Association Between Conduit Type and Outcomes After Open Repair of Popliteal Artery Aneurysms.

INTRODUCTION: Prior studies have demonstrated acceptable midterm outcomes with prosthetic conduits for above-knee bypass for occlusive disease in patients with inadequate segment great saphenous vein (GSV). In this study we aimed to investigate whether this holds true for open repair of popliteal artery aneurysms (PAA). METHODS: We queried the Vascular Quality Initiative data for patients who underwent open PAA repair (OPAR). We divided the cohort into three groups based on the conduit used: GSV, other autologous veins, or prosthetic graft. Study outcomes included primary patency, freedom from major amputation, amputation-free survival, and overall survival at 1 y. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates, log-rank tests and multivariable Cox regression were used to compare outcomes between study groups. RESULTS: A total of 4016 patients underwent bypass for PAA from January 2010 to October 2021. The three cohorts were significantly different in many demographic and clinical characteristics. The adjusted odds of postoperative amputation among symptomatic patients were 3-fold higher for prosthetic conduits compared to the GSV (odds ratio, 3.20; 95% CI, 1.72-5.92; P < 0.001). For the 1-y outcomes, the adjusted risk of major amputation was almost 3-fold higher for patients with symptomatic disease undergoing bypass with prosthetic conduits (hazard ratio [HR], 2.97; 95% CI, 1.35-6.52; P = 0.007). When compared with GSV, prosthetic conduits were associated with 96% increased risk of death when used for repair in symptomatic patients (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR), 1.96; 95% CI, 1.29-2.97; P = 0.002) but no significant association with mortality in asymptomatic patients (aHR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.37-1.87; P = 0.652). When compared with GSV, prosthetic conduits were associated with a 2-fold increased risk of 1-y major amputation or death when used for repair in symptomatic patients (aHR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.40-2.94; P < 0.001) but no significant association with mortality in asymptomatic patients (aHR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.42-1.98; P = 0.816). Comparing bypass with other veins to the GSV among patients with symptomatic disease, there was no statistically significant difference in major amputation risk (HR; 2.44; 95% CI, 0.55-10.82; P = 0.242) and no difference in the adjusted risk of all-cause mortality (aHR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.26-2.44; P = 0.653). There were no differences in the adjusted risk of loss of primary patency comparing other veins to GSV (HR, 1.53; 95% CI, 0.85-2.76; P = 0.154) and prosthetic conduits to GSV (HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.57-1.26; P = 0.422). CONCLUSIONS: This large study shows that among patients undergoing OPAR, 1-y primary patency does not differ between conduit types. However, prosthetic conduits are associated with significantly higher risk of amputation and death compared to GSV among symptomatic patients. Though non-GSV autologous veins are less often used for OPAR, they have comparably acceptable outcomes as GSV.

Impact of Flow Reversal Duration on Neurological Outcomes of Transcarotid Artery Revascularization (TCAR).

BACKGROUNDS: Flow reversal is a key component of transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR). However, the impact of flow reversal duration on neurological outcomes and the duration of flow reversal which optimizes TCAR's outcomes is not known. We evaluated the association of flow reversal time with the intraoperative and postoperative neurological outcomes of TCAR. METHODS: We studied all patients undergoing TCAR from September 2016 to October 2021. The exposure of interest was the duration of flow reversal. Multivariable logistic and fractional polynomial models were used to study the impact of flow reversal duration on in-hospital stroke, intraoperative neurological change/intolerance and stroke/death following TCAR and to identify the flow reversal time above which significant perioperative neurological events occur. RESULTS: The study included 19,462 patients with mean age of 73.4 years who were mostly Caucasian (91%) and male (63%). The mean flow reversal time was 10.7 minutes, and the overall stroke rate was 1.4%. The odds of intraoperative neurological change increased by 3.6% per minute increase in flow reversal time (odds ratio (OR), 1.04; 95%, 1.01-1.06; P < 0.002). Flow reversal duration >10 minutes was associated with 78% increased odds of neurological changes compared to flow reversal duration <10 minutes. There was no significant association between flow reversal duration and stroke, and stroke/death in the first 5 minutes after initiation of flow reversal. The odds of stroke increased by 2.7% per minute increase in flow reversal time >5 minutes (OR, 1.03; 95%, 1.01-1.04; P < 0.001), with flow reversal duration >10 minutes associated with 38% increased odds of stroke compared to flow reversal duration ≤10 minutes (OR, 1.37, 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.09-1.73, P = 0.006). The odds of stroke/death increased by 2.5% per minute increase in flow reversal time >5 minutes (OR, 1.03; 95%, 1.01-1.04; P < 0.001). Flow reversal duration >10 minutes was associated with 25% increased odds of stroke/death compared to flow reversal duration <10 minutes (OR, 1.25, 95% CI, 1.01-1.53, P = 0.038). Symptomatic status did not modify outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that outcomes following TCAR are optimal if the duration of flow reversal is minimized. A clinical cutoff time of 10 minutes is suggested by this study and recommended as a guide. Further studies targeted at the flow reversal component of TCAR are needed to solidify the evidence regarding the clinical effects of temporarily induced retrograde cerebral blood flow during TCAR.

