Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Patients presenting with iliofemoral deep venous thrombosis (DVT) often undergo percutaneous thrombectomy intending to prevent post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS). However, the relationship between the extent of DVT and outcomes after thrombectomy has not been explored. The objective of this study was to compare rates of post-thrombectomy DVT recurrence between patients with isolated iliofemoral DVT and patients with iliofemoral DVT and extension more peripherally. METHODS:We conducted a single-center, retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent thrombectomy for iliofemoral DVT from 2014-2023. Patients were stratified into two cohorts: (1) iliofemoral DVT without popliteal/tibial extension or (2) iliofemoral DVT with popliteal/tibial extension. The primary outcome was acute DVT recurrence and multivariable analysis was performed to identify risk factors for recurrence. Chi-squared and t-tests were calculated for categorical and continuous data, respectively. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to compare rates of acute DVT and chronic venous changes postoperatively. A P-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS:222 patients were identified during the study period (76 isolated iliofemoral DVT vs. 146 iliofemoral DVT with peripheral extension) with a median follow-up of 19 months. Patients who presented with iliofemoral DVT with peripheral extension were more likely to be older (57 vs. 50 years, p=0.004), have hypertension (64% vs. 41%, p=0.001) or hyperlipidemia (58% vs. 40%, p=0.01), and to have had surgery within the prior 6-months (29% vs. 17%, p=0.04). Amongst female patients, those on hormone therapy were more likely to have isolated iliofemoral DVT (17% vs. 3%, p<0.001). Patients with iliofemoral DVT with peripheral extension had a greater chance of developing recurrent acute DVT (48% vs. 20%, p<0.001) and chronic venous changes (51% vs. 30%, p=0.004) during follow-up. Multivariable analysis showed a significant correlation between iliofemoral DVT with peripheral extension (Odds ratio 3.8 [95% confidence interval 1.7-8.7], p=0.001) and acute DVT recurrence. There were no differences in the rates of reintervention or death. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:More extensive peripheral thrombus burden was associated with higher rates of follow-up DVT recurrence in patients undergoing thrombectomy for iliofemoral DVT. These findings suggest that such patients may require closer follow-up and more aggressive anticoagulation therapy postoperatively. Moreover, our results provide a framework for further studies to specifically study the role peripheral thrombus may play in venous hemodynamics and the development of recurrent DVT and, ultimately, PTS.

BACKGROUND:Endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) is utilized to treat abdominal aortic aneurysms, while patients with short infrarenal necks can undergo fenestrated EVAR (FEVAR). Previous studies have demonstrated decreased aortic neck dilation for FEVAR compared to EVAR. Sac regression is a marker of success after EVAR; however, little is known regarding changes in sac volumetrics. This study compares aortic sac regression after EVAR versus FEVAR using volumetric analysis. METHODS:A retrospective review of prospectively collected data from 120 patients who underwent EVAR was performed. Thirty patients underwent FEVAR (Cook Medical Inc, Bloomington, IN) and 90 patients underwent EVAR (30 each with Endurant [Medtronic, Dublin, Ireland], Excluder [Gore, Flagstaff, AZ], and Zenith [Cook]). Demographic data were analyzed. Using 3-dimensional reconstruction software, preoperative and postoperative aneurysm sac volumes were measured, in addition to aneurysm characteristics. RESULTS:, P = 0.005). EVAR patients had greater number of lumbar arteries (7.26 ± 1.68 vs. 5.31 ± 1.93, P < 0.000001). On postoperative follow-up, FEVAR cases had greater sac regression compared to standard EVAR (-22.75 ± 25.7% vs. -5.98 ± 19.66%, P = 0.00031). The percentage of sac regression was greater when measured by volume compared to maximum diameter for FEVAR (-22.75 ± 25.7% vs. -13.90 ± 15.4%, P = 0.01) but not EVAR (-5.98 ± 19.7% vs. -4.51 ± 15.2%, P = 0.246). Those in the top tertile of percent volume of thrombus (>48.5%) were more likely to experience greater than 10% sac regression by volume (55% vs. 33.3%, P = 0.015). On multivariate analysis, FEVAR was associated with sac regression greater than 10% by volume (odds ratio [OR] 4.325, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.346-13.901, P = 0.014), while endoleak (OR 0.162, 95% CI 0.055-0.479, P < 0.001) and 2 patent hypogastric arteries (OR 0.066, 95% CI 0.005-0.904, P = 0.042) were predictive against. CONCLUSIONS:Fenestrated EVAR is associated with greater sac regression compared to EVAR on volumetric analysis. This difference may be attributable to decreased endotension within the aneurysm resulting from less aortic neck dilatation, while the greater proportion of thrombus may be a protective factor from growth. Patients being evaluated for EVAR with borderline neck anatomy should be considered for FEVAR given increased sac regression.

