Faculty Bibliography

Stroke is a persistent leading cause of morbidity and mortality, and carotid artery atherosclerosis remains a treatable cause of future stroke. Although most patients with asymptomatic carotid artery disease may be at a relatively low risk for future stroke, most completed strokes are unheralded; thus, the identification and appropriate treatment of patients with asymptomatic carotid artery disease remains a critical part of overall stroke prevention. Select patients with asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis with an increased risk of future stroke based on the degree of stenosis and other imaging or patient-related characteristics are appropriate to consider for carotid artery intervention.

BACKGROUND:Despite the expanded application of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in patients with significant cardiac comorbidities, the effect of decreased left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) on outcomes remains unknown. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes in patients with normal and abnormal EFs undergoing TEVAR for type-B aortic dissection (TBAD). METHODS:The Vascular Quality Initiative database was reviewed from 2012 to 2020. Patients were categorized into severely reduced (EF ≤ 30%), reduced (EF 30-50%) and normal EF (EF>50%). Baseline characteristics, procedural details and 18-month outcomes were compared. Multivariable logistic regression identified factors associated with mortality, major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), and aortic-related reintervention. RESULTS:Of 1,993 patients, 38 (2%) and 208 (10%) patients had severely reduced ejection fraction (SREF) and reduced ejection fraction (REF). Patients with abnormal EF were more likely to have cardiac comorbidities and be prescribed angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and anticoagulants. Perioperatively, patients with SREF were more likely to experience mortality (13.2% vs. 6.7% vs. 4.4%, P = 0.018), MACE (26.3% vs. 11.5% vs. 8%, P < 0.001), hemodialysis (13.5% vs. 5% vs. 2.9%, P = 0.001) and aortic related reintervention (21.1% vs. 13% vs. 10%, P = 0.041), compared to REF and normal ejection fraction (NEF) patients. However, these associations were not present on multivariable analysis. At 18 months, mortality was significantly higher in patients with SREF, which was confirmed on multivariable analysis, but depressed EF was not associated with increased aortic reintervention compared to NEF. CONCLUSIONS:SREF was not independently associated with perioperative mortality or MACE compared to NEF. REF had similar risk of morbidity and mortality compared to NEF in both the perioperative and early postoperative periods. TEVAR-related complications were similar among the cohorts. As such, TEVAR may be offered to appropriately selected patients regardless of EF.

Objectives: Though splenic artery aneurysms (SAAs) are the most common visceral aneurysm, there is a paucity of literature on the natural history of SAAs. The objective of this study was to review the natural history of patients with SAA.
Method(s): This single-institution retrospective analysis studied all patients with SAA diagnosed by computed tomography imaging between 2015 and 2019, identified by our radiology database. Imaging, demographic, and clinical data was obtained via the electronic medical record.
Result(s): The cohort consists of 853 patients with 894 SAA; 693 were female (81.2%), with 37 (5.3%) of them of childbearing age (15-50 years). Mean age at diagnosis was 70.9 years (range, 28-100 years). Medical comorbidities included hypertension (70.2%), prior smoking (32.2%), and hypercholesterolemia (54.7%) (Table I). Imaging indications included abdominal pain (37.3%), unrelated follow-up (28.0%) and follow-up of a previously noted visceral artery aneurysm (8.6%). Mean diameter at diagnosis was 13.3 +/- 6.3 mm. Eighty-one patients (9.0%) had more than one SAA. Anatomical locations included the splenic hilum (36.0%), distal splenic artery (30.3%), mid splenic artery (23.9%), and proximal splenic artery (9.7%). Radiographically, the majority were saccular aneurysms (72.4%). Additional characteristics included calcification (88.5%) and thrombus (13.9%). Associated imaging findings included aortic atherosclerosis (58.7%), abdominal aortic aneurysms (7.0%), and additional visceral aneurysms (4.1%). One patient (a 38-year-old female) was initially diagnosed at the time of rupture of a 25-mm aneurysm; this patient underwent immediate endovascular intervention with no complications. Mean clinical follow-up among 812 patients was 4.1 +/- 4.0 years. Mean radiological follow-up among 514 patients was 3.8 +/- 6.8 years. Of these, 122 patients (23.7%) experienced growth, with mean growth of 2.5mm. Aneurysm growth rates for initial sizes <10 mm (n = 123), 10 to 19 mm (n = 353), 20 to 29 mm (n = 34), and >30 mm (n = 4) were 0.166 mm/y, 0.172 mm/y, 0.383 mm/y, and 0.246 mm/y, respectively. Of the entire cohort, 27 patients (3.2%) eventually underwent intervention (81.5% endovascular), with the most common indications including size/growth criteria (70.4%) and symptom development (18.5%). On multivariate analysis, only prior tobacco use (P =.028) was significantly associated with aneurysm growth. Data stratified by sex and childbearing age are presented in Table II.
Conclusion(s): The majority of SAAs in this cohort remained stable in size, with few patients requiring intervention over mean follow-up of 4 years. Current guidelines recommending treatment of asymptomatic aneurysms >30 mm appear appropriate given their slow progression. Despite societal recommendations for intervention for all SAAs among women of childbearing age, only a minority underwent intervention in this series, indicating that these recommendations may not be well known in the general medical community. [Formula presented] [Formula presented]
Copyright

