Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVE:Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) is preferred to open surgical repair (OSR) for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) in high-risk patients. We sought to compare perioperative and long-term outcomes for EVAR in patients designated as unfit for OSR using a large national dataset. METHODS:The Vascular Quality Initiative database collected from 2013 to 2019 was queried for patients undergoing elective EVARs for AAA > 5cm. The patients were stratified into two cohorts based on the suitability for OSR (FIT vs. UNFIT). Primary outcomes included perioperative (in-hospital) major adverse events, perioperative mortality, and mortality at 1 and 5 years. Patient demographics and postoperative outcomes were analyzed to identify predictors of perioperative and long-term mortality. RESULTS:Of 16,183 EVARs, 1,782 patients were deemed unfit for OSR. The UNFIT cohort was more likely to be older and female, with higher proportions of HTN, CAD, CHF, COPD, and larger aneurysm diameter. Postoperatively, the UNFIT cohort was more likely to have cardiopulmonary complications (6.5% vs. 3%; P<.001), with higher perioperative mortality (1.7% vs. 0.6%; P<.001) and 1 and 5-year mortality (13% and 29% UNFIT vs. 5% and 14% FIT; P<.001). Subgroup analysis within the UNFIT cohort revealed those deemed unfit due to hostile abdomen had significantly lower 1 and 5-year mortality (6% and 20%) compared to those unfit due to cardiopulmonary compromise and frailty (14% and 30%; P=.451). Reintervention-free survival at 1 and 5-years was significantly higher in the FIT cohort (93% and 82%) as compared to the UNFIT cohort (85% and 68%; P<.001). Designation as unfit for OSR was an independent predictor of both perioperative (OR 1.59; 95% CI, 1.03-2.46; P=.038) and long-term mortality (HR 1.92; 95% CI, 1.69-2.17; P<.001). Advanced age (OR 2.91; 95% CI, 1.28-6.66; P=.011) was the strongest determinant of perioperative mortality while ESRD (HR 2.51; 95% CI, 1.78-3.55; P<.001) was the strongest predictor of long-term mortality. Statin (HR 0.77; 95% CI, 0.69-0.87; P<.001) and ACE inhibitor (HR 0.83; 95% CI, 0.75-0.93; P<.001) were protective of long-term mortality. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Despite low perioperative mortality, long-term mortality of those designated by the operating surgeons as unfit for OSR was rather high in patients undergoing elective EVARs, likely due to the competing risk of death from their medical frailty. Unfit designation due to hostile abdomen did not confer any additional risks after EVAR. Judicious estimation of the patient's life expectancy is essential when considering treatment options in this subset of patients deemed unfit for OSR.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:The pandemic of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has caused devastating morbidity and mortality worldwide. In particular, thromboembolic complications have emerged as a key threat in COVID-19. We assessed our experience with deep venous thrombosis (DVT) in patients with COVID-19. METHODS:We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients with COVID-19 undergoing upper or lower extremity venous duplex ultrasonography at an academic health system in New York City between March 3 2020 and April 12 2020 with follow-up through May 12 2020. A cohort of hospitalized patients without COVID-19 (non-COVID-19) undergoing venous duplex ultrasonography from December 1 2019 to December 31 2019 was used for comparison. The primary outcome was DVT. Secondary outcomes included pulmonary embolism (PE), in-hospital mortality, admission to intensive care unit, and antithrombotic therapy. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify risk factors for DVT and mortality. RESULTS:Of 443 patients (188 COVID-19 and 255 non-COVID-19) undergoing venous duplex ultrasonography, patients with COVID-19 had higher incidence of DVT (31% vs. 19%; P=0.005), compared to the non-COVID-19 cohort. The incidence of PE was not statistically different between the COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 cohorts (8% vs. 4%; P=.105). The DVTs in the COVID-19 group were more distal (63% vs. 29%; P<.001) and bilateral (15% vs. 4%; P<.001). The result of duplex ultrasonography had a significant impact on the antithrombotic plan; 42 (72%) patients with COVID-19 in the DVT group had their therapies escalated while 49 (38%) and 3 (2%) patients had their therapies escalated and de-escalated in the non-DVT group, respectively (P<.001). Within the COVID-19 cohort, the D-dimer was significantly higher in the DVT group at the time of admission (2,746 ng/mL vs 1,481 ng/mL; P=.004) and at the time of the duplex exam (6,068 ng/mL vs. 3,049 ng/mL; P<0.01). At multivariable analysis, male sex (odd ratio (OR) 2.27; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.06-4.87; P=.035), ICU admission (OR 3.42; 95% CI, 1.02-11.44; P=.046) and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (OR 5.5; 95% CI, 1.01-30.13; P=.049) were independently associated with DVT. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Given the high incidence of venous thromboembolic events in this population, we support the decision to empirically initiate therapeutic anticoagulation in patients with low bleeding risk and severe COVID-19 infection, with duplex ultrasonography reserved for patients with high clinical suspicion of VTE in which anticoagulation may pose a life-threatening consequence. Further study is warranted in patients with COVID-19 to elucidate the etiology of vascular thromboembolic events and guide prophylactic and therapeutic interventions in these patients.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Chronic limb threatening ischemia (CLTI) in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) confers a significant survival disadvantage and is associated with a high major amputation rate. Moreover, diabetes mellitus (DM) is an independent risk factor for developing CLTI. However, the interplay between end stage renal disease (ESRD) and DM on outcomes after peripheral revascularization for CLTI is not well established. Our goal was to assess the effect of DM on outcomes after an infrainguinal bypass for CLTI in patients with ESRD. METHODS:Using the Vascular Quality Initiative dataset from January 2003 to March 2020, records for all primary infrainguinal bypasses for CLTI in patients with ESRD were included for analysis. One-year and perioperative outcomes of all-cause mortality, reintervention, amputation-free survival (AFS) and major adverse limb event (MALE) were compared for patients with DM versus those without DM. RESULTS:Of a total of 1,058 patients (66% male) with ESRD, 726 (69%) patients had DM, and 332 patients did not have DM. The DM group was younger (median age, 65 years vs. 68 years; P=.002), with higher proportions of obesity (body-mass index>30kg/m2; 34% vs. 19%; P<.001) and current smokers (26% vs. 19%; P=.013). The DM group presented more frequently with tissue loss (76% vs. 66%; P<.001). A distal bypass anastomosis to tibial vessels was more frequently performed in the DM group compared to the non-DM group (57% vs. 45%; P<.001). DM was independently associated with higher perioperative MALE (OR 1.34; 95% CI, 1.06-1.68; P=.013), without increased risks of loss of primary patency and composite outcomes of amputation or death. On the mean follow-up of 11.4 ± 5.5 months, DM patients had a significantly higher rate of one-year MALEs (43% vs. 32%; P=.001). However, the one-year primary patency and AFS, did not differ significantly. After adjusting for confounders, the risk-adjusted hazards for MALE (HR 1.34; 95% CI, 1.06-1.68; P=.013) were significantly increased in patients with DM. However, DM was not associated with increased risk of AFS (HR 1.16; 95% CI, 0.91-1.47; P=.238), or loss of primary patency (HR 1.04; 95% CI, 0.79-1.37; P=.767). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:DM and ESRD each independently predict early and late major adverse limb events after an infrainguinal bypass in patients presenting with CLTI. However, in the presence of ESRD, DM may increase perioperative adverse events, but does not influence primary patency and AFS at one-year. The risk profile associated with ESRD appears to supersede that of DM, with no additive effect.