OBJECTIVE:The objective of this study was to characterize the natural history of incidentally identified asymptomatic mesenteric artery stenosis and to identify clinical and radiographic predictors that differentiate patients with asymptomatic mesenteric artery occlusive disease (MAOD) and patients with symptomatic chronic mesenteric ischemia (CMI) diagnosed at index study. METHODS:This single-institution retrospective analysis included patients diagnosed with >70% stenosis of the celiac or superior mesenteric artery (SMA) on axial imaging or duplex ultrasound in an institutional radiology database. Patients were grouped into asymptomatic MAOD and symptomatic CMI cohorts according to their clinical presentation at index study. The primary endpoint was progression of disease from asymptomatic stenosis to CMI. Demographic, clinical, and imaging features at index study were also compared between asymptomatic and symptomatic cohorts. RESULTS:79 patients met the inclusion criteria, with 43 in the asymptomatic group and 36 in the symptomatic group. Patients in the asymptomatic group were followed for mean 32.7 ± 30.2 months; 60.5% (n=26) were referred to and followed by a vascular surgeon for 21.5 ± 27.8 months. No asymptomatic patients developed symptoms during the follow-up period. All patients in the symptomatic group were evaluated by a vascular surgeon and underwent procedural intervention for CMI within six months of diagnosis. Patients with CMI were more likely to have a history of smoking (p=0.02) and less likely to be anticoagulated (p<0.01) than patients with asymptomatic MAOD. Symptomatic patients trended towards a higher prevalence of coronary artery disease (p=0.06) and a lower prevalence of arrhythmia (p=0.08). On imaging, the symptomatic cohort was more likely to have severe SMA stenosis (p<0.001), multivessel mesenteric disease (p=0.001), calcified aortic plaque (p=0.01), and severe stenosis in one or both internal iliac arteries (p<0.001). On multivariable analysis, a lack of anticoagulation use (p<0.01) and severe SMA stenosis (p<0.001) were independently associated with higher odds of symptomatic mesenteric stenosis. While statistically insignificant, calcified aortic plaque (p=0.08) and smoking history (p=0.06) trended toward higher odds of symptomatic index presentation. CONCLUSIONS:The rate of progression from asymptomatic MAOD to CMI appears exceedingly low in the first two to three years after diagnosis, suggesting that prophylactic revascularization is mostly unnecessary. Surveillance of asymptomatic MAOD may be personalized based on clinical and radiographic features of disease. SMA stenosis severity, anticoagulation use, and possibly smoking history and the presence of aortic plaque calcification may be promising markers to stratify the risk of ischemic progression.