Objectives: This study compared outcomes in patients with and without preoperative cardiac stress testing undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA).
Method(s): Patients in the Vascular Quality Initiative Vascular Implant Surveillance and Interventional Outcomes Network database who underwent elective carotid revascularization between 2016 and 2019 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, defined as evidence of ischemia or myocardial infarction (MI). Outcomes of interest were periprocedural MI/stroke, 90-day readmission rates, as well as late-term mortality.
Result(s): We analyzed 14,470 patients who underwent elective CEA. Of these, 5411 (37.4%) underwent preoperative stress testing and 1231 (29.4%) were positive. Comorbidities were significantly higher among patients undergoing CEA with preoperative stress test compared to those without stress testing. For patients with positive stress test undergoing CEA, there was a significant increase in postoperative MI (1.7% vs 0.6%; P <.001) and 90-day readmission rates (19.6% vs 15.8%; P =.003), but no significant change in postoperative stroke or congestive heart failure incidence. In 3-year follow-up after CEA, those with a positive stress test were more likely to undergo coronary artery bypass graft/percutaneous coronary intervention (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.42-2.27; P <.0001) and also exhibited a 28% increase in mortality (adjusted HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.03-1.58; P =.03) in follow-up compared to those patients with a negative preoperative stress test (Figure). Conversely, those patients with a negative stress test compared to no stress test undergoing CEA experienced a 14% reduction in follow-up mortality (adjusted HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.76-0.98; P =.02) despite no difference in in-hospital MI/stroke or follow-up coronary artery bypass graft/percutaneous coronary intervention (adjusted HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.78-1.14; P =.53).
Conclusion(s): Our study highlights that cardiac stress testing in appropriately selected patients can facilitate risk stratification and identify patients at higher risk of postoperative adverse cardiac events. Furthermore, judicious patient selection for elective CEA is warranted in patients with a positive preoperative stress test given the increased late mortality. [Formula presented]
Copyright

Objective: Renal transplant is associated with substantial survival advantage in patients with end-stage renal disease. However, little is known about the outcomes of renal transplant recipients (RTRs) after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). This study aimed to study the effect of renal transplant on perioperative outcomes and long-term survival after elective infrarenal EVAR.
Method(s): The Vascular Quality Initiative database was queried for all patients undergoing elective EVAR from 2003 to 2021. Functioning RTRs were compared with non-renal transplant recipients without a diagnosis of end-stage renal disease (non-RTRs). The outcomes included 30-day mortality, acute kidney injury (AKI), new renal failure requiring renal replacement therapy (RRT), endoleak, aortic-related reintervention, major adverse cardiac events, and 5-year survival. A logistic regression analysis was used to assess the association between RTRs and perioperative outcomes.
Result(s): Of 60,522 patients undergoing elective EVAR, 180 (0.3%) were RTRs. RTRs were younger (median, 71 years vs 74.5 years; P <.001), with higher incidence of hypertension (92% vs 84%; P =.004) and diabetes (29% vs 21%; P =.005). RTRs had higher median preoperative serum creatinine (1.3 mg/dL vs 1.0 mg/dL; P <.001) and lower estimated glomerular filtration rate (51.6 mL/min vs 69.4 mL/min; P <.001). There was no difference in the abdominal aortic aneurysm diameter and incidence of concurrent iliac aneurysms. Procedurally, RTRs were more likely to undergo general anesthesia with lower amount of contrast used (median, 68.6 mL vs 94.8 ml; P <.001) and higher crystalloid infusion (median, 1700 mL vs 1500 mL; P =.039), but no difference was observed in the incidence of open conversion, endoleak, operative time, and blood loss. Postoperatively, RTRs experienced a higher rate of AKI (9.4% vs 2.7%; P <.001), but the need for new RRT was similar (1.1% vs 0.4%; P =.15). There was no difference in the rates of postoperative mortality, aortic-related reintervention, and major adverse cardiac events. After adjustment for potential confounders, RTRs remained associated with increased odds of postoperative AKI (odds ratio, 3.33; 95% confidence interval, 1.93-5.76; P <.001) but had no association with other postoperative complications. A subgroup analysis identified that diabetes (odds ratio, 4.21; 95% confidence interval, 1.17-15.14; P =.02) is associated with increased odds of postoperative AKI among RTRs. At 5 years, the overall survival rates were similar (83.4% vs 80%; log-rank P =.235).
Conclusion(s): Among patients undergoing elective infrarenal EVAR, RTRs were independently associated with increased odds of postoperative AKI, without increased postoperative renal failure requiring RRT, mortality, endoleak, aortic-related reintervention, or major adverse cardiac events. Furthermore, 5-year survival was similar. As such, while EVAR may confer comparable benefits and technical success perioperatively, RTRs should have aggressive and maximally optimized renal protection to mitigate the risk of postoperative AKI. Keywords: End-stage renal disease, Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm, Multi-institutional study, Renal transplant, Renal transplant recipient, Vascular Quality Initiative database
Copyright

