Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVE:Restenosis after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) poses unique therapeutic challenges, with no specific guidelines available on the operative approach. Traditionally, transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TfCAS) has been regarded as the preferred approach to treating restenosis after CEA. Recently, transcarotid artery revascularization with a flow-reversal neuroprotection system (TCAR) has gained popularity as an effective alternative treatment modality for de novo carotid artery stenosis. The aim of the present study was to compare the contemporary perioperative outcomes of TfCAS and TCAR in patients with prior ipsilateral CEA. METHODS:The Vascular Quality Initiative database was reviewed for patients who had undergone TfCAS and TCAR for restenosis after prior ipsilateral CEA between January 2016 and August 2020. The primary outcome was the 30-day composite outcome of stroke and death. The secondary outcomes included 30-day stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA), myocardial infarction (MI), death, and composite 30-day outcomes of stroke, death, and TIA, stroke and TIA, and stroke, death, and MI. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to evaluate the outcomes of interest after adjustment for potential confounders and baseline differences between cohorts. RESULTS:Of 3508 patients, 1834 and 1674 had undergone TfCAS and TCAR, respectively. The TCAR cohort was older (mean age, 71.6 years vs 70.2 years; P < .001) and less likely to be symptomatic (27% vs 46%; P < .001), with a greater proportion taking aspirin (92% vs 88%; P = .001), a P2Y12 inhibitor (89% vs 80%; P < .001), and a statin (91% vs 87%; P = .002) compared with the TfCAS cohort. Perioperatively, the TCAR cohort had had lower 30-day composite outcomes of stroke/death (1.6% vs 2.7%; P = .025), stroke/death/TIA (1.8% vs 3.3%; P = .004), and stroke/death/MI (2.1% vs 3.2%; P = .048), primarily driven by lower rates of stroke (1.3% vs 2.3%; P = .031) and TIA (0.2% vs 0.7%; P = .031). Among asymptomatic patients, the incidence of stroke (0.6% vs 1.4%; P = .042) and the composite of stroke/TIA (0.8% vs 1.8%; P = .036) was significantly lower after TCAR than TfCAS, and TCAR was associated with a lower incidence of TIA (0% vs 1%; P = .038) among symptomatic patients. On adjusted analysis, the TCAR cohort had lower odds of TIA (adjusted odds ratio, 0.17; 95% confidence interval, 0.04-0.74; P = .019). CONCLUSIONS:Among patients undergoing carotid revascularization for restenosis after prior ipsilateral CEA, TCAR was associated with decreased odds of 30-day TIA compared with TfCAS. However, the two treatment approaches were similarly safe in terms of the remaining perioperative outcomes, including stroke and death and stroke, death, and MI. Our results support the safety and efficacy of TCAR in this subset of patients deemed at high risk of reintervention.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Patients with prior infrarenal aortic intervention represent an increasing demographic of patients undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) and/or complex EVAR. Studies have suggested that prior abdominal aortic surgery is a risk factor for spinal cord ischemia (SCI). However, these results are largely based on single-center experiences with limited multi-institutional and national data assessing clinical outcomes in these patients. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of prior infrarenal aortic surgery on SCI. METHODS:The Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative database was retrospectively reviewed to identify all patients ≥18 years old undergoing TEVAR/complex EVAR from January 2012 to June 2020. Patients with previous thoracic or suprarenal aortic repairs were excluded. Baseline and procedural characteristics and postoperative outcomes were compared by group: TEVAR/complex EVAR with or without previous infrarenal aortic repair. The primary outcome was postoperative SCI. Secondary outcomes included postoperative hospital length of stay (LOS), bowel ischemia, renal ischemia, and 30-day mortality. Multivariate regression was used to determine independent predictors of postoperative SCI. Additional analysis was performed for patients undergoing isolated TEVAR. RESULTS:A total of 9506 patients met the inclusion criteria: 8691 (91.4%) had no history of infrarenal aortic repair and 815 (8.6%) had previous infrarenal aortic repair. Patients with previous infrarenal repair were older with an increased prevalence of chronic kidney disease (p=0.001) and cardiovascular risk factors including hypertension, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and smoking history (p<0.001). These patients presented with larger maximal aortic diameters (6.06±1.47 cm versus 