Association of Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System Inhibitor Usage Patterns with Midterm Amputation-Free Survival after Lower Extremity Bypass for Peripheral Arterial Disease.

BACKGROUND: Different renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitor (RAASI) usage patterns exist among patients undergoing lower extremity bypass (LEB) for peripheral arterial disease. We studied the association of RAASI usage patterns with LEB outcomes to determine which pattern is associated with improved survival after LEB. METHODS: We evaluated peripheral arterial disease patients who underwent LEB between January 2014 and December 2018 in the Vascular Quality Initiative-Medicare matched database. Study cohorts included no RAASI use, preoperative RAASI use only, postoperative RAASI use only, and continuous RAASI use both preoperatively and postoperatively. Logistic and Cox regression was used to adjust for potential confounders. Primary outcome was 2-year amputation-free survival (AFS). RESULTS: Of 19,012 patients included, 1,574 (8.3%) were on RAASIs preoperatively only, 1,051 (5.5%) postoperatively only, and 8,484 (45.2%) continuously. Compared to no RAASI use, isolated preoperative RAASI use was associated with 2.8-fold increased odds of 30-day mortality (adjusted Odds Ratio, 2.75; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.15-3.51; P < 0.001) whereas continuous RAASI use had 56% lower odds of 30-day mortality (adjusted Odds Ratio, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.34-0.58; P < 0.001). Two-year AFS was 63.2% for no RAASI use and 60.4%, 66.2%, and 73.4% for preoperative, postoperative, and continuous RAASI use, respectively (P < 0.001). While no RAASI use and postoperative RAASI use had comparable adjusted risks of 2-year major amputation or death (adjusted Hazard Ratio [aHR], 0.94; 95% CI, 0.83-1.06; P = 0.312), this risk was 14% higher for preoperative RAASI use only (aHR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.04-1.26; P = 0.006) and 23% lower for continuous RAASI use (aHR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.72-0.82; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Isolated preoperative RAASI use was associated with worse 30-day mortality and 2-year AFS, while continuous RAASI use was associated with improved 30-day mortality and 2-year AFS. Optimum survival benefit may be derived from continuous RAAS inhibition in the preoperative and postoperative periods.

Revision of Aneurysmal Arteriovenous Access with Immediate Use Graft Is Safe and Avoids Prolonged Use of Tunneled Hemodialysis Catheters.

BACKGROUND: Aneurysmal arteriovenous fistulas (AVF) can pose a difficult treatment dilemma for the vascular surgeons. Prolonged tunneled dialysis catheters (TDCs) in patients requiring long-term dialysis are associated with significantly increased mortality compared to AVF. We aimed to elucidate the outcomes of aneurysmal arteriovenous (AV) access revision with aneurysm resection and Artegraft® (LeMaitre, New Brunswick, NJ) Collage Vascular Graft placement to avoid prolonged use of TDCs. METHODS: We reviewed all patients with aneurysmal AV access in whom the access was revised with aneurysm resection and jump graft placement at a single institution from 2018 to 2021. Outcomes were time to cannulation, reintervention rates, time to reintervention, and patency (primary, primary assisted, and secondary). Patency rates were estimated with Kaplan-Meier Survival analysis. RESULTS: A total of 51 revised aneurysmal AV accesses in 51 patients were studied, of which 23.5% (n = 12) had perioperative TDC placement. Three patients were done for emergent bleeding. The cohort was 62.8% male (n = 32) with a median age of 58 years (interquartile range: 49-67). Most patients had brachiocephalic AVF (n = 37 [72.6%]). The median follow-up time was 280 days. The median time to cannulation was 2 days. Time to cannulation was significantly longer in patients with perioperative TDC as compared with those without TDC (24 days vs. 2 days, P < 0.001). Reintervention was required in 41.2% of patients (n = 21), at median time of 47 days. At 30, 90, 180, and 365 days, primary patency rates were 84.3%, 78.3%, 66.6%, and 54.9%; primary assisted patency rates were 94.1%, 88.1%, 79.4%, and 79.4%; and secondary patency rates were 100%, 97.8%, 91.6%, and 91.6%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The revision of aneurysmal AV access (urgent or elective) with Artegraft as jump graft is safe, with acceptable short- and mid-term patency results. This allows dialysis patients to continue to have a functional access, decreasing the need for a tunneled catheter and reducing the associated risk of sepsis and increased mortality. This should be considered for all patients with aneurysmal, dysfunctional fistulas to maintain AV access and avoid TDC placement.

Outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair for uncomplicated type B dissections based on chronicity.