OBJECTIVE:Venous duplex ultrasound (VDUS) is the accepted initial imaging study to rule out lower extremity deep venous thrombosis (DVT). In accordance with the Intersocietal Accreditation Commission (IAC) vascular laboratory policies, many institutions require technicians to additionally assess the asymptomatic contralateral common femoral vein. There is conflicting literature on whether this policy is needed. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the utility of examining the asymptomatic contralateral common femoral vein in patients undergoing a unilateral lower extremity VDUS to rule out DVT by (1) defining the prevalence of DVT in the contralateral asymptomatic limb and (2) identifying risk factors that predispose patients to develop a DVT in the asymptomatic limb. METHODS:and Student's t-tests, respectively. For all tests, a P-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS:371 patients (170 inpatient vs. 201 outpatient) with unilateral DVT symptoms who underwent VDUS during the study period were identified. Right leg symptoms were present in 186 (50%) patients and left leg symptoms were present in 185 (50%) patients. The overall incidence of acute DVT in the symptomatic limb was 17% (17.4% outpatient vs. 16.5% inpatient, p=NS). Outpatients were more likely to have superficial venous thrombosis (7.0% vs. 0.6%, p=0.002) and chronic venous changes (25.4% vs. 1.2%, p<0.001) in the symptomatic limb. 59% of DVTs in the symptomatic limb were documented in the calf veins, 25% in the proximal veins, and 16% in both the proximal and calf veins. There were no incidences of bilateral DVT in our cohort. Moreover, none of the patients had a DVT isolated to the contralateral common femoral vein. CONCLUSIONS:Scanning the asymptomatic contralateral common femoral vein may not be necessary for patients undergoing unilateral VDUS for symptomatic DVT, regardless of thrombotic risk factors. A single-extremity study will suffice in most cases, and if implemented, it will improve vascular laboratory efficiency and decrease costs without a decline in DVT detection.

OBJECTIVE:This study compared outcomes in patients with and without preoperative stress testing undergoing carotid revascularization including carotid endarterectomy (CEA), transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TF-CAS), and transcarotid revascularization (TCAR). METHODS:Patients in the Vascular Quality Initiative Vascular Implant Surveillance and Interventional Outcomes Network (VQI VISION) database who underwent elective carotid revascularization 2016-2020 were included. Patients were analyzed by group based upon whether they underwent cardiac stress testing within two years preceding revascularization without subsequent coronary intervention. Subset analysis was performed comparing outcomes between those with negative and positive results (evidence of ischemia or MI). Outcomes of interest were postoperative MI/neurologic events, 90-day re-admission rates, as well as long-term mortality. RESULTS:We analyzed 18,364 patients (78.8% CEA, 9.3% TF-CAS, 11.9% TCAR). Of these, 35.8% underwent preoperative stress testing (37.4% of CEA patients, 27.5% of TF-CAS patients, and 31.9% of TCAR patients). While comorbidities were significantly higher amongst patients undergoing CEA with preoperative stress test compared to those without stress testing, the overall prevalence of co-morbidities was higher amongst patients undergoing TF-CAS or TCAR irrespective of preoperative stress test status. Compared to patients with a negative stress test, patients with positive stress test undergoing any form of carotid revascularization had a significant increase in 90-day re-admission rates (CEA 19.6% vs 15.8%, p=0.003; CAS 33.3% vs. 18.6%, p<0.001; TCAR 25% vs. 17.5%, p=0.04). No group demonstrated a difference in the incidence of in-hospital postoperative neurologic events or CHF, but those undergoing CEA (but not CAS or TCAR) experienced a significant increase in-hospital post-operative MI (1.7% vs 0.6%, p<0.001). In 3-year follow-up, those with a positive compared to negative stress test were more likely to undergo CABG/PCI in the CEA (adjusted HR 1.87 [1.42-2.27], p<0.0001) and CAS groups (adjusted HR 3.89 [1.77-8.57], p<0.01), but not the TCAR cohort. Notably those undergoing CEA with a positive compared to negative stress test, but not CAS or TCAR, exhibited a 28% increase in mortality (adjusted HR 1.28 [1.03-1.58], p=0.03) at 3 years. Conversely, those patients with a negative stress test compared to no stress test undergoing CEA experienced a 14% reduction in mortality at 3 years (adjusted HR 0.86 [0.76-0.98], p=0.02); this mortality difference was not observed in similar stress test cohort undergoing TF-CAS or TCAR. CONCLUSIONS:Our study highlights that a positive stress test in appropriately selected, asymptomatic patients undergoing elective carotid revascularization can predict select perioperative and long-term cardiovascular outcomes. However, given the high follow-up mortality associated with those undergoing CEA for elective carotid revascularization, our findings call into question whether these patients should be preferentially offered optimal medical management and/or stenting.