5.15±1.76 cm; p<0.001) and required more stent grafts (p<0.001) with increased intraoperative blood transfusion requirements (p<0.001), and longer procedure times (p<0.001). Univariate analysis demonstrated no difference in postoperative SCI, postoperative hospital LOS, bowel ischemia, or renal ischemia between the two groups. Thirty-day mortality was significantly higher in patients with prior infrarenal repair (p=0.001). On multivariate regression, prior infrarenal aortic repair was not a predictor of postoperative SCI, while aortic dissection (odds ratio [OR] 1.65; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.26-2.16, p<0.001), number of stent grafts deployed (OR 1.45; 95% CI 1.30-1.62, p<0.001), and units of packed red blood cells transfused intraoperatively (OR 1.33; 95% CI 1.03-1.73, p=0.032) were independent predictors of SCI. CONCLUSIONS:Although TEVAR/complex EVAR patients with prior infrarenal aortic repair constituted a sicker cohort with higher 30-day mortality, the rate of SCI was comparable to patients without prior repair. Previous infrarenal repair was not associated with risk of SCI.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:In patients deemed high risk for carotid endarterectomy (CEA) who are indicated for treatment of carotid artery stenosis (CAS), transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) has been demonstrated as a safe and effective alternative to trans-femoral carotid artery stenting (TF-CAS). Compared to CEA, where approx. 12% of patients undergoing awake intervention do not tolerate internal carotid artery (ICA) clamping, only 1-2% of patients were observed to have intolerance to flow reversal during TCAR based on data from the ROADSTER1/2 trials. This study reviewed awake interventions from those trials to assess factors associated with intolerance to flow reversal and review how those cases were managed. METHODS:This is a retrospective review of prospectively collected data from Reverse Flow Used During Carotid Artery Stenting Procedure (ROADSTER) multicenter trial along with the subsequent post-approval (ROADSTER-2) trial. The subset of patients from both trials undergoing awake TCAR was analyzed to compare demographics, procedural details, and anatomic factors between patients who did and did not experience intolerance to reversal of flow to assess for predisposing factors. Patients were deemed intolerant to flow reversal at the discretion of the operator, often related to changes in completion of neurologic tasks, hemodynamic stability, or patient reported symptoms. RESULTS:103 patients from ROADSTER and 194 patients from ROADSTER-2 underwent TCAR under local/regional anesthesia. Of these, 8 patients had intolerance to flow reversal, though all cases were successfully completed. While intra-operative hemodynamic data was only available for 5 of the 8 intolerant patients, none experienced hypotension. 4 cases were completed under low flow reversal, 3 cases were successfully weaned from low to high flow over several minutes, and 1 case required general anesthesia. No significant association was found between intolerance to flow reversal and comorbidities including diabetes mellitus (DM), hypertension (HTN), hyperlipidemia (HLD), congestive heart failure (CHF), prior MI or angina, pre-op CAS-related symptoms, prior stroke, prior CAS or CEA, prior neck radiation, tandem stenosis, high cervical stenosis, or hostile neck (tables 1, 2). A trend towards significance was seen with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and contralateral carotid artery occlusion (p= 0.086 and 0.139, respectively). CONCLUSIONS:Despite intolerance to flow reversal, TCAR cases were successfully completed by adjusting reversal-of-flow rate and do not typically require conversion to GETA. While factors contributing to intolerance of flow reversal during TCAR remain poorly understood, this study identified a trend towards significance with an association of pre-existing COPD and contralateral carotid artery occlusion. Given the low number of patients who experienced this issue, a larger sample size is required to better elucidate these trends.