OBJECTIVE:The outcomes of patients with premature cerebrovascular disease (age ≤55 years) who undergo carotid artery stenting are not well-defined. Our study objective was to analyze the outcomes of younger patients undergoing carotid stenting. METHODS:The Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative was queried for transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TF-CAS) and transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) procedures between 2016 and 2020. Patients were stratified based on age ≤55 or >55 years. Primary endpoints were periprocedural stroke, death, myocardial infarction (MI), and composite outcomes. Secondary endpoints included procedural failure (defined as ipsilateral restenosis ≥80% or occlusion) and reintervention rates. RESULTS:Of the 35,802 patients who underwent either TF-CAS or TCAR, 2912 (6.1%) were ≤55 years. Younger patients were less likely than older patients to have coronary disease (30.5% vs 50.2%; P < .001), diabetes (31.5% vs 37.9%; P < .001), and hypertension (71.8% vs 89.8%; P < .001), but were more likely to be female (45% vs 35.4%; P < .001) and active smokers (50.9% vs 24.0%; P < .001) Younger patients were also more likely to have had a prior transient ischemic attack or stroke than older patients (70.7% vs 56.9%; P < .001). TF-CAS was more frequently performed in younger patients (79.7% vs 55.4%; P < .001). In the periprocedural period, younger patients were less likely to have a MI than older patients (0.3% vs 0.7%; P < .001), but there was no significant difference in the rates of periprocedural stroke (1.5% vs 2.0%; P = .173) and composite outcomes of stroke/death (2.6% vs 2.7%; P = .686) and stroke/death/MI (2.9% vs 3.2%; P = .353) between our two cohorts. The mean follow-up was 12 months regardless of age. During follow-up, younger patients were significantly more likely to experience significant (≥80%) restenosis or occlusion (4.7% vs 2.3%; P = .001) and to undergo reintervention (3.3% vs 1.7%; P < .001). However, there was no statistical difference in the frequency of late strokes between younger and older patients (3.8% vs 3.2%; P = .129). CONCLUSIONS:Patients with premature cerebrovascular disease undergoing carotid artery stenting are more likely to be African American, female, and active smokers than their older counterparts. Young patients are also more likely to present symptomatically. Although periprocedural outcomes are similar, younger patients have higher rates of procedural failure (significant restenosis or occlusion) and reintervention at 1-year follow-up. However, the clinical implication of late procedural failure is unknown, given that we found no significant difference in the rate of stroke at follow-up. Until further longitudinal studies are completed, clinicians should carefully consider the indications for carotid stenting in patients with premature cerebrovascular disease, and those who do undergo stenting may require close follow-up.