OBJECTIVE: The long-term results of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for uncomplicated type B aortic dissection (uTBAD) have been associated with improved aorta-specific survival and delayed disease progression compared with medical therapy alone. In 2020, the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) and Society for Thoracic Surgeons (STS) reported new reporting standards and classification for TBAD. We assessed the effectiveness of TEVAR in the treatment of uTBAD stratified by the updated classification using the Vascular Quality Initiative database. METHODS: The Vascular Quality Initiative registry was queried for patients who had undergone TEVAR for uTBAD from August 2014 to November 2020. We analyzed the outcomes stratified by the SVS/STS reporting standards. The cohort was then grouped and compared using the updated chronicity classification (hyperacute, <24 hours; acute, 1-14 days; subacute, 15-90 days; and chronic, >90 days) and univariable methods (χ2, analysis of variance), multivariable logistic regression, and survival analysis (Kaplan-Meier, Cox regression). RESULTS: Of 1476 TEVARs, 121 (8.2%) were for hyperacute, 833 (56.4%) for acute, 316 (21.4%) for subacute, and 206 (14.0%) for chronic uTBAD. The rates of in-hospital stroke for hyperacute and acute uTBAD were significantly higher than was the rate for chronic uTBAD. The rate of spinal cord ischemia (SCI) was significantly higher for hyperacute and subacute uTBAD than for chronic uTBAD but not for acute vs chronic uTBAD. After multivariable adjustment, no significant difference was found in the 30-day mortality between the four groups. However, the adjusted stroke risk was more than sixfold higher for hyperacute uTBAD than for chronic uTBAD (odds ratio [OR], 6.78; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.83-25.17; P = .004) and more than threefold higher for acute than for chronic uTBAD (OR, 3.42; 95% CI, 1.04-11.24; P = .043). The adjusted risk of SCI was also significantly higher for hyperacute and subacute than for chronic uTBAD (OR, 19.17; 95% CI, 2.42-151.90; P = .005; and OR, 8.64; 95% CI, 1.11-67.21; P = .039, respectively) but not for acute vs chronic uTBAD (OR, 6.95; 95% CI, 0.93-51.88; P = .059). The risk of postoperative reintervention was threefold higher for hyperacute vs chronic uTBAD (OR, 3.02; 95% CI, 1.19-7.69; P = .02). The Kaplan-Meier survival estimates revealed that the 1-year survival rate for hyperacute, acute, subacute, and chronic uTBAD was 83.2%, 87.2%, 92.3%, and 92.9%, respectively (P = .010). However, no significant differences were found in the hazard of 1-year mortality after adjustment for potential confounders. CONCLUSIONS: Using the updated SVS/STS chronicity classification, we found an increased risk of perioperative stroke, SCI, and the need for reintervention after TEVAR for uTBAD in the hyperacute periods compared with the chronic period. The updated classification should be incorporated into all future study designs for TEVAR trials. We would recommend avoiding TEVAR for uTBAD in the hyperacute phase.

Open Repair Versus Endovascular Repair in the Treatment of Symptomatic Popliteal Artery Aneurysms.

BACKGROUND: Endovascular and open surgical modalities are currently used to treat popliteal artery aneurysms (PAA). However, there is limited data on the comparative durability of both repairs to guide physicians especially in the treatment of patients presenting symptomatic. We aimed to study the comparative effectiveness of endovascular PAA repair (EPAR) versus open PAA repair (OPAR). METHODS: The vascular quality initiative (VQI)-Medicare linked database was queried for patients with symptomatic PAA who underwent OPAR or EPAR from January 2010 to December 2018. Kaplan-Meier estimates, log-rank tests and multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression were employed to study the outcomes of amputation free survival (AFS), freedom from first reintervention, freedom from major amputation, and overall survival in 2 years following the index procedure. RESULTS: A total of 1,375 patients were studied, of which 23.7% (n = 326) were treated with EPAR. Patients treated with OPAR were younger, less likely to have coronary artery disease (CAD) and chronic kidney disease (CKD), but more likely to be smokers and to present with acute lower extremity ischemia. OPAR treated patients had better 2-year AFS (84.5% vs. 72.5%, P < 0.001) and overall survival (86.2% vs. 74.7%, P < 0.001). Freedom from major amputation at 2 years were comparable between EPAR and OPAR (95.5% vs. 97.7%, P = 0.164) in the overall cohort. Within the sub cohort of patients with acute limb ischemia, freedom from major amputation was significantly higher for OPAR compared to EPAR (97.4% vs. 90.6%, P = 0.021). After adjustment for confounders, OPAR was associated with decreased risk of amputation or death (aHR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.48-0.80; P < 0.001) and mortality (aHR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.48-0.81; P < 0.001) at 2 years. OPAR and EPAR had comparable adjusted risk of 2-year major amputation in the overall cohort. However, for patients presenting with acute limb ischemia OPAR was associated with 72% lower risk of 2-year major amputation compared to EPAR (aHR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.10-0.83; P = 0.021). CONCLUSIONS: In this multi-institutional observational study of symptomatic popliteal aneurysms, OPAR was associated with significantly better amputation free and overall survival compared to EPAR. For patients with acute limb ischemia, OPAR was associated with reduced risk of amputation. These findings suggest that OPAR may be superior to EPAR in the treatment of symptomatic PAA. A consideration of OPAR as first line definitive treatment for symptomatic PAA patients who are good surgical candidates is suggested.