Background: To date, few studies adequately evaluate the impact of anticoagulation and antiplatelet medications on aortic remodeling for type B thoracic dissection (TBAD) after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). As such, we assessed the relationship between chronic anticoagulation/antiplatelet medications and aortic remodeling of patients with TBAD after TEVAR.
Method(s): Records of the Vascular Quality Initiative TEVAR registry (2011-2019) were reviewed. Procedures performed for dissection-related pathology were included. Primary outcomes included complete false lumen thrombosis, reintervention-free survival and endoleak at 18 months. Primary outcomes were compared between patients with and without chronic anticoagulants (AC and non-AC). A subgroup analysis was performed to assess the effect of antiplatelet medications (none, single antiplatelet, and dual antiplatelets) in the non-AC group. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the effect of different antithrombotic therapies on primary outcomes.
Result(s): We identified 1507 patients (mean age, 60.7 +/- 12.2 years; 68.3% male) with a mean follow-up of 18.9 +/- 13.7 months. Two hundred one (14%) patients were on anticoagulation therapy at follow-up. There were no differences in the mean preoperative thoracic aortic diameter or the number of endografts used. The status of false lumen thrombosis and endoleaks were available in 648 (43%) and 1023 patients (68%), respectively. At 18 months, the rates of complete false lumen thrombosis (51.3% vs 47.5%; P =.182), reinterventions (9% vs 10.6%; P =.175), all-cause mortality (97.6% vs 96.9%; P =.561), and endoleaks (18.8% vs 22%; P =.397) were similar in the AC and non-AC groups, respectively (Fig). Controlling for covariates with the Cox regression method, AC use was not independently associated with a decreased risk of complete false lumen thrombosis (hazard ratio [HR], 0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-1.16; P =.235) or increased risks of reintervention (HR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.9-1.24; P =.484) and endoleak (HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.83-1.14; P =.725). Within the non-AC group, antiplatelet medications did not affect the rates of complete false lumen thrombosis, reintervention, or endoleak.
Conclusion(s): The use of chronic anticoagulation and antiplatelet medications did not adversely affect the rate of complete false lumen thrombosis and positive aortic remodeling in patients who underwent TEVAR for TBAD. Anticoagulation and antiplatelet medications may be safely used in patients who undergo TEVAR for TBAD. [Formula presented]
Copyright