OBJECTIVE:Mortality after open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair is a quality measure and early death may represent a technical complication or poor patient selection. Our objective was to analyze patients that died in the hospital within postoperative day (POD) 0-2 after elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. METHODS:The Vascular Quality Initiative was queried from 2003-2019 for elective open abdominal aortic aneurysm repairs. Operations were categorized as in-hospital death on POD 0-2 (POD 0-2 Death), in-hospital death beyond POD 2 (POD ≥3 Death), and those alive at discharge. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed. RESULTS:There were 7,592 elective open abdominal aortic aneurysm repairs with 61 (.8%) POD 0-2 Death, 156 (2.1%) POD ≥3 Death, and 7,375 (97.1%) alive at discharge. Overall, median age was 70 years and 73.6% were male. Iliac aneurysm repair and surgical approach (anterior/retroperitoneal) were similar amongst groups. POD 0-2 Death, compared to POD ≥3 Death and those alive at discharge, had the longest renal/visceral ischemia time, more commonly had proximal clamp placement above both renal arteries, an aortic distal anastomosis, longest operative time, and largest estimated blood loss (all P<.05). Postoperative vasopressor usage, myocardial infarction, stroke, and return to the operating room were most frequent in POD 0-2 Death and extubation in the operating room was least frequent (all P<.001). Postoperative bowel ischemia and renal failure occurred most commonly amongst POD ≥3 Death (all P<.001).On multivariable analysis, POD 0-2 Death was associated with congestive heart failure, prior peripheral vascular intervention, female sex, preoperative aspirin use, lower center volume quartile, renal/visceral ischemia time, estimated blood loss, and older age (all P<.05). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:POD 0-2 Death was associated with comorbidities, center volume, renal/visceral ischemia time, and estimated blood loss. Referral to high-volume aortic centers could improve outcomes.

OBJECTIVE:Much attention has been given to the influence of anatomic and technical factors, such as maximum abdominal aortic aneurysm diameter and proximal clamp position, in open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (OSR). However, no studies have rigorously examined the correlation between site of distal anastomosis and OSR outcomes despite conventional wisdom that more proximal sites of anastomosis are preferrable when technically feasible. This study aimed to test the association between sites of distal anastomosis and clinical outcomes for patients undergoing primary elective OSR. METHODS:Our study included 5683 patients undergoing primary elective OSR at 233 centers from 2014 to 2020. Using a variety of statistical methods to account for potential confounders, including multivariable logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards modeling, as well as subgroup analysis, we examined the association between site of distal anastomosis and clinical outcomes in elective OSR. Primary outcomes were major in-hospital complication rate, 30-day mortality, and long-term survival. RESULTS:Patients undergoing elective aortobifemoral reconstruction (n = 672) exhibited significantly increased rates of smoking, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and peripheral artery disease in comparison to patients undergoing elective OSR with distal anastomosis to the aorta (n = 2298), common iliac artery (n = 2163), or external iliac artery (n = 550). Patients undergoing aorto-aortic tube grafting were significantly less likely to exhibit iliac aneurysmal disease and significantly more likely to be undergoing elective OSR with a suprarenal or supraceliac proximal clamp position. Using multivariable logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards analysis to control for important confounders, such as age, smoking status, and medical history, we found that distal anastomosis to the common femoral artery was associated with increased odds of major in-hospital complications (adjusted odds ratio, 1.79; 95% confidence interval, 1.46-2.18; P < .001) and reduced long-term survival (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.44; 95% confidence interval, 1.09-1.89; P = .010). We observed no significant differences in 30-day mortality across sites of distal anastomosis in our study population. CONCLUSIONS:It is generally accepted that more proximal sites of distal anastomosis should be selected in OSR when technically feasible. Our findings support this hypothesis by demonstrating that distal anastomosis to the common femoral artery is associated with increased perioperative morbidity and reduced long-term survival. Careful diligence regarding optimization of preoperative health status, perioperative care, and long-term follow-up should be applied to mitigate major complications in this patient population.

