Patients With Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia Treated With Revascularization.

BACKGROUND: In the BEST-CLI trial (Best Endovascular Versus Best Surgical Therapy for Patients With Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia), a prespecified secondary objective was to assess the effects of revascularization strategy on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). METHODS: Patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia were randomized to surgical bypass (Bypass) or endovascular intervention (Endo) in 2 parallel trials. Cohort 1 included patients with single-segment great saphenous vein; cohort 2 included those lacking suitable single-segment great saphenous vein. HRQoL was assessed over the trial duration using Vascular Quality-of-Life (VascuQoL), European Quality-of-Life-5D (EQ-5D), the Short Form-12 (SF-12) Physical Component Summary (SF-12 PCS), SF-12 Mental Component Summary (SF-12 MCS), Utility Index Score (SF-6D R2), and numeric rating scales of pain. HRQoL was summarized by cohort and compared within and between groups using mixed-model linear regression. RESULTS: A total of 1193 and 335 patients in cohorts 1 and 2 with a mean follow-up of 2.9 and 2.0 years, respectively, were analyzed. In cohort 1, HRQoL significantly improved from baseline to follow-up for both groups across all measures. For example, mean (SD) VascuQoL scores were 3.0 (1.3) and 3.0 (1.2) for Bypass and Endo at baseline and 4.7 (1.4) and 4.8 (1.5) over follow-up. There were significant group differences favoring Endo when assessed with VascuQoL (difference, -0.14 [95% CI, -0.25 to -0.02]; P=0.02), SF-12 MCS (difference, -1.03 [95% CI, -1.89 to -0.18]; P=0.02), SF-6D R2 (difference, -0.01 [95% CI, -0.02 to -0.001]; P=0.03), numeric rating scale pain at present (difference, 0.26 [95% CI, 0.03 to 0.49]; P=0.03), usual level during previous week (difference, 0.26 [95% CI, 0.04 to 0.48]; P=0.02), and worst level during previous week (difference, 0.29 [95% CI, 0.02 to 0.56]; P=0.04). There was no difference between treatment arms on the basis of EQ-5D (difference, -0.01 [95% CI, -0.03 to 0.004]; P=0.12) or SF-12 PCS (difference, -0.41 [95% CI, -1.2 to 0.37]; P=0.31). In cohort 2, HRQoL also significantly improved from baseline to the end of follow-up for both groups based on all measures, but there were no differences between Bypass and Endo on any measure. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia deemed eligible for either Bypass or Endo, revascularization resulted in significant and clinically meaningful improvements in HRQoL. In patients with an available single-segment great saphenous vein for bypass, but not among those without one, Endo was statistically superior on some HRQoL measures; however, these differences were below the threshold of clinically meaningful difference.

2024 ACC/AHA/AACVPR/APMA/ABC/SCAI/SVM/SVN/SVS/SIR/VESS Guideline for the Management of Lower Extremity Peripheral Artery Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

AIM: The "2024 ACC/AHA/AACVPR/APMA/ABC/SCAI/SVM/SVN/SVS/SIR/VESS Guideline for the Management of Lower Extremity Peripheral Artery Disease" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with lower extremity peripheral artery disease across its multiple clinical presentation subsets (ie, asymptomatic, chronic symptomatic, chronic limb-threatening ischemia, and acute limb ischemia). METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from October 2020 to June 2022, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that was published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINHL Complete, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through May 2023 during the peer review process, were also considered by the writing committee and added to the evidence tables where appropriate. STRUCTURE: Recommendations from the "2016 AHA/ACC Guideline on the Management of Patients With Lower Extremity Peripheral Artery Disease" have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing comprehensive care for patients with peripheral artery disease have been developed.

