Faculty Bibliography

This is a case report of a patient with Campylobacter fetus involving bilateral internal iliac artery aneurysms. The patient was treated successfully by ligation of the bilateral iliac artery aneurysms and antibiotics. According to a review of the English-language medical literature, this was the first such patient to be reported. A 69-year-old African-American male presented with a past medical history of repair of a 6.6 cm abdominal aortic aneurysm. It had been repaired with a Dacron bifurcated graft in July 2005. The bilateral internal iliac artery aneurysms (right 2.3 cm and left 3.4 cm) were coil embolized intraoperatively. The patient's past medical history was significant for hypertension and coronary artery disease and was status post-stent placement. He re-presented with fever and chills for 8 days in duration at home in March 2007. His fever was 101 to 102 degrees F. He denied vomiting, diarrhea, and a history of recent travel. The patient was admitted to the hospital for a fever workup. After an extensive workup, a left internal iliac artery aneurysm was found to be the source of sepsis. The patient was taken to the operating room for excision of the left internal iliac artery. No purulence was noted, but tissue overlying the aneurysm was thickened and fibrotic. Multiple cultures were taken. The tissue culture came back as C. fetus. Incidentally, the patient's preoperative computed tomographic scan revealed a right internal iliac artery aneurysm that was 4.2 cm on March 28, 2007, and 4.9 cm on April 23, 2007. Postoperatively, the patient's right internal iliac artery aneurysm was noted to be rapidly growing. He was promptly taken to the operating room for ligation of the right internal iliac artery aneurysm. The patient's postoperative course was unremarkable. He was discharged on ciprofloxacin for 14 days.

PURPOSE: The placement of central catheters is a common procedure. It is also associated with multiple known complications. One of the potential complications that carry high morbidity and morality is arterial puncture and cannulation. Herein, we describe five case reports of a central line that was inadvertently placed in the subclavian artery and successfully removed using a StarClose device (Abbott Laboratories, Redwood CA). METHODS/RESULTS: A retrospective chart review of a prospectively maintained database was performed. We identified five cases of inadvertent subclavian artery cannulation during central venous catheter placement. All catheters were removed successfully either in the operating room under fluoroscopic guidance or at the bedside with closure of the arteriotomy using the StarClose device. No cases required conversion to an open procedure for repair. No postremoval hematomas, bleeding episodes, myocardial infarctions, arrhythmias, or adverse clinical sequelae were identified. DISCUSSION: Based on our limited experience, we feel that this method can be performed safely and expeditiously not only in the operating room but also at the bedside.

We describe herein a combined approach to the treatment of popliteal artery aneurysms (PAA) that averts extensive dissections and potential blood loss particularly in cases of behind-the-knee aneurysms. Over the last 4 years, 13 patients (12 males) with mean age of 75 +/- 8 years were treated for PAAs at our institution with a combined surgical and endovascular approach. The mean size of popliteal aneurysms was 2.9 cm +/- 1.7 cm. One of the 13 cases (8%) was performed for acute ischemia and an additional 5 (38%) for claudication. All operations were performed under general anesthesia in supine position. Vein conduits (eight ipsilateral great saphenous veins, two contralateral great saphenous veins and one arm vein) were utilized for 11 bypasses. Of these, eight were from superficial femoral artery (SFA) to below the knee popliteal artery, two popliteal to popliteal and one SFA to posterior tibial artery. In addition, two expanded polytetrafluoroethylene femoral popliteal bypasses were performed. The distal anastomosis was performed after the popliteal artery was ligated distal to the aneurysm. Next, coil embolization of the aneurysmal sac was performed under fluoroscopic or ultrasound guidance. Coils were embolized through a 5F sheath. Lastly, the popliteal artery was ligated distal to the proximal anastomosis. Completion studies were obtained with duplex in six cases and arteriography in the remaining five cases. Mean follow-up was 11.6 months +/- 9.6. One bypass occluded in 2 months after surgery. One patient demonstrated continued growth of his aneurysm despite coil embolization twice and underwent an open ligation of the branches perfusing the aneurysm from within the sac through a posterior approach. This approach may be particularly useful for PAAs located behind the knee where optimal surgical exposure is often difficult and the collateral circulation is abundant. The proposed technique is simple, effective and averts extensive dissections required to minimize blood loss.

The Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) appointed a committee of experts to formulate evidence-based clinical guidelines for the management of carotid stenosis. In formulating clinical practice recommendations, the committee used systematic reviews to summarize the best available evidence and the GRADE scheme to grade the strength of recommendations (GRADE 1 for strong recommendations; GRADE 2 for weak recommendations) and rate the quality of evidence (high, moderate, low, and very low quality). In symptomatic and asymptomatic patients with low-grade carotid stenosis (<50% in symptomatic and <60% in asymptomatic patients), we recommend optimal medical therapy rather than revascularization (GRADE 1 recommendation, high quality evidence). In symptomatic patients with moderate to severe carotid stenosis (more than 50%), we recommend carotid endarterectomy plus optimal medical therapy (GRADE 1 recommendation, high quality evidence). In symptomatic patients with moderate to severe carotid stenosis (>/=50%) and high perioperative risk, we suggest carotid artery stenting as a potential alternative to carotid endarterectomy (GRADE 2 recommendation, low quality evidence). In asymptomatic patients with moderate to severe carotid stenosis (>/=60%), we recommend carotid endarterectomy plus medical management as long as the perioperative risk is low (GRADE 1 recommendation, high quality evidence). We recommend against carotid artery stenting for asymptomatic patients with moderate to severe (>/=60%) carotid artery stenosis (GRADE 1 recommendation, low quality evidence). A possible exception includes patients with >/=80% carotid artery stenosis and high anatomic risk for carotid endarterectomy.

The Society for Vascular Surgery considers the placement and maintenance of arteriovenous hemodialysis access to be an important component of any vascular surgery practice. Therefore, the Society has long been involved in setting the standards for the management of arteriovenous access. Formulating clinical recommendations in this area is the latest effort by the Society to improve the management of arteriovenous access on a national level. To provide an unbiased study of the evidence and to help in formulating the recommendations, the Society used the Knowledge and Encounter Research (KER) Unit of the Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minn, to review the available evidence and advise a multidisciplinary group of access surgeons and nephrologists in formulating the clinical recommendations. To review the evidence, randomized and observational study designs were both considered. Whenever possible, systematic reviews and meta-analyses of the literature were used because, compared with individual studies, they generate more precise estimates of treatment effects and their results are applicable to a wider range of patients. On behalf of the Society, the group issued its recommendations following the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) format; this format disentangles the strength of recommendations from the quality of the evidence and encourages statements about the underlying values and preferences relevant to the particular recommendation. The recommendations are classified as strong (denoted by the phrase "we recommend") or weak (denoted by the phrase "we suggest"); and the quality of evidence is classified as high, moderate, low, or very low. These recommendations are not meant to supersede clinical judgment; rather, they should be used as a guide for the practicing surgeon and nephrologist as the decision is being made for the placement and subsequent procedures and management of arteriovenous hemodialysis access are being considered.

Recognizing the impact of the decision making by the dialysis access surgeon on the successful placement of autogenous arteriovenous hemodialysis access, the Society for Vascular Surgery assembled a multispecialty panel to develop practice guidelines in arteriovenous access placement and maintenance with the aim of maximizing the percentage and functionality of autogenous arteriovenous accesses that are placed. The Society commissioned the Knowledge and Encounter Research Unit of the Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota, to systematically review the available evidence in three main areas provided by the panel: timing of referral to access surgeons, type of access placed, and effectiveness of surveillance. The panel then formulated practice guidelines in seven areas: timing of referral to the access surgeon, operative strategies to maximize the placement of autogenous arteriovenous accesses, first choice for the autogenous access, choice of arteriovenous access when a patient is not a suitable candidate for a forearm autogenous access, the role of monitoring and surveillance in arteriovenous access management, conversion of a prosthetic arteriovenous access to a secondary autogenous arteriovenous access, and management of the nonfunctional or failed arteriovenous access. For each of the guidelines, the panel stated the recommendation or suggestion, discussed the evidence or opinion upon which the recommendation or suggestion was made, detailed the values and preferences that influenced the group's decision in formulating the relevant guideline, and discussed technical remarks related to the particular guideline. In addition, detailed information is provided on various configurations of autogenous and prosthetic accesses and technical tips related to their placement.

Office-based procedures have witnessed a veritable explosion with more than 10 million procedures being performed in the United States yearly. This is partially because of improvements in technology that allow these procedures to be performed safely in the office. However, as the number of procedures has increased, the reports of significant morbidity and mortality that have been appearing in the media have captured the public's attention. Until recently, this new and growing field has been largely unregulated. This is changing nationwide. The authors review the new regulations in New York State as a model of the future of this rapidly evolving field and their effect on vascular surgery office procedures.