OBJECTIVE:Patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) undergo lower extremity revascularization (LER) for symptomatic relief or limb salvage. Despite LER, patients remain at increased risk of platelet-mediated complications, such as major adverse cardiac and limb events (MACLEs). Platelet activity is associated with cardiovascular events, yet little is known about the dynamic nature of platelet activity over time. We, therefore, investigated the change in platelet activity over time and its association with long-term cardiovascular risk. METHODS:Patients with PAD undergoing LER were enrolled into the multicenter, prospective Platelet Activity and Cardiovascular Events study. Platelet aggregation was assessed by light transmission aggregometry to submaximal epinephrine (0.4 μmol/L) immediately before LER, and on postoperative day 1 or 2 (POD1 or POD2) and 30 (POD30). A hyperreactive platelet phenotype was defined as >60% aggregation. Patients were followed longitudinally for MACLEs, defined as the composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, major lower extremity amputation, or acute limb ischemia leading to reintervention. RESULTS:Among 287 patients undergoing LER, the mean age was 70 ± 11 years, 33% were female, 61% were White, and 89% were on baseline antiplatelet therapy. Platelet aggregation to submaximal epinephrine induced a bimodal response; 15.5%, 16.8%, and 16.4% of patients demonstrated a hyperreactive platelet phenotype at baseline, POD1, and POD30, respectively. Platelet aggregation increased by 18.5% (P = .001) from baseline to POD1, which subsequently returned to baseline at POD30. After a median follow-up of 19 months, MACLEs occurred in 165 patients (57%). After adjustment for demographics, clinical risk factors, procedure type, and antiplatelet therapy, platelet hyperreactivity at POD1 was associated with a significant hazard of long-term MACLE (adjusted hazard ratio, 4.61; 95% confidence interval, 2.08-10.20; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS:Among patients with severe PAD, platelet activity increases after LER. Platelet hyperreactivity to submaximal epinephrine on POD1 is associated with long-term MACLE. Platelet activity after LER may represent a modifiable biomarker associated with excess cardiovascular risk.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Total contact casting (TCC) is used to promote wound closure in diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs); however, this technique is underused today. This study aims to further evaluate the efficacy of TCC in a large cohort, including patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD). METHODS:This was a retrospective analysis of patients with DFUs who underwent TCC from 2017 to 2021. PAD was defined as absence of pedal pulse or ABI <0.9. Demographic data, DFU characteristics, and peripheral arterial intervention were evaluated. Outcomes included complete healing, healing time, and rate of major amputation. Subgroup analysis was performed on patients undergoing peripheral intervention. RESULTS:= .0008) compared to patients without intervention. CONCLUSIONS:TCC remains an effective option for treatment of DFUs, as most were completely healed. Patients with PAD may benefit from TCC and revascularization, however, healing rates are lower in this cohort, necessitating the need for close observation.