Surgery or Endovascular Therapy for Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) require revascularization to improve limb perfusion and thereby limit the risk of amputation. It is uncertain whether an initial strategy of endovascular therapy or surgical revascularization for CLTI is superior for improving limb outcomes. METHODS: In this international, randomized trial, we enrolled 1830 patients with CLTI and infrainguinal peripheral artery disease in two parallel-cohort trials. Patients who had a single segment of great saphenous vein that could be used for surgery were assigned to cohort 1. Patients who needed an alternative bypass conduit were assigned to cohort 2. The primary outcome was a composite of a major adverse limb event - which was defined as amputation above the ankle or a major limb reintervention (a new bypass graft or graft revision, thrombectomy, or thrombolysis) - or death from any cause. RESULTS: In cohort 1, after a median follow-up of 2.7 years, a primary-outcome event occurred in 302 of 709 patients (42.6%) in the surgical group and in 408 of 711 patients (57.4%) in the endovascular group (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59 to 0.79; P<0.001). In cohort 2, a primary-outcome event occurred in 83 of 194 patients (42.8%) in the surgical group and in 95 of 199 patients (47.7%) in the endovascular group (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.58 to 1.06; P = 0.12) after a median follow-up of 1.6 years. The incidence of adverse events was similar in the two groups in the two cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with CLTI who had an adequate great saphenous vein for surgical revascularization (cohort 1), the incidence of a major adverse limb event or death was significantly lower in the surgical group than in the endovascular group. Among the patients who lacked an adequate saphenous vein conduit (cohort 2), the outcomes in the two groups were similar. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; BEST-CLI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02060630.).

Health Disparities in Peripheral Artery Disease: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

Peripheral artery disease (PAD) affects 200 million individuals worldwide. In the United States, certain demographic groups experience a disproportionately higher prevalence and clinical effect of PAD. The social and clinical effect of PAD includes higher rates of individual disability, depression, minor and major limb amputation along with cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events. The reasons behind the inequitable burden of PAD and inequitable delivery of care are both multifactorial and complex in nature, including systemic and structural inequity that exists within our society. Herein, we present an overview statement of the myriad variables that contribute to PAD disparities and conclude with a summary of potential novel solutions.

Infrapopliteal Endovascular Interventions for Claudication Are Associated with Poor Long-Term Outcomes in Medicare-Matched Registry Patients.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data supporting or opposing the use of infrapopliteal peripheral vascular interventions (PVI) for the treatment of claudication. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate the association of infrapopliteal PVI with long-term outcomes compared with isolated femoropopliteal PVI for the treatment of claudication. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of all patients in the Medicare-matched Vascular Quality Initiative database who underwent an index infrainguinal PVI for claudication from January 2004-December 2019 using Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Of 14,261 patients (39.9% female; 85.6% age ≥65 years, 87.7% non-Hispanic white) who underwent an index infrainguinal PVI for claudication, 16.6% (N=2,369) received an infrapopliteal PVI. The median follow-up after index PVI was 3.7 years (IQR 2.1-6.1). Compared to patients who underwent isolated femoropopliteal PVI, patients receiving any infrapopliteal PVI had a higher 3-year cumulative incidence of conversion to CLTI (33.3% vs. 23.8%; P<0.001); repeat PVI (41.0% vs. 38.2%; P<0.01); and amputation (8.1% vs. 2.8%; P<0.001). After risk-adjustment, patients undergoing infrapopliteal PVI had a higher risk of conversion to CLTI (aHR 1.39, 95% CI, 1.25-1.53); repeat PVI (aHR 1.10, 95% CI, 1.01-1.19); and amputation (aHR 2.18, 95% CI, 1.77-2.67). Findings were consistent after adjusting for competing risk of death; in a 1:1 propensity-matched analysis; and in subgroup analyses stratified by TASC disease, diabetes, and end-stage kidney disease. CONCLUSIONS: Infrapopliteal PVI is associated with worse long-term outcomes than femoropopliteal PVI for claudication. These risks should be discussed with patients.

Long-Term Outcomes of Elective Endovascular versus Open Repair of Popliteal Artery Aneurysms in the VISION Database.

INTRODUCTION: The best modality for elective popliteal artery aneurysm repair (PAR) remains controversial. Most single center studies suggest open popliteal aneurysm repair (OPAR) is more durable than endovascular (EPAR), but large randomized multicenter studies are lacking. This study compares long-term outcomes of EPAR and OPAR in the VQI-VISION database. METHODS: Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) Medicare-linked VISION database (2010-2019) for peripheral vascular interventions and infrainguinal bypass were reviewed for elective PAR. Patients undergoing OPAR and EPAR were propensity-matched to compare outcomes. RESULTS: There were 1,159 PAA repairs (65.1% open). EPAR patients were older (77 vs 73 years, p<0.001) and more likely to be on P2Y12 inhibitors (26.5% vs 17.0%, p<0.001). After matching, there were 396 patients in each group with similar baseline characteristics. EPAR patients were more likely to be discharged home (87.6% vs 48.5%, p<0.001) and have shorter hospital length-of-stay (1 vs 3 days, p<0.001). Kaplan-Meier curves showed no difference in mortality, reintervention, or major amputation at 1, 3, and 5 years. Cox proportional hazards regression showed no significant association between revascularization strategy and mortality, reintervention, or major amputation. Subgroup analysis of patients undergoing OPAR with great saphenous vein (GSV) bypass compared to EPAR showed that OPAR with GSV bypass was associated with lower mortality without difference in reintervention or major amputation. CONCLUSION: Elective EPAR is durable and comparable to OPAR in terms of limb outcomes, even when GSV is used as conduit. However, bypass with GSV was associated with increased survival after open popliteal aneurysm repair compared to endovascular therapy.