Female sex portends increased risk of major amputation following surgical repair of symptomatic popliteal artery aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: Popliteal artery aneurysms (PAAs) are rare in women, with only ∼5% of all PAAs occurring in women. The aim of the present study was to investigate whether sex disparities exist for patients treated with open PAA repair. METHODS: We reviewed all patients with PAAs who had undergone open PAA repair in the Vascular Quality Initiative from January 2010 to July 2021. Univariate analyses and multivariable logistic or Cox regression analyses controlling for potential confounders were performed. The study outcomes included primary patency, major amputation, overall survival, and amputation-free survival at 1 year. RESULTS: The study included 3807 adult patients, of whom 160 were women (4.2%). The female patients were younger (age, 66.1 years vs 68.3 years; P = .012) and less likely to have coronary artery disease (14.5% vs 23.4%; P = .009). However, the women were more likely to be taking aspirin (69.2% vs 60.4%; P = .019) and statins (67.8% vs 60.4%; P < .001) and to undergo repair for symptomatic disease (77.5% vs 64.1%; P = .001). No difference was found between the women and men in primary patency (95.2% vs 90.8%; P = .230) and overall survival (94.3% vs 96.1%; P = .270). Amputation-free survival was lower for women than for men (91.4% vs 95.3%; P = .033). This finding resulted from by lower freedom from major amputation for women (96.1% vs 98.9%; P = .010). After adjustment for confounders, no differences were found between the women and men regarding the loss of primary patency and all-cause mortality. For symptomatic PAAs, the risk of major amputation was threefold greater for women (adjusted hazard ratio, 3.09; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-9.06; P = .040), and the risk of the composite end point of major amputation or death was twofold higher for women than for men (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.97; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-3.79; P = .043). CONCLUSIONS: In our large national study of patients with PAAs, women were more likely to be treated for symptomatic PAAs. The risk of 1-year major amputation was threefold greater for women with symptomatic PAAs than for men with a similar presentation. Early recognition and treatment of PAAs in women before the PAAs have become symptomatic could optimize limb salvage outcomes in women.

Association of body mass index with outcomes after thoracic endovascular aortic repair in the vascular quality initiative.

OBJECTIVE: Although several studies have evaluated the impact of obesity on outcomes after abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, literature examining this association in thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is sparse. Here, we use a multi-institutional, international database to assess the role of body mass index (BMI) on adverse outcomes in patients who underwent TEVAR for descending thoracic aortic aneurysms (DTAA) and type B dissections (TBD). METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients who underwent TEVAR for DTAA or TBD from August 2014 to August 2020 was performed. Patients who were underweight (BMI <18.5 kg/m2) or obese (BMI ≥30 kg/m2) were compared with those of normal weight (≥18.5 to <30 kg/m2). Adjustment for confounding was done with multivariable logistic regression or Cox proportional hazards regression as appropriate for studying postoperative or 1-year outcomes. Primary outcomes were 30-day and 1-year mortality. Other outcomes included any postoperative complication, stroke, and spinal cord ischemia. RESULTS: A total of 3423 participants were included in the study, of whom 3.3% (n = 113) were underweight, 65.9% (n = 2253) had normal weight, and 30.8% (n = 1053) were obese. Compared with normal weight, there was no significant difference in 30-day mortality in underweight patients (odds ratio [OR], 1.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80-4.14; P = .156). Obese patients who underwent TEVAR for TBD had a 2.7-fold increase in the odds of 30-day mortality compared with normal weight (OR, 2.67; 95% CI, 1.52-4.68; P = .001). Obese and normal weight patients with DTAA had equivalent odds of 30-day mortality (OR, 1.32; 95% CI, 0.79-2.23; P = .292). The adjusted hazard of 1-year mortality was 2-fold higher in underweight patients compared with normal weight (hazard ratio, 2.15; 95% CI, 1.41-3.29; P < .001), driven by a higher risk of mortality among patients with thoracic aortic aneurysm (OR, 2.62; 95% CI, 1.63-4.21; P < .001). There was no significant difference in 1-year mortality risk between normal weight and obesity in both DTAA (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.54-1.09; P = .146) and TBD (OR, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.85-1.86; P = .248). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, obese patients who underwent TEVAR for DTAA had comparable 30-day and 1-year mortality risk as normal weight individuals. Obese patients who underwent TEVAR for TBD demonstrated a 2.7-fold increase in the odds of 30-day mortality, but equivalent mortality risk as normal weight patients at 1 year. TEVAR represents a safe minimally invasive option for treatment of DTAA in obese patients. Future work should be directed toward minimizing perioperative mortality among patients with TBD to optimize TEVAR outcomes.

Risk calculator predicts 30-day mortality after thoracic endovascular aortic repair for intact descending thoracic aortic aneurysms in the Vascular Quality Initiative.