BACKGROUND:There is a paucity of data evaluating outcomes of lower extremity bypass (LEB) using supra-inguinal inflow for revascularization of infra-inguinal vessels. The purpose of this study is to report outcomes after LEB originating from aortoiliac arteries to infra-femoral targets. METHODS:The Vascular Quality Initiative database (2003-2020) was queried for patients undergoing LEB from the aortoiliac arteries to the popliteal and tibial arteries. Patients were stratified into 3 cohorts based on outflow targets (above-knee [AK] popliteal, below-knee [BK] popliteal, and tibial arteries). Perioperative and 1-year outcomes including primary patency, amputation-free survival (AFS), and major adverse limb events (MALEs) were compared. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate the independent prognostic factors of outcomes. RESULTS:Of 403 LEBs, 389 (96.5%) originated from the external iliac artery, while the remaining used the aorta or common iliac artery as inflow. In terms of the distal target, the AK popliteal was used in 116 (28.8%), the BK popliteal in 151 (27.5%), and tibial vessels in 136 (43.7%) cases. BK popliteal and tibial bypasses, compared to AK popliteal bypasses, were more commonly performed in patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (69.5% and 69.9% vs. 48.3%; P < 0.001). Vein conduit was more often used for tibial bypass than for AK and BK popliteal bypasses (46.3% vs. 21.9% and 16.3%; P < 0.001). In the perioperative period, BK popliteal and tibial bypass patients had higher reoperation rates (16.9% and 13.2% vs. 5.2%; P = 0.02) and lower primary patency (89.4% and 89% vs. 95.7%; P = 0.04) than AK bypass patients. At 1 year, compared with AK popliteal bypasses, BK and tibial bypasses demonstrated lower primary patency (81.9% vs. 56.7% vs. 52.4%, P < 0.001) and freedom from MALE (77.6% vs. 70.2% vs. 63.1%, P = 0.04), although AFS was not significantly different (89.7% vs. 90.6% vs. 83.8%, P = 0.19).On multivariable analysis, compared with AK popliteal bypasses, tibial bypasses were independently associated with increased loss of primary patency (hazard ratio 1.9, 95% confidence interval, 1.03-3.51, P = 0.04). Subanalysis of patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia demonstrated significantly higher primary patency in the AK popliteal cohort at discharge and 1 year, but no difference in AFS or freedom from MALE between the cohorts at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS:LEB with supra-inguinal inflow appear to have acceptable rates of 1-year patency and limb salvage in patients at high risk of bypass failure. Tibial outflow target was independently associated with worse primary patency but not with MALE or AFS.

OBJECTIVE:Vascular surgeons are often called upon to provide emergent surgical assistance to other specialties for iatrogenic complications, both intraoperatively and in the inpatient setting. The management of iatrogenic vascular injury remains a critical role of the vascular surgeon, especially in the context of the increasing adoption of percutaneous procedures by other specialties. This study aims to characterize consultation timing, management, and outcomes for iatrogenic vascular injuries. METHODS:This study identified patients for whom vascular surgery was consulted for iatrogenic vascular complications from February 1, 2022, to May 12, 2023. Patient information, including demographic information, injury details, and details of any operative intervention, was retrospectively collected from February 1, 2022, to October 13, 2022, and prospectively collected for the remainder of the study period. Analyses were performed with R (version 2022.02.03). RESULTS:There were 87 patients with consultations related to iatrogenic vascular injury. Of these, 42 (46%) were female and the mean age was 59 years (±18 years). The most common consulting services were cardiology (32%), cardiothoracic surgery (26%), general surgery (8%), and neurointerventional radiology (10%). Reasons for consultation included hemorrhage (36%), limb ischemia (36%), and treatment of pseudoaneurysm (23%). A total of 24% of consults were intraoperative, 20% of consults related to extracorporeal membrane oxygenation cannulation, and 16% of consults related to ventricular assist devices including left ventricular assist device and intra-aortic balloon pump. The majority of these consult requests (60%) occurred during evening and night hours (5 PM to 7 AM). Emergent intervention was required in 62% of cases and consisted of primary open surgical repair of arterial injury (54%), endovascular intervention (21%), and open thromboembolectomy (15%). Overall, in-hospital mortality for the patient cohort was 20% and the reintervention rate was 23%, reflecting the underlying complexity of the illness and nature of the vascular injury in this patient group. CONCLUSIONS:Vascular surgeons play an essential role in managing emergent life-threatening hemorrhagic and ischemic iatrogenic vascular complications in the hospitalized setting. The complications require immediate bedside or intraoperative consult and often emergent open surgical or endovascular intervention. Furthermore, many of these require urgent management in the evening or overnight hours, and therefore the high frequency of these events represents a potential significant resource utilization and workforce issue to the vascular surgery workforce.