Decision aids for patients with carotid stenosis.

BACKGROUND: Shared decision-making tools have been underused by clinicians in real-world practice. Changes to the National Coverage Determination by Medicare for carotid stenting greatly expand the coverage for patients, but simultaneously require a shared decision-making interaction that involves the use of a validated tool. Accordingly, our objective was to evaluate the currently available decision aids for carotid stenosis. METHODS: We conducted a review of the literature for published work on decision aids for the treatment of carotid disease. RESULTS: Four publications met inclusion criteria. We found the format of the decision aid impacted patient comprehension and decision making, although patient characteristics also played a role in the therapeutic decisions made. Notably, none of the available decision aids included the widely adopted transcarotid artery revascularization as an option. CONCLUSIONS: Further work is needed in the development of a widespread validated decision aid instrument for patients with carotid stenosis.

Changes in global mortality from aortic aneurysm.

OBJECTIVE: Globally, there has been a marked increase in aortic aneurysm-related deaths between 1990 and 2019. We sought to understand the underlying etiologies for this mortality trend by examining secular changes in both demographics and the prevalence of risk factors, and how these changes may vary across sociodemographic index (SDI) regions. METHODS: We queried the Global Burden of Disease Study (GBD) for aortic aneurysm deaths from 1990 to 2019 overall and by age group. We identified the percentage of aortic aneurysm deaths attributable to each risk factor identified by GBD modeling (smoking, hypertension, lead exposure, and high sodium diet) and their respective changes over time. We then analyzed aneurysm mortality by SDI region. RESULTS: The number of aortic aneurysm-related deaths have increased from 94,968 in 1990 to 172,427 in 2019, signifying an 81.6% increase, which greatly exceeds the 18.2% increase in all-cause mortality observed over the same time interval. Examination of age-specific mortality demonstrated that the number of aortic aneurysm deaths markedly correlated with advancing age. However, when considering rate of death rather than mortality count, overall age-standardized death rates decreased 18% from 2.72 per 100,000 in 1990 to 2.21 per 100,000 in 2019. Analysis of the specific risk factors associated with aneurysm death revealed that the percentage of deaths attributable to smoking decreased from 45.6% in 1990 to 34.6% in 2019, and deaths attributable to hypertension decreased from 38.7% to 34.7%. Globally, hypertension surpassed smoking as the leading risk factor. The reported rate of death was consistently greater as SDI increased, and this effect was most pronounced among low-middle and middle SDI regions (173.2% and 170.4%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Despite an overall increase in the number of aneurysm deaths, there was a decrease in the age-standardized death rate, demonstrating that the observed increased number of aortic aneurysm deaths between 1990 and 2019 was primarily driven by an overall increase in the age of the global population. Fortunately, it appears that the increase in overall aneurysm-related deaths has been modulated by improved risk factor modification, in particular smoking. Given the rise in aneurysm-related deaths, global expansion of vascular specialty capabilities is warranted and will serve to amplify improvements in population-based aneurysm health achieved with risk factor control.

Patient decision-making in the era of transcarotid artery revascularization.