BACKGROUND:Peripheral vascular interventions (PVIs) for lower extremity peripheral artery disease have been increasing, particularly in the office-based setting. Our goal was to evaluate practice patterns for PVI by site of service using a contemporary real-world dataset. METHODS:The Vascular Quality Initiative PVI registry was queried from 2010-2021. Site of service was classified as hospital/inpatient, hospital/outpatient, and ambulatory/office-based center. Patient demographics, comorbidities, procedural details, and periprocedural outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS:There were 54,897 hospital/inpatient (43.2%), 64,105 hospital/outpatient (50.4%), and 8,179 ambulatory/office-based center (6.4%) PVI. When comparing the 2 outpatient settings, ambulatory/office-based center patients were older than hospital/outpatient (mean age 70.7 vs. 68.7 years), more often female sex (41.4% vs. 39.1%), never smokers (27.5% vs. 18.5%), primary Medicare (61.6% vs. 55.9%), nonambulatory (6.5% vs. 4.7%), less often with coronary artery disease (30.2% vs. 34.1%), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (18.1% vs. 26.9%), congestive heart failure (13% vs. 17.2%), obesity (30.9% vs. 33.6%), and less often on a statin (71.4% vs. 76.1%) (P < 0.001). Ambulatory/office-based center procedures were more likely for claudication (60.1% vs. 55.8%), more often involved femoro-popliteal (73.1% vs. 64.6%) and infrapopliteal (36.7% vs. 24.3%), and less often iliac interventions (24.1% vs. 33.6%) (P < 0.001).Overall, atherectomy was used in 14.2% of hospital/inpatient, 19.4% of hospital/outpatient, and 63.4% of ambulatory/office-based center procedures. Stents were used in 41.8% of hospital/inpatient, 45.1% of hospital/outpatient, and 48.8% of ambulatory/office-based center procedures. However, stent grafts were used in 12.5% of hospital/inpatient, 8.8% of hospital/outpatient, and only 1.3% of ambulatory/office-based center procedures. On multivariable analysis, compared with hospital/inpatient, atherectomy use was associated with ambulatory/office-based center setting (Odds ratio 10.9, 95% confidence interval 10.3-11.5, P < 0.001) and hospital/outpatient setting (Odds ratio 1.57, 95% confidence interval 1.51-1.62, P < 0.001). Periprocedure complications including hematoma requiring intervention (0.3%), any stenosis/occlusion (0.2%), and distal embolization (0.6%) were quite low across all settings. CONCLUSIONS:There are substantial variations in patient populations, procedural indications, and types of interventions undertaken during PVI across different locations. Ambulatory/office-based procedures more commonly treat claudicants, use atherectomy, and less often use stent grafts. Further research is warranted to investigate long-term trends in practice patterns and long-term outcomes, for PVI in the ever-expanding ambulatory/office-based setting.

BACKGROUND:Intraoperative dextran infusion has been associated with reduction of an embolic risk in patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA). Nonetheless, dextran has been associated with adverse reactions, including anaphylaxis, hemorrhage, cardiac, and renal complications. Herein, we aimed to compare the perioperative outcomes of CEA stratified by the use of intraoperative dextran infusion using a large multiinstitutional dataset. METHODS:Patients undergoing CEA between 2008 and 2022 from the Vascular Quality Initiative database were reviewed. Patients were categorized by use of intraoperative dextran infusion, and demographics, procedural data, and in-hospital outcomes were compared. Logistic regression analysis was utilized to adjust for differences in patients while assessing the association between postoperative outcomes and intraoperative infusion of dextran. RESULTS:Of 140,893 patients undergoing CEA, 9,935 (7.1%) patients had intraoperative dextran infusion. Patients with intraoperative dextran infusion were older with lower rates of symptomatic stenosis (24.7% vs. 29.3%; P < 0.001) and preoperative use of antiplatelets, anticoagulants and statins. Additionally, they were more likely to have severe carotid stenosis (>80%; 49% vs. 45%; P < 0.001) and undergo CEA under general anesthesia (96.4% vs. 92.3%; P < 0.001), with a more frequent use of shunt (64.4% vs. 49.5%; P < 0.001). After adjustment, multivariable analysis showed that intraoperative dextran infusion was associated with higher odds of in-hospital major adverse cardiac events (MACE), including myocardial infarction [MI] (odds ratio [OR], 1.76, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.34-2.3, P < 0.001), congestive heart failure [CHF] (OR, 2.15, 95% CI: 1.67-2.77, P = 0.001), and hemodynamic instability requiring vasoactive agents (OR, 1.08, 95% CI: 1.03-1.13, P = 0.001). However, it was not associated with decreased odds of stroke (OR, 0.92, 95% CI: 0.74-1.16, P = 0.489) or death (OR, 0.88, 95% CI: 0.58-1.35, P = 0.554). These trends persisted even when stratified by symptomatic status and degree of stenosis. CONCLUSIONS:Intraoperative infusion of dextran was associated with increased odds of MACE, including MI, CHF, and persistent hemodynamic instability, without decreasing the risk of stroke perioperatively. Given these results, judicious use of dextran in patients undergoing CEA is recommended. Furthermore, careful perioperative cardiac management is warranted in select patients receiving intraoperative dextran during CEA.