OBJECTIVE: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for descending thoracic aortic aneurysm (DTAA) is associated with high perioperative survival, although mortality is a possible outcome. However, no risk score has been developed to predict mortality after TEVAR for intact DTAA to aid in risk discussion and preoperative patient selection. Our objective was to use a multi-institutional database to develop a 30-day mortality risk calculator for TEVAR after DTAA repair. METHODS: The Vascular Quality Initiative database was queried for patients treated with TEVAR for intact DTAA between August 2014 and August 2020. Univariable and multivariable analyses aided in developing a 30-day mortality risk score. Internal validation was done with K-fold cross-validation and calibration curve analysis. RESULTS: Of 2141 patients included in the analysis, 90 (4.2%) died within 30 days after the procedure. Clinically relevant variables identified to be independently associated with 30-day mortality and therefore used to derive the predictive model included age 75 years or greater (odds ratio [OR], 2.27; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.50-3.44; P < .001), coronary artery disease (OR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.03-2.47; P = .036), American Society of Anesthesiologists class IV/V (OR, 2.39; 95% CI, 1.39-4.10; P = .002), urgent vs elective procedure (OR, 3.47; 95% CI, 1.90-6.33; P < .001), emergent vs elective procedure (OR, 5.27; 95% CI, 2.36-11.75; P < .001), prior carotid revascularization (OR, 3.24; 95% CI, 1.64-6.39; P = .001), and proximal landing zone <3 (OR, 2.51; 95% CI, 1.65-3.81; P < .001). The model showed an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.75. Internal validation demonstrated a bias-corrected area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.73 (95% CI, 0.66-0.79) and a calibration slope of 1.00 with a corresponding intercept of 0.00. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a novel clinically relevant risk prediction model to estimate 30-day mortality risk after TEVAR for DTAA. The TEVAR Mortality Risk Calculator provides useful prognostic information to guide patient selection and facilitate preoperative discussions and shared decision making. An easily accessible online version of the TEVAR Mortality Risk Score is available to facilitate ease of use.

Contemporary outcomes of concomitant suprainguinal bypass with infrainguinal revascularization procedures in patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia.

OBJECTIVE: Combined suprainguinal and infrainguinal revascularization is sometimes necessary in the treatment of patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI). However, data on outcomes of concomitant revascularization procedures are lacking. We studied the outcomes of patients with CLTI who underwent suprainguinal bypass (SIB) alone, SIB with concomitant infrainguinal bypass (IIB), and SIB with concomitant infrainguinal peripheral endovascular intervention (IIPVI). METHODS: We reviewed all patients in the Vascular Quality Initiative with CLTI who underwent SIB from January 2010 to June 2020. Logistic regression, Kaplan-Meier survival estimates, log-rank tests, and Cox regression were used to analyze outcomes. Outcomes were 30-day mortality, perioperative myocardial infarction, perioperative major amputation, 1-year amputation-free survival, and 5-year survival. RESULTS: Of 8037 patients included, 81.3% (n = 6537) underwent SIB alone, 9.7% (n = 783) underwent SIB+IIB, and 8.9% (n = 717) underwent SIB+IIPVI. The indication for surgery was rest pain in 5040 (62.5%) and tissue loss in 3031 (37.6%). There were no significant differences in 30-day mortality and perioperative myocardial infarction rates. However, there was 2.8-fold increased odds of perioperative major amputation in both SIB+IIPVI (odds ratio [OR], 2.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.30-5.88; P = .008) and SIB+IIB (OR, 2.79; 95% CI, 1.38-5.54; P = .004) among patients with rest pain as compared with SIB alone. Comparing SIB+IIPVI with SIB alone, there were no significant differences in 1-year freedom from amputation and amputation-free survival. SIB+IIPVI was associated with a 27% increased risk of 5-year mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 1.27; 95% CI, 1.03-1.55; P = .035). Compared with SIB alone, SIB+IIB was associated with 97% increased risk of 1-year major amputation among patients with rest pain (HR, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.06-3.69; P = .033), but a 47% decreased risk of 1-year major amputation or death for patients with tissue loss (HR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.37-0.78; P = .001). SIB+IIPVI, compared with SIB+IIB, was associated with a two-fold increased risk of 1-year major amputation or death (HR, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.04-2.23), P = .003) and a 52% increased risk of 5-year mortality (HR,1.52; 95% CI, 1.04-2.24; P = .032) among patients with tissue loss. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that SIB with concomitant infrainguinal revascularization in patients with rest pain is associated with an increased risk of amputation, whereas SIB+IIB in patients with tissue loss is associated with decreased risk of amputation or death. SIB+IIB outperformed SIB+IIPVI in patients with tissue loss. SIB with infrainguinal revascularization should be limited in patients with rest pain in line with current guidelines, but SIB+IIB may be preferred in patients with tissue loss.

Derivation of a Coronary Age Calculator Using Traditional Risk Factors and Coronary Artery Calcium: The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis.

Background The optimal method for communicating coronary heart disease (CHD) risk to individual patients is not yet clear. Recent research supports the concept of "coronary age" for more effective risk communication. We defined an individual's coronary age as the age at which an average healthy individual would have an equivalent estimated CHD risk as that calculated for the index individual, building on our previously validated MESA (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis) 10-year CHD Risk Score equations with and without coronary artery calcium (CAC). Methods and Results We derived a coronary age by (1) calculating the MESA 10-year CHD risk; (2) mathematically setting this equal to an equation describing risk of an average healthy MESA participant, as a function of age; and (3) solving for age. The risk discrimination of the resultant coronary age was compared with that of chronological age, the MESA CHD Risk Score, and CAC alone. Approximately 95% of coronary age values ranged from 30 years less to 30 years higher than chronological age. Although the mean chronological age of individuals experiencing CHD events compared with those free of events was 67.4 versus 61.8 years, the difference in coronary age including CAC was larger (80.6 versus 62.8 years). Coronary age with CAC had identical predictive ability to that of MESA CHD Risk Score and outperformed chronological age and CAC alone. Conclusions The newly derived coronary age is a convenient transformation of MESA CHD Risk, retaining very good risk discrimination. This easy-to-communicate tool will be available for patients and clinicians, potentially facilitating risk communication in routine care.