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:The treatment of a refluxing perforator is indicated in the setting of severe chronic venous insufficiency, but there are limited data on the presence of multilevel disease in these patients. This study sought to evaluate whether the presence of a pathologic perforator is predictive of the presence of central venous pathology. METHODS:This study was a retrospective review of the institutional vascular quality initiative (VQI) database. Consecutive patient-limbs were identified who underwent intervention of refluxing perforators. The patients who underwent imaging, including MRI or CT (Group A) were compared to those who did not undergo imaging (Group B). The treated limbs in Group A were also compared to the contralateral limbs as an internal control. Anatomical findings on imaging were analyzed by two independent investigators. The primary outcome was the presence and degree of central venous stenosis as measured by an orthogonal diameter reduction of > 50% by axial imaging. Secondary outcomes included demographic and clinical differences between the two groups, frequency of central venous intervention, and duration of ulcer healing. Standard statistical analysis was performed. RESULTS:Ninety-three patient-limbs underwent treatment of a pathologic perforator, with 30 in Group A and 63 in Group B. The following demographic and clinical variables were higher in Group A compared to Group B: Male gender, BMI, deep venous thrombosis history, recent or active anticoagulation use, perforator diameter, Clinical Etiology Anatomy Pathophysiology class 4, 5 or 6, and Venous Clinical Severity Score. Radiographic analysis of Group A revealed concordance of a treated pathological perforator with an ipsilateral central venous stenosis in 53.3% of patients, and a higher frequency of common iliac vein stenosis (50% vs 21.4%, P = 0.024) and external iliac vein stenosis (20% vs 0%, P = 0.012) compared to the contralateral limbs. When separated by left or right limb, the left limbs exhibited a greater degree of common iliac vein stenosis as compared to the contralateral limbs (50.7±20.9% vs 16.3±16.5%, P < 0.001) as well as a greater frequency of >50% common iliac vein stenosis (46.7% vs 13.3%, P = 0.046). The right limbs exhibited a greater frequency of > 50% external iliac vein stenosis as compared to contralateral limbs (33.3% vs 0%, P = 0.022). CONCLUSIONS:This study suggests that patients with severe chronic venous insufficiency who undergo treatment for a pathologic perforator may have additional ipsilateral central venous pathology, supporting the presence of multilevel disease. Additional axial imaging might unmask central venous pathology and provide another option for treatment.

BACKGROUND:Histological analyses of deep vein thrombi (DVT) are based on autopsy samples and animal models. No prior study has reported on thrombus composition following percutaneous mechanical extraction. As elements of chronicity and organization render thrombus resistant to anticoagulation and thrombolysis, a better understanding of clot evolution may inform therapies. METHODS:We performed histologic evaluation of DVTs from consecutive patients undergoing mechanical thrombectomy for extensive iliofemoral DVTs using the Clottriever/ Flowtriever device (Inari Medical, Irvine, CA). Thrombi were scored in a semi-quantitative manner based on the degree of fibrosis (collagen deposition on trichrome stain), and organization (endothelial growth with capillaries and fibroblastic penetration). RESULTS:Twenty-three specimens were available for analysis with 20 presenting with acute DVT (≤14 days from symptom onset). Eleven of 23 patients (48%) had >5% fibrosis (collagen deposition) and 14/23 patients (61%) had >5% organization (endothelial growth, capillaries, fibroblasts). Four patients with acute DVT had ≥25% organized thrombus and 2 had ≥ 25% collagen deposition. Among the 20 patients with acute DVT, 40% had >5% fibrosis and 55% had > 5% organization. Acuity of DVT did not correlate with the fibrosis or organizing scores. CONCLUSIONS:A large proportion of patients with acute DVT have histologic elements of chronicity and fibrosis. A better understanding of the relationship between such elements and response to anticoagulants and fibrinolytics may inform our approach to therapeutics.

Background: Severe presentations of chronic venous insufficiency may result from reflux or obstruction at the deep venous, perforator or superficial venous levels. Iliofemoral venous stenting may be used to address central venous obstruction, but its effect on deep venous reflux remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of iliac vein stenting on femoropopliteal deep vein reflux with the hypothesis that sonographic evidence of deep vein reflux would remain absent or improve following iliac vein stenting.
Method(s): This study was a retrospective review of patients undergoing iliofemoral venous stenting from 2013-2020. Patients were divided into two cohorts based on the preprocedural presence (Group A) or absence (Group B) of femoropopliteal reflux. Baseline patient variables were collected including age, gender, CEAP, presence of concomitant superficial or perforator reflux, DVT history, and additional venous intervention(s). The primary outcome evaluated was the persistent absence or the resolution of deep vein reflux on the latest venous duplex ultrasound follow-up. Other outcomes included follow-up CEAP classification as well as need for secondary deep venous interventions.
