Why selective screening for asymptomatic carotid stenosis is currently appropriate: a special report.

INTRODUCTION: Two of the main reasons recent guidelines do not recommend routine population-wide screening programs for asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis (AsxCS) is that screening could lead to an increase of carotid revascularization procedures and that such mass screening programs may not be cost-effective. Nevertheless, selective screening for AsxCS could have several benefits. This article presents the rationale for such a program. AREAS COVERED: The benefits of selective screening for AsxCS include early recognition of AsxCS allowing timely initiation of preventive measures to reduce future myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, cardiac death and cardiovascular (CV) event rates. EXPERT OPINION: Mass screening programs for AsxCS are neither clinically effective nor cost-effective. Nevertheless, targeted screening of populations at high risk for AsxCS provides an opportunity to identify these individuals earlier rather than later and to initiate a number of lifestyle measures, risk factor modifications, and intensive medical therapy in order to prevent future strokes and CV events. For patients at 'higher risk of stroke' on best medical treatment, a prophylactic carotid intervention may be considered.

Recent advances and controversial issues in the optimal management of asymptomatic carotid stenosis.

OBJECTIVE: The optimal management of patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis (AsxCS) is enduringly controversial. We updated our 2021 Expert Review and Position Statement, focusing on recent advances in the diagnosis and management of patients with AsxCS. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was performed up to August 1, 2023, using PubMed/PubMed Central, EMBASE and Scopus. The following keywords were used in various combinations: "asymptomatic carotid stenosis," "carotid endarterectomy" (CEA), "carotid artery stenting" (CAS), and "transcarotid artery revascularization" (TCAR). Areas covered included (i) improvements in best medical treatment (BMT) for patients with AsxCS and declining stroke risk, (ii) technological advances in surgical/endovascular skills/techniques and outcomes, (iii) risk factors, clinical/imaging characteristics and risk prediction models for the identification of high-risk AsxCS patient subgroups, and (iv) the association between cognitive dysfunction and AsxCS. RESULTS: BMT is essential for all patients with AsxCS, regardless of whether they will eventually be offered CEA, CAS, or TCAR. Specific patient subgroups at high risk for stroke despite BMT should be considered for a carotid revascularization procedure. These patients include those with severe (≥80%) AsxCS, transcranial Doppler-detected microemboli, plaque echolucency on Duplex ultrasound examination, silent infarcts on brain computed tomography or magnetic resonance angiography scans, decreased cerebrovascular reserve, increased size of juxtaluminal hypoechoic area, AsxCS progression, carotid plaque ulceration, and intraplaque hemorrhage. Treatment of patients with AsxCS should be individualized, taking into consideration individual patient preferences and needs, clinical and imaging characteristics, and cultural, ethnic, and social factors. Solid evidence supporting or refuting an association between AsxCS and cognitive dysfunction is lacking. CONCLUSIONS: The optimal management of patients with AsxCS should include BMT for all individuals and a prophylactic carotid revascularization procedure (CEA, CAS, or TCAR) for some asymptomatic patient subgroups, additionally taking into consideration individual patient needs and preference, clinical and imaging characteristics, social and cultural factors, and the available stroke risk prediction models. Future studies should investigate the association between AsxCS with cognitive function and the role of carotid revascularization procedures in the progression or reversal of cognitive dysfunction.

An international, multispecialty, expert-based Delphi Consensus document on controversial issues in the management of patients with asymptomatic and symptomatic carotid stenosis.

OBJECTIVE: Despite the publication of various national/international guidelines, several questions concerning the management of patients with asymptomatic (AsxCS) and symptomatic (SxCS) carotid stenosis remain unanswered. The aim of this international, multi-specialty, expert-based Delphi Consensus document was to address these issues to help clinicians make decisions when guidelines are unclear. METHODS: Fourteen controversial topics were identified. A three-round Delphi Consensus process was performed including 61 experts. The aim of Round 1 was to investigate the differing views and opinions regarding these unresolved topics. In Round 2, clarifications were asked from each participant. In Round 3, the questionnaire was resent to all participants for their final vote. Consensus was reached when ≥75% of experts agreed on a specific response. RESULTS: Most experts agreed that: (1) the current periprocedural/in-hospital stroke/death thresholds for performing a carotid intervention should be lowered from 6% to 4% in patients with SxCS and from 3% to 2% in patients with AsxCS; (2) the time threshold for a patient being considered "recently symptomatic" should be reduced from the current definition of "6 months" to 3 months or less; (3) 80% to 99% AsxCS carries a higher risk of stroke compared with 60% to 79% AsxCS; (4) factors beyond the grade of stenosis and symptoms should be added to the indications for revascularization in AsxCS patients (eg, plaque features of vulnerability and silent infarctions on brain computed tomography scans); and (5) shunting should be used selectively, rather than always or never. Consensus could not be reached on the remaining topics due to conflicting, inadequate, or controversial evidence. CONCLUSIONS: The present international, multi-specialty expert-based Delphi Consensus document attempted to provide responses to several unanswered/unresolved issues. However, consensus could not be achieved on some topics, highlighting areas requiring future research.

Pseudoaneurysm temporary embolization as a new method for the management of catheter-related complication.