The association of estimated glomerular filtration rate with outcomes following infrainguinal bypass for peripheral arterial disease.

OBJECTIVE: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a recognized predictor of long-term survival, frequently coexisting with peripheral arterial disease (PAD). Estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) is a more accurate marker of renal function than creatinine. This study sought to determine the graded impact of CKD, defined by eGFR, on infrainguinal lower extremity bypass (LEB) outcomes. METHODS: This retrospective study examined 44,332 patients from the Vascular Quality Initiative database who underwent LEB between January 2003 and November 2019. The GFR was estimated using the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease equation. Multivariable logistic regression was used to study perioperative mortality and Kaplan-Meier survival estimation and multivariable Cox regression were used to evaluate 5-year mortality, 1-year major amputation, and major amputation/death. RESULTS: The 30-day mortality odds was increased for CKD 3 (odds ratio [OR], 1.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.32-1.91; P < .001) and CKD 5 (OR, 3.08; 95% CI, 2.45-3.87; P < .001) relative to CKD 1 to 2. Comparing CKD stages 3, 4, and 5 with CKD 1 and 2, there was a stepwise increase in the adjusted hazard of 5-year mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 1.18; 95% CI, 1.09-1.27; P < .001), (HR, 1.73; 95% CI; 1.47-2.03; P < .001) and (HR, 2.58; 95% CI, 2.33-3.84; P < .001), respectively. Although the risk of 1-year death or major amputation did not differ for CKD 3 compared with CKD 1, this was 50% higher for CKD 4 (HR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.26-1.78; P < .001) and doubled for CKD 5 (HR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.87-2.29; P < .001) compared with CKD 1 and 2. The adjusted HR for major amputation in 1 year was 0.81 (95% CI, 0.71-0.92; P = .002), 1.14 (95% CI, 0.84-1.54; P = .396) and 1.56 (95% CI,1.31-1.84; P < .001) for CKD 3, 4, and 5, respectively, compared with CKD 1 and 2. CONCLUSIONS: The estimated GFR is a useful predictor of postoperative mortality, overall survival, and/or amputation after LEB in patients with PAD. It should be considered in the preoperative risk-benefit analysis process to guide patient selection in the population with concomitant PAD and CKD being considered for LEB.

Impact of impaired ambulatory capacity on the outcomes of peripheral vascular interventions among patients with chronic limb-threating ischemia.

OBJECTIVE: Despite prior literature recommending against limb salvage in patients with poor functional status such as nonambulatory patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI), peripheral endovascular interventions continue to be carried out in this group of patients. Clinical outcomes following these interventions are, however, not well-characterized. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted on all patients treated for CLTI in the Vascular Quality Initiative from September 2016 to December 2019. Logistic regression, Kaplan-Meier survival estimates, log-rank tests, and Cox regression analyses were used as appropriate to study outcomes. The primary outcomes were 30-day mortality and 1-year amputation-free survival. The secondary outcomes were in-hospital death, postoperative complications, 1-year freedom from major amputation, and 2-year survival. RESULTS: Of the 49,807 patients studied, 28,469 (57.2%) were ambulatory, 15,148 (31.0%) were ambulatory with assistance, 5395 (10.8%) were wheelchair bound, and 525 (1.1%) were bedridden. There was a 2-fold increase in the odds of 30-day death in patients who were ambulatory with assistance (odds ratio [OR], 2.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.77-2.34; P < .001) and wheelchair-bound patients (OR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.74-2.51; P < .001), and a more than 6-fold increase in bedridden patients (OR, 6.28; 95% CI, 4.55-8.65; P < .001) compared with ambulatory patients. There was a significantly higher odds of postoperative complications in patients who were ambulatory with assistance or bedridden, but no difference with wheelchair-bound patients. Among ambulatory patients, the risks of major amputation and death within 1 year were only 10% and 12%, respectively, whereas that of bedridden patients were as high as 30% and 38%, respectively. A stepwise decrease in amputation-free survival from 81% with full ambulatory capacity to less than 50% (47.7%) in bedridden patients was observed. The risk of major amputation or death within 1 year was 35% higher for ambulatory with assistance (hazard ratio [HR], 1.35; 95% CI, 1.26-1.44; P < .001), 65% higher for wheelchair-bound (HR, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.51-1.79; P < .001) and 2.6-fold higher for bedridden (HR, 2.64; 95% CI, 2.17-3.21; P < .001) compared with ambulatory. A similar association was seen for 1-year freedom from major amputation and 2-year survival. CONCLUSIONS: Ambulatory impairment in patients with CLTI is associated with a significant increase in 30-day mortality and significant decrease in amputation-free survival after peripheral endovascular intervention. Bedridden patients had a 6-fold increase in the 30-day death rate, whereas their amputation-free survival dropped to less than 50% at 1 year. These risks should be considered during shared decision-making regarding management options for nonambulatory patients with CLTI.

Primary mechanism of stroke reduction in transcarotid artery revascularization is dynamic flow reversal.