Aortic mural thrombus in the absence of underlying aortic disease is rare and results in a risk of distant arterial embolization that can result in limb loss or other end organ damage. Current management involves open surgery, anticoagulation, and systemic thrombolysis; however, each carries inherent risks. We report the case of aortic thrombus with distal emboli in two patients, a 56-year-old man and a 68-year-old man, neither with underlying aortic pathology and both presenting with limb threatening ischemia. We performed percutaneous mechanical thrombectomy using the FlowTriever System (Inari Medical, Irvine, Calif) with successful removal of the aortic thrombus in both patients.

BACKGROUND:The ability to ambulate following major lower extremity amputation, either below (BKA) or above knee (AKA), is a major concern for all prospective patients. This study analyzed ambulatory rates and risk factors for nonambulation in patients undergoing a major lower extremity amputation. METHODS:A retrospective review of 811 patients who underwent BKA or AKA at our institution between January 2009 and December 2014 was conducted. Demographic information and co-morbid conditions, including the patients' functional status prior to surgery, at 6 months, and at latest follow up were recorded. Following exclusion criteria, 538 patients were included. Patients who were either independent or used an assistive device were considered ambulatory, while those who were completely wheelchair-dependent or bed-bound were considered nonambulatory. RESULTS:Pre-operatively, 83.1% of BKA patients were ambulatory, significantly more so than those undergoing AKA (44.9%, P < 0.0001). At 6-month follow-up these percentages dropped to 58.0% and 25.2%, respectively, for all patients. For patients who were ambulatory pre-operatively, 182/246 (73.9%) of BKA and 32/51 (62.7%) of AKA remained so post-amputation. Of those patients with both 6-month and greater than 1-year follow-up, there was no change in ambulatory status between the 2 time periods. On multivariable logistic regression, age greater than 70 years and female sex were associated with nonambulation post-operatively (P = 0.001, P = 0.015, respectively). None of the co-morbid conditions recorded (diabetes, renal insufficiency, end-stage renal disease, peripheral vascular disease, or body mass index > 35) was found to have a statistically significant correlation with post-operative ambulation using multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS:The majority of ambulatory patients undergoing a major amputation were able to remain ambulatory. Patients who failed to ambulate 6 months after their amputation, failed to resume ambulating. Age greater than 70 and female sex were found to have a statistically significant association with becoming nonambulatory following surgery.

