Implementation of an enhanced recovery program for lower extremity bypass.

OBJECTIVE: Enhanced recovery programs (ERPs) have gained wide acceptance across multiple surgical disciplines to improve postoperative outcomes and to decrease hospital length of stay (LOS). However, there is limited information in the existing literature for vascular patients. We describe the implementation and early results of an ERP and barriers to its implementation for lower extremity bypass surgery. Our intention is to provide a framework to assist with implementation of similar ERPs. METHODS: Using the plan, do, check, adjust methodology, a multidisciplinary team was assembled. A database was used to collect information on patient-, procedure-, and ERP-specific metrics. We then retrospectively analyzed patients' demographics and outcomes. RESULTS: During 9 months, an ERP (n = 57) was successfully developed and implemented spanning preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative phases. ERP and non-ERP patient demographics were statistically similar. Early successes include 97% use of fascia iliaca block and multimodal analgesia administration in 81%. Barriers included only 47% of patients achieving day of surgery mobilization and 19% receiving celecoxib preoperatively. ERP patients had decreased total and postoperative LOS compared with non-ERP patients (n = 190) with a mean (standard deviation) total LOS of 8.32 (8.4) days vs 11.14 (10.1) days (P = .056) and postoperative LOS of 6.12 (6.02) days vs 7.98 (7.52) days (P = .089). There was significant decrease in observed to expected postoperative LOS (1.28 [0.66] vs 1.82 [1.38]; P = .005). Variable and total costs for ERP patients were significantly reduced ($13,208 [$9930] vs $18,777 [$19,118; P < .01] and $29,865 [$22,110] vs $40,328 [$37,820; P = .01], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Successful implementation of ERP for lower extremity bypass carries notable challenges but can have a significant impact on practice patterns. Further adjustment of our current protocol is anticipated, but early results are promising. Implementation of a vascular surgery ERP reduced variable and total costs and decreased total and postoperative LOS. We believe this protocol can easily be implemented at other institutions using the pathway outlined.

Importance of postprocedural Wound, Ischemia, and foot Infection (WIfI) restaging in predicting limb salvage.

OBJECTIVE: The Wound, Ischemia, and foot Infection (WIfI) classification system was created to encompass demographic changes and expanding techniques of revascularization to perform meaningful analyses of outcomes in the treatment of the threatened limb. The WIfI index is intended to be analogous to the TNM staging system for cancer, with restaging to be done after control of infection and after revascularization. Our goal was to evaluate the effectiveness of WIfI restaging after therapy in the prediction of limb outcomes. METHODS: Preoperative WIfI scoring was performed prospectively for all critical limb ischemia patients who underwent revascularization from January 2014 to June 2015. WIfI restaging and assessment of outcomes were performed retrospectively through August 2016. WIfI classification was determined at the following intervals: preoperatively, immediately postoperatively, and 1 month and 6 months after intervention. Amputation-free survival (AFS) was the primary end point. Kaplan-Meier plot analysis and comparisons of preoperative grades with respective postoperative grades were performed using paired t-test, χ2 test, and correlation analyses. RESULTS: A total of 180 limbs and 172 critical limb ischemia patients underwent revascularization, of which 29 limbs had major amputations (16%). Wound grades generally improved after surgery across the entire cohort. Major amputation was associated with preoperative wound grade and remained associated with wound grade at postoperative restaging at 1 month and beyond on the basis of amputation frequency analysis (preoperatively, 1 month, and 6 months, P = .03, < .001, and < .001, respectively). Wound grade was significantly associated with AFS at 1 month and 6 months after intervention (log-rank, P < .001 for restaging intervals). Ischemia grades improved initially with a slight decline across the cohort at 6 months. Ischemia grade at 1 month postoperatively was associated with AFS (log-rank, P = .03). Foot infection grades also improved at each time interval. Foot infection grade was associated with AFS at 1 month postoperatively (log-rank, P < .001) and at 6 months (log-rank, P = .017). CONCLUSIONS: WIfI restaging is an important tool for predicting limb loss and assessing adequacy of intervention, more so than baseline WIfI alone. The 1- and 6-month postoperative ischemia grade correlated with AFS, whereas preoperative grade did not. The 1- and 6-month postoperative wound and foot infection grades additionally correlated with AFS. WIfI restaging at 1 month and 6 months postoperatively may help identify a cohort that remains at higher risk for limb loss and may merit more expeditious reintervention.

Rescue of False Lumen Frozen Elephant Trunk Deployment Intraoperatively.

Endovascular devices have become increasingly available, which has led to an increase in use of frozen elephant trunk stents for extended repair during type A aortic dissection. Frozen elephant trunk deployment is usually done under direct visualization of both the true and false lumen but rarely, the endograft can inadvertently end in the false lumen. This can lead to false lumen pressurization and end-organ malperfusion. Herein we describe a novel intraoperative rescue technique for misplaced frozen elephant trunk into the false lumen, easily executed in a standard operating room using transesophageal echocardiography and intravascular ultrasound guidance.

Observer reliability of arteriovenous malformations grading scales using current imaging modalities.

OBJECT: The aim of this study was to examine observer reliability of frequently used arteriovenous malformation (AVM) grading scales, including the 5-tier Spetzler-Martin scale, the 3-tier Spetzler-Ponce scale, and the Pollock-Flickinger radiosurgery-based scale, using current imaging modalities in a setting closely resembling routine clinical practice. METHODS: Five experienced raters, including 1 vascular neurosurgeon, 2 neuroradiologists, and 2 senior neurosurgical residents independently reviewed 15 MRI studies, 15 CT angiograms, and 15 digital subtraction angiograms obtained at the time of initial diagnosis. Assessments of 5 scans of each imaging modality were repeated for measurement of intrarater reliability. Three months after the initial assessment, raters reassessed those scans where there was disagreement. In this second assessment, raters were asked to justify their rating with comments and illustrations. Generalized kappa (κ) analysis for multiple raters, Kendall's coefficient of concordance (W), and interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were applied to determine interrater reliability. For intrarater reliability analysis, Cohen's kappa (κ), Kendall's correlation coefficient (tau-b), and ICC were used to assess repeat measurement agreement for each rater. RESULTS: Interrater reliability for the overall 5-tier Spetzler-Martin scale was fair to good (ICC = 0.69) to extremely strong (Kendall's W = 0.73) on initial assessment and improved on reassessment. Assessment of CT angiograms resulted in the highest agreement, followed by MRI and digital subtraction angiography. Agreement for the overall 3-tier Spetzler-Ponce grade was fair to good (ICC = 0.68) to strong (Kendall's W = 0.70) on initial assessment, improved on reassessment, and was comparable to agreement for the 5-tier Spetzler-Martin scale. Agreement for the overall Pollock-Flickinger radiosurgery-based grade was excellent (ICC = 0.89) to extremely strong (Kendall's W = 0.81). Intrarater reliability for the overall 5-tier Spetzler-Martin grade was excellent (ICC > 0.75) in 3 of the 5 raters and fair to good (ICC > 0.40) in the other 2 raters. CONCLUSION: The 5-tier Spetzler-Martin scale, the 3-tier Spetzler-Ponce scale, and the Pollock-Flickinger radiosurgery-based scale all showed a high level of agreement. The improved reliability on reassessment was explained by a training effect from the initial assessment and the requirement to defend the rating, which outlines a potential downside for grades determined as part of routine clinical practice to be used for scientific purposes.