OBJECTIVE: Recent studies have suggested that the low risk of stroke and death associated with transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) is partially attributable to a robust dynamic flow reversal system and the avoidance of the atherosclerotic aortic arch during stenting. However, the benefits of flow reversal compared with distal embolic protection (DEP) in reducing stroke or death in TCAR have not been studied. METHODS: All patients undergoing carotid artery stenting (CAS) via the transcarotid route with either dynamic flow reversal (TCAR) or DEP (TCAS-DEP) in the Vascular Quality Initiative from September 2016 to November 2019 were analyzed. Both multivariable logistic regression and nearest neighbor propensity score-matched analysis were performed to explore the differences in outcomes between the two procedures. The primary outcome was in-hospital stroke or death. The secondary outcomes were stroke, death, myocardial infarction (MI), and the composite of stroke, death, and MI. A secondary analysis was performed to compare transcarotid stenting with DEP vs transfemoral CAS with DEP to evaluate the effects of crossing the aortic arch. RESULTS: A total of 8426 patients were identified (TCAS-DEP, n = 287; 3.4%). TCAR was associated with a lower risk of in-hospital stroke or death (1.6% vs 5.2%; odds ratio [OR], 0.35; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.20-0.64; P = .001), stroke (1.4% vs 4.2%; OR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.20-0.68; P = .002), and stroke/death/MI (2.0% vs 5.2%; OR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.23-0.71; P = .001) compared with TCAS-DEP. Among the 274 pairs of patients identified with propensity score matching, TCAR was associated with a lower risk of stroke/death (1.1% vs 4.7%; risk ratio [RR], 0.23; 95% CI, 0.06-0.81; P = .021) and stroke (0.4% vs 4.0%; RR, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.01-0.70; P = .006) compared with TCAS-DEP but no differences in stroke/death/MI (1.8% vs 4.7%; RR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.15-1.02; P = .077). The secondary analysis found no differences in stroke between TCAS-DEP and transfemoral CAS with DEP (4.9% vs 3.7%; RR, 1.3; 95% CI, 0.36-1.63; P = .65). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with TCAS-DEP, TCAR was associated with a lower risk of perioperative stroke or death and stroke. This finding implies that dynamic flow reversal might provide better neuroprotection than does a distal embolic filter in reducing the perioperative risk of stroke. Avoiding the aortic arch did not confer any reduction in the stroke rate. The present findings serve to separate the clinical benefit of dynamic flow reversal from that of avoiding the aortic arch during TCAR.

Intravenous ketorolac is associated with reduced mortality and morbidity after open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVES: The role of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in aortic aneurysm disease has been debated. Animal studies demonstrated that intrathecal ketorolac reduces the inflammatory response associated with aortic clamping. However, no human-subject study evaluated this association. Therefore, we sought to explore the effects of ketorolac use in open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. METHODS: The Premier Healthcare Database (June 2009-March 2015) was inquired to capture patients who underwent open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair for non-ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm, identified via International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) codes. Intravenous ketorolac was coded as any or none. Outcomes were in-hospital mortality, cardiac, respiratory, renal, neurological, and hemorrhagic complications. Multivariable logistic regression coarsened exact matching followed by conditional fixed-effect regression modeling were performed. RESULTS: A total of 6394 patients were identified (ketorolac: 806; 12.6%). Patients who received ketorolac were younger and less likely to have hypertension (76.1% vs. 79.3%), diabetes mellitus (12.5% vs. 17.4%), or chronic kidney disease (8.3% vs. 21.4%; all p values ≤ .033). There was no significant difference in medication use including oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and malignant or musculoskeletal diseases. Mortality, respiratory, and renal complications were less prevalent with ketorolac (2.5% vs. 4.9%, 25.2% vs. 34.6%, 10.0% vs. 21.1%; p ≤ .002). Ketorolac was associated with lower adjusted odds for those events: 0.58 (0.36-0.93), 0.53 (0.42-0.68), and 0.72 (0.60-0.86), respectively (all p values ≤ .025). There was no association with neurological, cardiac, or hemorrhagic complications. The findings were replicated by coarsened exact matching analysis. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated 40% mortality reduction with intravenous ketorolac following open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. The survival benefit could be due to its anti-inflammatory and opioid-sparing properties. This is evident by its protective effect against respiratory outcomes. The lack of association with the classical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs-related cardiac and hemorrhagic complication could be attributable to the short-term use of ketorolac compared with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs chronic use.

Thromboembolism risk of COVID-19 is high and associated with a higher risk of mortality: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Studies have suggested that there is increased risk of thromboembolism (TE) associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, overall arterial and venous TE rates of COVID-19 and effect of TE on COVID-19 mortality is unknown. METHODS: We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies evaluating TE in COVID-19. We searched PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase for studies published up to June 12, 2020. Random effects models were used to produce summary TE rates and odds ratios (OR) of mortality in COVID-19 patients with TE compared to those without TE. Heterogeneity was quantified with I 2 . FINDINGS: Of 425 studies identified, 42 studies enrolling 8271 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Overall venous TE rate was 21% (95% CI:17-26%): ICU, 31% (95% CI: 23-39%). Overall deep vein thrombosis rate was 20% (95% CI: 13-28%): ICU, 28% (95% CI: 16-41%); postmortem, 35% (95% CI:15-57%). Overall pulmonary embolism rate was 13% (95% CI: 11-16%): ICU, 19% (95% CI:14-25%); postmortem, 22% (95% CI:16-28%). Overall arterial TE rate was 2% (95% CI: 1-4%): ICU, 5% (95%CI: 3-7%). Pooled mortality rate among patients with TE was 23% (95%CI:14-32%) and 13% (95% CI:6-22%) among patients without TE. The pooled odds of mortality were 74% higher among patients who developed TE compared to those who did not (OR, 1.74; 95%CI, 1.01-2.98; P = 0.04). INTERPRETATION: TE rates of COVID-19 are high and associated with higher risk of death. Robust evidence from ongoing clinical trials is needed to determine the impact of thromboprophylaxis on TE and mortality risk of COVID-19. FUNDING: None.