Introduction and Objectives: Adjunctive false lumen embolization (FLE) with thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in patients with chronic aortic dissection is thought to induce FL thrombosis and favorable aortic remodeling. However, evidence is limited and the potential benefit of FLE remains unproven.
Method(s): Patients 18+ who underwent TEVAR for chronic aortic dissection with known FLE status in the SVS VQI database 1/2010-2/2020 were included. Ruptured patients and emergent procedures were excluded. Primary outcomes were in-hospital post-operative complications and all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included follow-up maximum aortic diameter change, re-intervention rates, and mortality.
Result(s): 884 patients were included: 46 had TEVAR/FLE and 838 had TEVAR alone. There was no significant difference between groups in terms of age, gender, comorbidities, maximum pre-operative aortic diameter, presentation symptomatology, or intervention indication. FLE was associated with significantly longer procedural times (178min vs. 146min, p=0.0002), increased contrast use (134mL vs. 113mL, p=0.02), and prolonged fluoroscopy time (34min vs. 21min, p<0.0001), but not associated with a significant difference in post-operative complications (17.4% vs. 13.8%, p=0.51), length of stay (6.5 vs. 5.7 days, p=0.18), or in-hospital all-cause mortality (0% vs. 1.3%, p=1). In mid-term follow-up (median 15.5months), all-cause mortality trended lower, but was not significant (2.2% vs. 7.8%); Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated no difference in overall survival between groups (p=0.23). Post-operative complications had the strongest independent association with all-cause mortality (HR 2.65, 95% CI 1.56-4.5, p<0.001). In patients with available follow-up imaging and re-intervention status, mean aortic diameter change (n=337, -0.71cm vs. -0.69cm, p=0.64) and re-intervention rates (n=487, 10% vs. 11.4%, p=1) were similar.
Conclusion(s): Adjunctive FLE can be performed safely in chronic thoracic aortic dissections without significantly higher perioperative morbidity or mortality. However, given lack of reduction in re-intervention rates, induction of significant favorable aortic remodeling, or definitive survival benefit compared to TEVAR alone, FLE utility remains unclear.
Copyright

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:In many facilities, the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic caused suspension of elective surgery. We therefore sought to determine the impact of this on the surgical experience of vascular trainees. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:Surgical case volume, breadth, and the participating trainee post-graduate level from 3 large New York City Hospitals with integrated residency and fellowship programs (Mount Sinai, Montefiore Medical Center/Albert Einstein College of Medicine, and New York University) were reviewed. Procedures performed between February 26 to March 25, 2020 (pre-pandemic month) and March 26 to April 25, 2020 (peak pandemic period) were compared to those performed during the same time period in 2019. The trainees from these programs were also sent surveys to evaluate their subjective experience during this time. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:The total number of cases during the month leading into the peak pandemic period was 635 cases in 2019 and 560 cases in 2020 (12% decrease). During the peak pandemic period, case volume decreased from 445 in 2019 to 114 in 2020 (74% reduction). The highest volume procedures during the peak pandemic month in 2020 were amputations and peripheral cases for acute limb ischemia; during the 2019 period, the most common cases were therapeutic endovascular procedures. There was a decrease in case volume for vascular senior residents of 77% and vascular junior and midlevel residents of 75%. There was a 77% survey response rate with 50% of respondents in the senior years of training. Overall, 20% of respondents expressed concern about completing ACGME requirements due to the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:Vascular surgery-specific clinical educational and operative experiences during redeployment efforts have been limited. Further efforts should be directed to quantify the impact on training and to evaluate the efficacy of training supplements such as teleconferences and simulation.

The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has impacted millions of people worldwide. This novel virus has a variety of presentations and complications. Notably, patients with this infection have an associated coagulopathy, presenting with symptoms such as gastrointestinal bleeds, deep vein thrombosis, ischemic cerebrovascular events, and pulmonary embolism. Although there are documented cases of venous thromboembolism in patients with coronavirus disease 2019, the authors present an interesting case of upper extremity arterial thromboembolism in a 75-year-old patient surgically treated for arterial thrombus removal. We also discuss diagnosis, medical management, and surgical approach to an upper extremity arterial thromboembolism in a patient with coronavirus disease 2019, to highlight the challenges of hypercoagulability in such patients.

New York City was one of the epicenters of the COVID-19 pandemic. The management of peripheral artery disease (PAD) during this time has been a major challenge for health care systems and medical personnel. This document is based on the experiences of experts from various medical fields involved in the treatment of patients with PAD practicing in hospitals across New York City during the outbreak. The recommendations are based on certain aspects including the COVID-19 infection status as well as the clinical PAD presentation of the patient. Our case-based algorithm aims at guiding the treatment of patients with PAD during the pandemic in a safe and efficient way.