Result(s): There were 275 consecutive patients who underwent iliofemoral venous stenting. Of those, 58 presented with deep vein reflux (Group A), and the remaining did not (Group B). When comparing Group A and Group B, patients in Group A had a higher likelihood of prior DVT (P =.0001) as well as higher frequency of venous ablation (Table). The remaining demographics did not differ significantly between the two groups. In Group A, deep vein reflux resolved in follow-up in 17/51 patients (P =.0001). In Group B, deep vein reflux developed on follow-up in 6/217 patients. CEAP appeared to improve from preintervention (C0, 1.1%; C1, 0.4%; C2, 1.8%; C3, 41.4%; C4, 24.9%; C5, 5.9%; and C6, 24.5%) to latest follow-up (C0, 4.9%; C1, 1.9%; C2, 5.7%; C3, 34.2%; C4, 22.8%; C5, 17.1%; and C6, 13.3%).
Conclusion(s): For patients who undergo iliofemoral vein stenting, deep vein reflux may improve if present initially, and is unlikely to develop if not present prior to intervention. A cohort of patients maintained persistent deep vein reflux, and these warrant further evaluation. Prospective studies are required to corroborate the safety, efficacy and durability of iliofemoral venous stenting in patients with deep vein reflux. [Formula presented]
Copyright

Objectives: Current guidelines recommend dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in patients undergoing carotid artery stenting. The most common DAPT regimen is aspirin and clopidogrel, a P2Y12 receptor antagonist; however, there is evidence that the prevalence of clopidogrel resistance (CR) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions may exceed 40%. Few studies have investigated the prevalence and impact of CR in patients undergoing extracranial carotid artery stenting, particularly transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR).
Method(s): Consecutive patients 18 years and older who underwent TCAR for high grade (>80%) or symptomatic (>50%) carotid stenosis with preoperative P2Y12 testing between January 2018 and January 2021 were identified across six institutions. Preoperative platelet reactivity was measured with the light transmission aggregometry (VerifyNow P2Y12 Reaction Units [PRU] Test; Instrumentation Laboratory, Bedford, MA), with CR defined as PRU >=194 and hyper-responders as PRU <70. Patients without preoperative P2Y12 testing within 30 days prior to TCAR or those on a non-clopidogrel P2Y12 inhibitor preoperatively were excluded. Primary outcome of interest was the prevalence of CR. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of ischemic and hemorrhagic complications.
Result(s): Of the 67 patients identified, 60 met inclusion criteria. The cohort was 63% male (38/60) and 62% (37/60) Caucasian, with mean age of 74 years (+/-8; range, 56-92 years). Preoperatively, 95% of patients were on aspirin, 100% on clopidogrel, and 15% on therapeutic anticoagulation. At presentation, 42% (25) were symptomatic. Mean preoperative P2Y12 was 168 PRU (+/-81; range, 6-349 PRU). In total, 23 patients (38%) met criteria for CR (mean PRU, 249 +/- 43; range, 197-349), and 8 patients (13%) met criteria for hyper-responder (mean PRU, 35 +/- 22; range, 6-64). There was no significant difference between clopidogrel responders and patients with CR in terms of age (P =.1447), gender (P = 1), race (P =.387), or symptomatic presentation (P =.319). Postoperatively, there were no in-hospital transient ischemic attacks, strokes, or myocardial infarctions. Two patients (3%), one CR (PRU, 240) and one responder (PRU, 119), experienced postoperative access site hematomas that required no subsequent intervention; no other index hospitalization hemorrhagic complications occurred.
Conclusion(s): Using preoperative P2Y12 testing with a threshold of PRU >=194 to define CR, we identified a high prevalence of CR in patients undergoing TCAR similar to that in the pre-existing coronary literature. We found no significant differences in postoperative ischemic or hemorrhagic complications by clopidogrel response phenotype, although complication rates in the overall study cohort were low. Further investigation is warranted to determine if a quantitative assessment of CR is sufficient to identify patients at risk of developing secondary cerebrovascular ischemic events in this patient population.
Copyright

Objective: The two feared complications of pelvic flow disruption include buttock ischemia and mesenteric ischemia. In cases of extensive aortic coverage, spinal cord ischemia is also a risk. Unilateral or bilateral hypogastric artery flow interruption, either from atherosclerosis or intentionally, is considered problematic in endovascular repair and has not been well studied in open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (OAR). We examined the effect of the interruption of flow to one or both hypogastric arteries on the outcomes after OAR.