OBJECTIVE: The National Coverage Determination on carotid stenting by Medicare in October 2023 stipulates that patients participate in a shared decision-making (SDM) conversation with their proceduralist before an intervention. However, to date, there is no validated SDM tool that incorporates transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) into its decision platform. Our objective was to elicit patient and surgeon experiences and preferences through a qualitative approach to better inform the SDM process surrounding carotid revascularization. METHODS: We performed longitudinal perioperative semistructured interviews of 20 participants using purposive maximum variation sampling, a qualitative technique designed for identification and selection of information-rich cases, to define domains important to participants undergoing carotid endarterectomy or TCAR and impressions of SDM. We also performed interviews with nine vascular surgeons to elicit their input on the SDM process surrounding carotid revascularization. Interview data were coded and analyzed using inductive content analysis coding. RESULTS: We identified three important domains that contribute to the participants' ultimate decision on which procedure to choose: their individual values, their understanding of the disease and each procedure, and how they prefer to make medical decisions. Participant values included themes such as success rates, "wanting to feel better," and the proceduralist's experience. Participants varied in their desired degree of understanding of carotid disease, but all individuals wished to discuss each option with their proceduralist. Participants' desired medical decision-making style varied on a spectrum from complete autonomy to wanting the proceduralist to make the decision for them. Participants who preferred carotid endarterectomy felt outcomes were superior to TCAR and often expressed a desire to eliminate the carotid plaque. Those selecting TCAR felt it was a newer, less invasive option with the shortest procedural and recovery times. Surgeons frequently noted patient factors such as age and anatomy, as well as the availability of long-term data, as reasons to preferentially select one procedure. For most participants, their surgeon was viewed as the most important source of information surrounding their disease and procedure. CONCLUSIONS: SDM surrounding carotid revascularization is nuanced and marked by variation in patient preferences surrounding autonomy when choosing treatment. Given the mandate by Medicare to participate in a SDM interaction before carotid stenting, this analysis offers critical insights that can help to guide an efficient and effective dialog between patients and providers to arrive at a shared decision surrounding therapeutic intervention for patients with carotid disease.

Long-term outcomes of great saphenous vein harvest techniques for infrainguinal arterial bypass in a Medicare-matched registry database.

OBJECTIVE: Long-term outcomes for harvesting techniques for great saphenous vein (GSV) and its impact on the outcomes of infrainguinal arterial bypass remains largely unknown. Endoscopic GSV harvesting (EVH) has emerged as a less invasive alternative to conventional open techniques. Using the Vascular Quality initiative Vascular Implant Surveillance & Interventional Outcomes Network (VQI-VISION) database, we compared the long-term outcomes of infrainguinal arterial bypass using open and endoscopic GSV harvest techniques. METHODS: Patients who underwent infrainguinal GSV bypass between 2010 and 2019 were identified in the VQI-VISION Medicare linked database. Long-term outcomes of major/minor amputations, and reinterventions up to 5 years of follow-up were compared between continuous incisions, skip incision, and EVH, with continuous incisions being the reference group. Secondary outcomes included 30- and 90-day readmission, in addition to surgical site infections and patency rates at 6 months to 2 years postoperatively. Survival analysis using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression hazard models were utilized to compare outcomes between groups. To adjust for multiple comparisons between the study groups, a P value of 2.5% was considered significant. RESULTS: Among the 8915 patients included in the study, continuous and skip vein harvest techniques were used in 44.4% and 43.4% of cases each, whereas 12.3% underwent EVH. The utilization of EVH remained relatively stable at around 12% throughout the study period. Compared with GSV harvest using continuous incisions, EVH was associated with higher rates of reintervention at 1 year (46.5% vs 41.3%; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.22; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.06-1.41; P = .01]. However, no significant difference was observed between EVH and continuous incisions, and between skip and continuous incisions in terms of long-term reintervention or major and minor amputations on adjusted analysis. Compared with continuous incision vein harvest, both EVH and skip incisions were associated with lower surgical site infection rates within the first 6 months post-bypass (aHR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.35-0.82 and aHR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.53-0.87, respectively). Loss of primary, primary-assisted, and secondary patency was higher after EVH compared with continuous incision vein harvest. Among surgeons performing EVH, comparable long-term outcomes were observed regardless of low (<4 cases/year), medium (4-7 cases/year), or high procedural volumes (>7 cases/year). CONCLUSIONS: Despite higher 1-year reintervention rates, EVH for infrainguinal arterial bypass is not associated with a significant difference in long-term reintervention or amputation rates compared with other harvesting techniques. These outcomes are not influenced by procedural volumes for EVH technique.

Association between tissue loss type and amputation risk among Medicare patients with concomitant diabetes and peripheral arterial disease.