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Transcarotid Artery Revascularization with Dynamic Flow Reversal Versus Transfemoral Carotid Artery Stenting and Carotid Endarterectomy.

BACKGROUND: Transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TFCAS) was introduced as a less invasive option for carotid revascularization in patients at high risk for complications from carotid endarterectomy (CEA). The increased perioperative stroke and death risk of TFCAS has however prevented TFCAS from widespread acceptance as an alternative to CEA in high-risk patients. Recent research suggests that transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) may be associated with a low stroke and death risk and potentially meet the needs of patients at high surgical risk. We aimed to estimate the 30-day risk of stroke or death of TCAR and compare it to TFCAS and CEA. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Scopus for studies of patients treated with TCAR. Meta-analysis was conducted when appropriate. A logistic-normal random-effects model with logit transformation was used to estimate the pooled event rates after TCAR. Pooled Mantel-Haenszel odds ratios (ORs) of events comparing TCAR to TFCAS and CEA were calculated using a fixed-effects model. Heterogeneity among studies was quantified with the chi-squared statistic of the likelihood ratio (LR) test that compares the random-effects and fixed-effects models. RESULTS: Nine nonrandomized studies evaluating 4012 patients who underwent TCAR were included. The overall 30-day risks after TCAR were stroke/death, 1.89% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.50, 2.37); stroke, 1.34% (95% CI: 1.02,1.75); death, 0.76% (95% CI: 0.56, 1.08); myocardial infarction (MI), 0.60% (95% CI: 0.23, 1.59); stroke/death/MI, 2.20% (95% CI: 1.31, 3.69); cranial nerve injury (CNI), 0.31% (95% CI: 0.12, 0.83). The failure rate of TCAR was 1.27% (95% CI: 0.32, 4.92). Two nonrandomized studies suggested that TCAR was associated with lower risk of stroke and death as compared with TFCAS (1.33% vs. 2.55%, OR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.36, 0.74 and 0.76% vs. 1.46%, OR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.32, 0.84, respectively). Four nonrandomized studies suggested that TCAR was associated with a lower risk of CNI (0.54% and 1.84%, OR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.36, 0.74) than CEA, but no statistically significant difference in the 30-day risk of stroke, stroke/death, or stroke/death/MI. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing TCAR with dynamic flow reversal for carotid stenosis the 30-day risk of stroke or death was low. The perioperative stroke/death rate of TCAR was similar to that of CEA while CNI risk was lower. Larger prospective studies are needed to account for confounding factors and provide higher certainty.

Racial and Gender Disparity in Aortoiliac Disease Open Revascularization Procedures.

BACKGROUND: The impact of race and gender on surgical outcomes has been studied in infrainguinal revascularization for peripheral arterial disease. The aim of this study is to explore how race and gender affect the outcomes of suprainguinal bypass (SIB) for aortoiliac occlusive disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients who underwent SIB were identified from the procedure-targeted National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data set (2011-2016). Patients were stratified into four groups: nonblack males, black males (BM), nonblack females, and black females (BF). Primary outcomes were 30-d major adverse cardiac events, a composite of myocardial infarction, stroke, or death; postoperative bleeding requiring transfusion or intervention; major amputation and prolonged length of stay (>10 d). Predictors of outcomes were determined by multivariable logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: About 5044 patients were identified. BM were younger, more likely to be smokers, less likely to be on antiplatelet drug or statin, and to receive elective SIB (all P ≤ 0.01). BFs were more likely to be diabetic and functionally dependent (all P ≤ 0.02). Major adverse cardiac events were not significantly different among all groups. BM had a threefold higher risk of amputation (adjusted odds ratio [OR] [95% confidence interval (95% CI)], 3.10 [1.50-6.43]; P < 0.002). Female gender was associated with bleeding in both races, that association was more drastic in BF (OR [95% CI], 2.43 [1.63-3.60]; P < 0.0001), whereas nonblack females (OR [95% CI], 1.46 [1.19-1.80]; P < 0.0001). BF had higher odds of prolonged length of stay (OR [95% CI]: 1.62 [1.08-2.42]; P < 0.019). CONCLUSIONS: In this large retrospective study, we demonstrated the racial and gender disparity in SIB outcomes. BM had more than threefold increase in amputation risk as compared with nonblack males. Severe bleeding risk was more than doubled in BF. Race and gender consideration is warranted in risk assessment when patients are selected for aortoiliac disease revascularization, which in turn necessitate preoperative risk modification and optimization in addition to enhancing their access to primary preventive care measures.