Method(s): The Society for Vascular Surgery Quality Initiative database was queried for all patients who had undergone elective OAR between 2003 and 2020. All patients who had undergone elective OAR were included. Patients with data on their hypogastric arteries were stratified into two groups-patent bilaterally (normal pelvic perfusion) and unilateral or bilateral occlusion or ligation (compromised pelvic perfusion [CPP]). The primary endpoints were 30-day major morbidity (myocardial infarction, respiratory complications, renal injury, and lower extremity or intestinal ischemia) and mortality.
Result(s): During the study period, 9492 patients underwent elective OAR-860 (9.1%) with CPP and 8632 (90.9%) with patent bilateral hypogastric arteries. The two groups had similar cardiac risk factors, including a history of coronary artery disease, prior coronary intervention, and the use of P2Y12 inhibitors and statins (Table I). Most patients in the CPP cohort had concurrent iliac aneurysms (63.3% vs 24.8%; P <.001). Perioperative mortality was significantly higher in the CPP group (5.5% vs 3.1%; P <.001). Bilateral flow interruption resulted in greater perioperative mortality compared with unilateral interruption (7.1% vs 4.7%; P <.001). The CPP group also had increased rates of myocardial injury (6.7% vs 4.7%; P =.012), renal complications (18.9% vs 15.9%; P =.024), leg ischemia (3.5% vs 2.1%; P =.008), and bowel ischemia (5.7% vs 3.4%; P <.001). On multivariable analysis, CPP was associated with increased perioperative mortality (odds ratio, 1.47; 95% confidence interval, 1.14-1.88; P =.003). Intraoperative blood transfusion, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and renal insufficiency were other factors associated with perioperative mortality (Table II).
Conclusion(s): CPP is associated with increased perioperative complications and higher mortality in patients undergoing OAR. Hypogastric artery occlusion or the need to ligate these vessels likely signifies the presence of more complex disease. Careful technique and appropriate patient selection are critical in this cohort of patients. Furthermore, the differences in physiology of pelvic circulation in open and endovascular repair warrant further examination. [Formula presented] [Formula presented]
Copyright

Objective: Statins are often used for primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular events. Multiple studies have demonstrated a significant reduction in perioperative complications after carotid endarterectomy for patients taking statins. However, data for statin use for patients undergoing transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) are limited. We evaluated the effects of statin use on the postoperative outcomes after TCAR.
Method(s): The records of the Vascular Quality Initiative carotid artery stenting registry (2012-2020) were reviewed for patients who had undergone TCAR. The patient demographics, perioperative characteristics, and 30-day outcomes were compared between the patients treated with and without statins (statin and no-statin group, respectively). Multivariable logistic regression models were used to estimate the effect of statins on the postoperative outcomes.
Result(s): A total of 15,797 patients had undergone TCAR, of whom, 10,116 (64%) were men. Of the 15,797 patients, 14,152 (89.6%) were taking a statin preoperatively (Table I). The statin group was more likely to have hypertension (91% vs 87%; P <.001), coronary artery disease (26% vs 23%; P =.008), and diabetes mellitus (33% vs 29%; P <.001). The incidence of both prior ipsilateral stroke (17.2% vs 13.5%; P <.001) and recent ipsilateral stroke (<=30 days; 7.1% vs 5.6%; P =.02) was higher in the statin group. No differences were found in the perioperative characteristics, including median operative time, contrast amount used, technical success, and number of stents used. Perioperative stroke and major adverse cardiac events (MACE; myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, dysrhythmia) occurred in 1.5% and 2.4% of the statin group and 1.4% and 2.3% of the no-statin group, respectively. Controlling for covariates with the logistic regression method, statin use was associated with a 62% reduction in the odds of mortality (odds ratio, 0.38; 95% confidence interval, 0.19-0.99; P =.047; Table II) for patients who had experienced a perioperative stroke or MACE after TCAR.
Conclusion(s): Statin use was associated with a significant reduction in postoperative mortality for patients who had experienced a stroke or MACE after TCAR. Therefore, strict adherence to statin use is strongly recommended, especially for patients who could be at high risk of major postoperative complications. [Formula presented] [Formula presented]
Copyright