OBJECTIVE: Prior studies have described risk factors associated with amputation in patients with concomitant diabetes and peripheral arterial disease (DM/PAD). However, the association between the severity and extent of tissue loss type and amputation risk remains less well-described. We aimed to quantify the role of different tissue loss types in amputation risk among patients with DM/PAD, in the context of demographic, preventive, and socioeconomic factors. METHODS: Applying International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-9 and ICD-10 codes to Medicare claims data (2007-2019), we identified all patients with continuous fee-for-service Medicare coverage diagnosed with DM/PAD. Eight tissue loss categories were established using ICD-9 and ICD-10 diagnosis codes, ranging from lymphadenitis (least severe) to gangrene (most severe). We created a Cox proportional hazards model to quantify associations between tissue loss type and 1- and 5-year amputation risk, adjusting for age, race/ethnicity, sex, rurality, income, comorbidities, and preventive factors. Regional variation in DM/PAD rates and risk-adjusted amputation rates was examined at the hospital referral region level. RESULTS: We identified 12,257,174 patients with DM/PAD (48% male, 76% White, 10% prior myocardial infarction, 30% chronic kidney disease). Although 2.2 million patients (18%) had some form of tissue loss, 10.0 million patients (82%) did not. The 1-year crude amputation rate (major and minor) was 6.4% in patients with tissue loss, and 0.4% in patients without tissue loss. Among patients with tissue loss, the 1-year any amputation rate varied from 0.89% for patients with lymphadenitis to 26% for patients with gangrene. The 1-year amputation risk varied from two-fold for patients with lymphadenitis (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.96; 95% confidence interval, 1.43-2.69) to 29-fold for patients with gangrene (adjusted hazard ratio, 28.7; 95% confidence interval, 28.1-29.3), compared with patients without tissue loss. No other demographic variable including age, sex, race, or region incurred a hazard ratio for 1- or 5-year amputation risk higher than the least severe tissue loss category. Results were similar across minor and major amputation, and 1- and 5-year amputation outcomes. At a regional level, higher DM/PAD rates were inversely correlated with risk-adjusted 5-year amputation rates (R2 = 0.43). CONCLUSIONS: Among 12 million patients with DM/PAD, the most significant predictor of amputation was the presence and extent of tissue loss, with an association greater in effect size than any other factor studied. Tissue loss could be used in awareness campaigns as a simple marker of high-risk patients. Patients with any type of tissue loss require expedited wound care, revascularization as appropriate, and infection management to avoid amputation. Establishing systems of care to provide these interventions in regions with high amputation rates may prove beneficial for these populations.

Device regulation and surveillance in vascular care: Challenges and opportunities.

Cardiovascular devices are essential for the treatment of cardiovascular diseases including cerebrovascular, coronary, valvular, congenital, peripheral vascular and arrhythmic diseases. The regulation and surveillance of vascular devices in real-world practice, however, presents challenges during each individual product's life cycle. Four examples illustrate recent challenges and questions regarding safety, appropriate use and efficacy arising from FDA approved devices used in real-world practice. We outline potential pathways wherein providers, regulators and payors could potentially provide high-quality cardiovascular care, identify safety signals, ensure equitable device access, and study potential issues with devices in real-world practice.

A Retrospective Analysis of Surgical Acuity & Procedure Volume Before & During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: In March 2020, the American College of Surgeons recommended postponing elective procedures amid the COVID-19 pandemic. We used Medicare claims to analyze changes in surgical and interventional procedure volumes from 2016 to 2021. METHODS: We studied 37 common surgical and interventional procedures using 5% Medicare claims files from January 1, 2016, through December 31, 2021. Procedures were classified according to American College of Surgeons guidelines as low, intermediate, or high acuity, and counts were analyzed per calendar year quarter (Q1-Q4), with stratification by sex and race/ethnicity. RESULTS: We observed 1,840,577 procedures and identified two periods of marked decline. In Q2 2020, overall procedure counts decreased by 32.2%, with larger declines in low (41.1%) and intermediate (30.8%) acuity procedures. High acuity procedures declined the least (18.2%). Overall volumes increased afterward but never returned to baseline. Another marked decline occurred in Q4 2021, with all acuity levels having declined to a similar extent (40.1%, 44.2%, and 46.9% for low, intermediate, and high acuity, respectively). High and intermediate acuity procedures declined more in Q4 2021 than Q2 2020 (P = 0.002). Similar patterns were observed across sex and race/ethnicity strata. CONCLUSIONS: Two major procedural volume declines occurred between 2020 and 2022 during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. High acuity (life or limb threatening) procedures were least affected in the first decline (Q2 2020) but not spared in second decline (Q4 2021). Future efforts should prioritize preserving high-acuity access during times of stress.

Reduction of Major Amputations after Surgery versus Endovascular Intervention: The BEST-CLI Randomised Trial.

