Clinical outcomes of bypass-first versus endovascular-first strategy in patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia due to infrageniculate arterial disease.

BACKGROUND: Chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI), defined as ischemic rest pain or tissue loss secondary to arterial insufficiency, is caused by multilevel arterial disease with frequent, severe infrageniculate disease. The rise in CLTI is in part the result of increasing worldwide prevalence of diabetes, renal insufficiency, and advanced aging of the population. The aim of this study was to compare a bypass-first with an endovascular-first revascularization strategy in patients with CLTI due to infrageniculate arterial disease. METHODS: We reviewed the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program targeted lower extremity revascularization database from 2012 to 2015 to identify patients with CLTI and isolated infrageniculate arterial disease who underwent primary infrageniculate bypass or endovascular intervention. We excluded patients with a history of ipsilateral revascularization and proximal interventions. The end points were major adverse limb event (MALE), major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE), amputation at 30 days, reintervention, patency, and mortality. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine the association of a bypass-first or an endovascular-first intervention with outcomes. RESULTS: There were 1355 CLTI patients undergoing first-time revascularization to the infrageniculate arteries (821 endovascular-first revascularizations and 534 bypass-first revascularizations) identified. There was no significant difference in adjusted rate of 30-day MALE in the bypass-first vs endovascular-first revascularization cohort (9% vs 11.2%; odds ratio [OR], 0.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.50-1.08). However, the incidence of transtibial or proximal amputation was lower in the bypass-first cohort (4.3% vs 7.4%; OR, 0.60; CI, 0.36-0.98). Patients with bypass-first revascularization had higher wound complication rates (9.7% vs 3.7%; OR, 2.75; CI, 1.71-4.42) compared with patients in the endovascular-first cohort. Compared with the endovascular-first cohort, the incidence of 30-day MACE was significantly higher in bypass-first patients (6.9% vs 2.6%; adjusted OR, 3.88; CI, 2.18-6.88), and 30-day mortality rates were 3.23% vs 1.8% (adjusted OR, 2.77; CI, 1.26-6.11). There was no difference in 30-day untreated loss of patency, reintervention of treated arterial segment, readmissions, and reoperations between the two cohorts. In subgroup analysis after exclusion of dialysis patients, there was also no significant difference in MALE or amputation between the bypass-first and endovascular-first cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: CLTI patients with isolated infrageniculate arterial disease treated by a bypass-first approach have a significantly lower 30-day amputation. However, this benefit was not observed when dialysis patients were excluded. The bypass-first cohort had a higher incidence of MACE compared with an endovascular-first strategy. These results reaffirm the need for randomized controlled trials, such as the Bypass versus Angioplasty in Severe Ischaemia of the Leg (BASIL-2) trial and Best Endovascular vs Best Surgical Therapy in Patients with Critical Limb Ischemia (BEST-CLI), to provide level 1 evidence for the role of endovascular-first vs bypass-first revascularization strategies in the treatment of this population of challenging patients.

Comparison of surgical incision complete closure versus leaving skin open in wound class IV in emergent colon surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Our aim was to compare the effect of techniques of wound closure in the emergent colon surgery with wound class IV. METHODS: Using 2014 the colectomy targeted ACS-NSQIP dataset; we identified patients undergoing emergent colectomy with wound class IV. Comparison of surgical incision complete closure versus leaving the skin open and multivariate logistic regression analyses was performed. RESULTS: Of 1792 patients undergoing emergent colectomy with wound class IV, the complete closure cohort had 1376 patients and the incision skin open cohort had 416 patients. The incidence of deep SSI was 2.3% in the complete closure cohort vs. 1.2% in the incision skin open, p = 0.15, and intra-abdominal abscess rate was 11.8% in the complete closure cohort vs. 12.3% in the incision skin open, p = 0.78. The dehiscence rate, readmission rate, and reoperation rates were not statistically significant between two cohorts. A multivariate model for dehiscence did not yield significant association between the complete closure cohort and incision skin open cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical incision complete wound closure in the emergent colon surgery with wound class III/IV is safe and effective.

Lower Extremity Ischemia after Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair.

BACKGROUND: Treatment reality of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is changing. Up to date, approximately 65% of intact AAA and 30% of ruptured AAA are treated endovascularly. As most comparative studies focus upon mortality and few major complications, some outcomes as lower extremity ischemia (LEI) after invasive AAA repair are often underreported. However, there is evidence for a worse outcome of patients suffering from this kind of complication. METHODS: Using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) vascular surgery targeted module from 2011 to 2014, we identified all patients undergoing endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) and open aortic repair (OAR) for AAA to illuminate the incidence and outcome of LEI after AAA repair. RESULTS: In total, 185 patients (1.9%) developed LEI after AAA repair. 1.6% of all patients showed LEI after treatment of asymptomatic or symptomatic intact AAA, compared with 4.8% of ruptured AAA repair (P < 0.001). Operation time, male gender, current smoking, and increased creatinine levels (>1.5 mg/dL) were associated with an increased likelihood of exhibiting LEI. No statistically significant differences between EVAR versus OAR were noted in the multivariate model. If LEI occurred, length of hospital stay (6 vs. 2 days, P < 0.001) and mortality (20.5 vs. 4.6%, P < 0.001) was significantly higher as compared with the patients without LEI. Furthermore, 30-day mortality and most major complications were more common if LEI occurred. CONCLUSIONS: In this specialized analysis regarding LEI after AAA repair up to 2% develop this severe ischemic complication. Since the occurrence of LEI is associated with significantly worse outcome, future research and strategies to avoid this complication is needed.

Directed postgraduate study result in quantitative improvement in American Board of Surgery In-Training Exam scores.

BACKGROUND: The collective study habits of 1 group of residents involved in educationally distinct periods of time in a community-based general surgery residency program were evaluated. METHODS: American Board of Surgery In-Training Exam (ABSITE) score results of 31 residents were calculated during 3 distinctive educational time periods: resident independent, self-directed study; resident-directed study with weekly systematic textbook reviews; and faculty-directed study with additional formal basic science and clinical lectures. RESULTS: Aggregate higher scores were observed when ABSITE results for the directed study period were compared with those observed during the independent study period in mid-level resident years (postgraduate year [PGY] 2 to 4). CONCLUSIONS: With limited faculty resources, community-based surgery residency programs have more challenges in opportunities for resident acquisition of cognitive knowledge and subsequent quantitative improvement in ABSITE scores. This study demonstrated a successful methodology particularly in the face of mandated limitation of weekly resident work hours and diminishing allocated education resources.