OBJECTIVE: BEST-CLI, an international randomised trial, compared an initial strategy of bypass surgery with endovascular treatment in chronic limb threatening ischaemia (CLTI). In this substudy, overall amputation rates and risk of major amputation as an initial or subsequent outcome were evaluated. METHODS: A total of 1 830 patients were randomised to receive surgical or endovascular treatment in two parallel cohorts: patients with adequate single segment great saphenous vein (SSGSV) (n = 1 434) were assigned to cohort 1; and patients without adequate SSGSV (n = 396) were assigned to cohort 2. Differences in time to first event and number of amputations were evaluated. RESULTS: In cohort 1, there were 410 (45.6%) total amputation events in the surgical group vs. 490 (54.4%) in the endovascular group (p = .001) during a mean follow up of 2.7 years. Approximately one in three patients underwent minor amputation after index revascularisation: 31.5% of the surgical group vs. 34.9% in the endovascular group (p = .17). Subsequent major amputation was required significantly less often in the surgical group compared with the endovascular group (15.0% vs. 25.6%; p = .002). The first amputation was major in 5.6% of patients in the surgical group and 6.0% in the endovascular group (p = .72). Major amputation was required in 10.3% (74/718) of patients in the surgical group and 14.9% (107/716) in the endovascular group (p = .008). In cohort 2, there were 199 amputation events in 132 patients (33.3%) during a mean follow up of 1.6 years: 95 (47.7%) in the surgical group vs. 104 (52.3%) in the endovascular group (p = .49). Major amputation was required in 15.2% (30/197) of patients in the surgical group and 14.1% (28/199) in the endovascular group (p = .74). CONCLUSION: In patients with CLTI, surgical bypass with SSGSV was more effective than endovascular treatment in preventing major amputations, mainly due to a decrease in major amputations subsequent to minor amputations.

Most preoperative stress tests fail to comply with practice guideline indications and do not reduce cardiac events.

BACKGROUND: There is wide variation in stress test utilization before major vascular surgery and adherence to practice guidelines is unclear. We defined rates of stress test compliance at our institution and led a quality improvement initiative to improve compliance with American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guidelines. METHODS: We implemented a stress testing order set in the electronic medical record at one tertiary hospital. We reviewed all patients who underwent elective, major vascular surgery in the 6 months before (Jan 1, 2022 - Jul 1, 2022) and 6 months after (Aug 1, 2022 - Jan 31, 2023) implementation. We studied stress test guideline compliance, changes in medical or surgical management, and major adverse cardiac events (MACE). RESULTS: Before order set implementation, 37/122 patients (30%) underwent stress testing within the past year (29 specifically ordered preoperatively) with 66% (19/29) guideline compliance. After order set implementation, 50/173 patients (29%) underwent stress testing within the past year (41 specifically ordered preoperatively) with 80% (33/41) guideline compliance. In the pre- and postimplementation cohorts, stress testing led to a cardiovascular medication change or preoperative coronary revascularization in 24% (7/29) and 27% (11/41) of patients, and a staged surgery or less invasive anesthetic strategy in 14% (4/29) and 4.9% (2/41) of patients, respectively. All unindicated stress tests were surgeon-ordered and none led to a change in management. There was no change in MACE after order set implementation. CONCLUSIONS: Electronic medical record-based guidance of perioperative stress testing led to a slight decrease in overall stress testing and an increase in guideline-compliant testing. Our study highlights a need for improved preoperative cardiovascular risk assessment prior to major vascular surgery, which may eliminate unnecessary testing and more effectively guide perioperative decision-making.

The impact of the Affordable Care Act Medicaid Expansion in Medicare beneficiaries with peripheral artery disease.

Background: In 2014, the Affordable Care Act Medicaid Expansion (ME) increased Medicaid eligibility for adults with an income level up to 138% of the federal poverty level. In this study, we examined the impact of ME on mortality and amputation in patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD). Methods: The 100% MedPAR and Part-B Carrier files from 2011 to 2018 were queried to identify all fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries with PAD using International Classification of Diseases codes. Our primary exposure was whether a state had adopted the ME on January 1, 2014. Our primary outcomes were the change in all-cause 1-year mortality and leg amputation. We used a state-level difference-in-differences (DID) analysis to compare the rates of the primary outcomes among patients who were in states (including the District of Columbia) who adopted ME (n = 25) versus those who were in states that did not (n = 26). We performed a subanalysis stratifying by sex, race, region, and dual-eligibility status. Results: Over the 8-year period, we studied 37,743,929 patients. The average unadjusted 1-year mortality decreased from 2011 to 2018 in both non-ME (9.5% to 8.7%, p < 0.001) and ME (9.1% to 8.3%, p < 0.001) states. The average unadjusted 1-year amputation rate did not improve in either the non-ME (0.86% to 0.87%, p = 0.17) or ME (0.69% to 0.69%, p = 0.65) states. Across the entire cohort, the DID model revealed that ME did not lead to a significant change in mortality (p = 0.15) or amputation (p = 0.34). Conclusion: Medicaid Expansion was not associated with reduced mortality or leg amputation in Medicare beneficiaries with PAD.

Trends in patient characteristics and mortality among Medicare patients diagnosed with peripheral artery disease.

INTRODUCTION: Peripheral artery disease (PAD) is a well-described risk factor for mortality, but few studies have examined secular trends in mortality over time for patients with PAD. We characterized trends in mortality in patients with PAD in recent years among Medicare patients. METHODS: We used Medicare claims to identify patients with a new diagnosis code for PAD between January 1, 2006 and December 31, 2018 using International Classification of Diseases (ICD) diagnosis codes. The primary outcome of interest was the 1-year all-cause age-adjusted mortality rate. Our secondary outcome was the 5-year all-cause mortality rate. Multivariable regression was used to identify factors which predict mortality at 1 year. RESULTS: We identified 4,373,644 patients with a new diagnosis code for PAD during the study period. Between 2006 and 2018, 1-year all-cause age-adjusted mortality declined from 12.6% to 9.9% (p < 0.001). One-year crude all-cause mortality also declined from 14.6% to 9.5% (p < 0.001). Similar results were observed for 5-year age-adjusted mortality rates (40.9% to 35.2%, p < 0.001). Factors associated with increased risk of death at 1 year included age ⩾ 85 years (hazard ratio [HR] 3.030; 95% CI 3.008-3.053) and congestive heart failure (HR 1.86; 95% CI 1.85-1.88). Patients who were regularly dispensed statins, ace-inhibitors, beta-blockers, antithrombotic agents, and anticoagulants all had lower mortality (range OR 0.36; CI 0.35-0.37 for statins to OR 0.60; CI 0.59-0.61 for anticoagulants; all p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Among US Medicare patients diagnosed with PAD between 2006 and 2019, 1-year age-adjusted mortality declined by 2.7%. This decline in mortality among PAD patients occurred in the context of a younger mean age of diagnosis of PAD and improved cardiovascular prevention therapy.

Duplex Ultrasound-Only Surveillance after Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair is Associated with Favorable Long-Term Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Long-term data surrounding the impact of different endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) surveillance strategies are limited. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to characterize postoperative imaging patterns, as well as to evaluate the association of duplex ultrasound surveillance after the first postoperative year with 5-year EVAR outcomes. METHODS: EVAR patients (2003-2016), who survived at least 1 year without aneurysm rupture, conversion to open repair, and reintervention in the Vascular Implant Surveillance and Interventional Outcomes Network were examined to provide all subjects ≥3 years of follow-up time. Patients were categorized into 6 cohorts after the first postoperative year: No imaging (N = 953); computed tomography (CT)/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-only (N = 2,976); duplex ultrasound-only (DUS; N = 1,808); combined CT/MRI + DUS with >50% being CT/MRI (N = 1,937); combined CT/MRI + DUS with >50% being DUS (N = 2,253); and mixed (CT + DUS + MRI N = 1,272). Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA)-related reintervention, rupture, conversion to open repair, and all-cause mortality were estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Multivariable logistic regression models identified variables associated with using DUS-only imaging (versus CT/MRI only). Cox regression models compared 5-year outcomes between patients receiving DUS-only versus CT/MRI-only imaging. RESULTS: A total of 11,199 EVAR patients were examined (mean age 76 ± 7 years; female: 20%; nonelective: 10%). DUS-only imaging surveillance after the first postoperative year was more likely to occur after elective repairs, as well as among older, male patients. Smaller (<6 cm) preoperative AAA diameter and absence of documented concurrent iliac aneurysm was also associated with DUS-only follow-up. Additionally, no endoleak detection on index EVAR completion imaging, as well as a documented >5 mm decrease in AAA sac diameter at 1-year follow-up was more common with DUS-only surveillance protocols. Post-EVAR DUS-only imaging after the first postoperative year had the lowest incidence of reintervention, conversion to open repair, and rupture (as well as the composite reintervention/open conversion/rupture; log-rank P < 0.001 for all). Further, patients receiving exclusively DUS after their first postoperative year had better overall survival (log-rank P < 0.001). These outcome advantages that were associated with DUS-only surveillance compared with CT/MRI-only surveillance after EVAR persisted when controlling for baseline covariates, preoperative AAA diameter, prior aortic surgery history, sac growth, and presence of endoleak (all P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: EVAR patients selected for DUS-only surveillance after the first postoperative year have excellent freedom from AAA-related reintervention, conversion to open repair, rupture and all-cause mortality. These findings remained on multivariable analysis after adjusting for baseline characteristics, endoleak status and sac diameter changes within the first year. This is the first registry-based investigation to document long-term EVAR outcomes for patients entered into a DUS-only monitoring protocol which serves to corroborate the growing evidence base that DUS may be able to supplant CT surveillance in certain subgroups. A prospective randomized multicenter trial comparing DUS versus CT-based imaging after EVAR is needed to validate these findings which may serve to change current practice guidelines, as well as industry and regulatory stakeholder requirements.

The Sustained Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Vascular Surgical Care Delivery.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated postponement of vascular surgery procedures nationally. Whether procedure volumes have since recovered remains undefined. Therefore, our objective was to quantify changes in procedure volumes and determine whether surgical volume has returned to its prepandemic baseline. METHODS: This study was a retrospective cross-sectional study between 2018 and 2023 using the US Fee-for-Service Medicare 5% National Sample as part of the VA Disrupted Care National Project. We studied patients who underwent 1 of 3 procedures: abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair for intact aneurysms, carotid endarterectomy (CEA), and major lower extremity amputation (LEA). The case volume of each quarter of 2020-2023 was compared to its corresponding prepandemic quarter in 2019. We then performed a subanalysis of these trends by sex, age, and race. RESULTS: We identified 21,031 procedures: 4,411 AAA repair, 8,361 CEA, and 8,259 LEA. The average percent change during the baseline prepandemic period from 2018 to 2019 was -4.3% for AAA repair, -8.5% for CEA, and -2.6% for LEA. Compared to Q2 of 2019, Q2 of 2020 demonstrated that AAA repair procedures decreased by 47%, CEA by 40%, and LEA by 14%. While procedures initially rebounded in Q3 of 2020, volumes did not return to their prepandemic baseline, demonstrating a persistent volume reduction (-16% AAA, -22% CEA, and -11% LEA). Thereafter, procedure counts again declined in Q1 of 2022 (-25% AAA, -34% CEA, and -25% LEA). CONCLUSIONS: Despite a perception that vascular surgical care was singularly disrupted at the outset of the pandemic, there has been a sustained reduction in vascular surgical volume since 2019. Not only have procedure volumes not returned to prepandemic baseline but it also appears that there has been a cumulative incremental impact on overall procedure volume. The impact of these findings on long-term population health remains uncertain and necessitates a better understanding of postpandemic care delivery.

Advancing Peripheral Artery Disease Quality of Care and Outcomes Through Patient-Reported Health Status Assessment: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

Peripheral artery disease (PAD) is chronic in nature, and individualized chronic disease management is a central focus of care. To accommodate this reality, tools to measure the impact and quality of the PAD care delivered are necessary. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and instruments to measure them, that is, PRO measures, have been well studied in the research and clinical trial context, but a shift toward integrating them into clinical practice has yet to take place. A framework to use PRO measures as indicators of the quality of PAD care delivered, that is, PRO performance measures (PRO-PMs), is provided in this scientific statement. Measurement goals to consider by PAD clinical phenotypes are provided, as well as an overview of potential benefits of adopting PRO-PMs in the clinical practice of PAD care, including reducing unwanted variability and promoting health equity. A central discussion with considerations for risk adjustment of PRO-PMs, individualized PAD care, and the need for patient engagement strategies is offered. Furthermore, necessary conditions in terms of required competencies and training to handle PRO-PM data are discussed because the interpretation and handling of these data come with great responsibility and consequences for designing care that adopts a broader framework of risk that goes beyond the inclusion of biomedical variables. To conclude, health system perspectives and an agenda to reach the next steps in the implementation of PRO-PMs in PAD care are offered.