A new minimally invasive method for the management of catheter-related pseudoaneurysms (PSAs) using percutaneous temporary guidewire embolization (TGE) is presented. We performed percutaneous insertion of a flexible 0.018-in. guidewire into the PSA cavity under ultrasound guidance. Once thrombosis of the PSA cavity was achieved, the guidewire was removed. In all seven cases, TGE was technically feasible and achieved complete thrombosis of the PSA. The time required for PSA thrombosis from insertion to removal of the guidewire ranged from 5 to 40 minutes. TGE is a highly effective, safe, and minimally invasive treatment of PSA.

Asymptomatic carotid stenosis and cognitive impairment.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this review was to assess the evidence supporting an association between asymptomatic carotid stenosis (ACS) with impaired cognitive function due to chronic cerebral hypoperfusion and/or silent cerebral embolization. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: PubMed/Medline, Embase and the Cochrane databases were searched up to December 1, 2022 to identify studies focusing on the association between ACS and cognitive function, as well as the mechanisms involved. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: A total of 49 studies were identified. The evidence supports an association between ACS and progressive cognitive deterioration. The mechanisms involved in the cognitive decline associated with ACS include cerebral hypoperfusion and silent cerebral embolization. Irrespective of the mechanism involved, severe ACS is associated with a progressive decline in several aspects of cognitive function, including global cognition, memory and executive function. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with ACS are at increased risk of developing a progressive decline in their cognitive function. The evidence from the present systematic review suggests that it may be inappropriate to consider ACS patients developing cognitive dysfunction as "asymptomatic". Besides stroke, myocardial infarction and death rates, future studies should include evaluation of cognitive function as part of their outcomes.

Why do guidelines recommend screening for abdominal aortic aneurysms, but not for asymptomatic carotid stenosis? A plea for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines do not recommend screening for asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis (AsxCS). The rationale behind this recommendation is that detection of AsxCS may lead to an unnecessary carotid intervention. In contrast, screening for abdominal aortic aneurysms is strongly recommended. METHODS: A critical analysis of the literature was performed to evaluate the implications of detecting AsxCS. RESULTS: Patients with AsxCS are at high risk for future stroke, myocardial infarction and vascular death. Population-wide screening for AsxCS should not be recommended. Additionally, screening of high-risk individuals for AsxCS with the purpose of identifying candidates for a carotid intervention is inappropriate. Instead, selective screening for AsxCS should be considered and should be viewed as an opportunity to identify individuals at high risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and future cardiovascular events for the timely initiation of intensive medical therapy and risk factor modification. CONCLUSIONS: Although mass screening should not be recommended, there are several arguments suggesting that selective screening for AsxCS should be considered. The rationale supporting such selective screening is to optimize risk factor control and to initiate intensive medical therapy for prevention of future cardiovascular events, rather than to identify candidates for an intervention.

Benefits and drawbacks of statins and non-statin lipid lowering agents in carotid artery disease.

International guidelines strongly recommend statins alone or in combination with other lipid-lowering agents to lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels for patients with asymptomatic/symptomatic carotid stenosis (AsxCS/SCS). Lowering LDL-C levels is associated with significant reductions in transient ischemic attack, stroke, cardiovascular (CV) event and death rates. The aim of this multi-disciplinary overview is to summarize the benefits and risks associated with lowering LDL-C with statins or non-statin medications for Asx/SCS patients. The cerebrovascular and CV beneficial effects associated with statins, proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors and other non-statin lipid-lowering agents (e.g. fibrates, ezetimibe) are reviewed. The use of statins and PCSK9 inhibitors is associated with several beneficial effects for Asx/SCS patients, including carotid plaque stabilization and reduction of stroke rates. Ezetimibe and fibrates are associated with smaller reductions in stroke rates. The side-effects resulting from statin and PCSK9 inhibitor use are also highlighted. The benefits associated with lowering LDL-C with statins or non-statin lipid lowering agents (e.g. PCSK9 inhibitors) outweigh the risks and potential side-effects. Irrespective of their LDL-C levels, all Asx/SCS patients should receive high-dose statin treatment±ezetimibe or PCSK9 inhibitors for reduction not only of LDL-C levels, but also of stroke, cardiovascular mortality and coronary event rates.

Comparison of Recent Practice Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis.

Despite the publication of several national/international guidelines, the optimal management of patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis (AsxCS) remains controversial. This article compares 3 recently released guidelines (the 2020 German-Austrian, the 2021 European Stroke Organization [ESO], and the 2021 Society for Vascular Surgery [SVS] guidelines) vs the 2017 European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) guidelines regarding the optimal management of AsxCS patients.The 2017 ESVS guidelines defined specific imaging/clinical parameters that may identify patient subgroups at high future stroke risk and recommended that carotid endarterectomy (CEA) should or carotid artery stenting (CAS) may be considered for these individuals. The 2020 German-Austrian guidelines provided similar recommendations with the 2017 ESVS Guidelines. The 2021 ESO Guidelines also recommended CEA for AsxCS patients at high risk for stroke on best medical treatment (BMT), but recommended against routine use of CAS in these patients. Finally, the SVS guidelines provided a strong recommendation for CEA+BMT vs BMT alone for low-surgical risk patients with >70% AsxCS. Thus, the ESVS, German-Austrian, and ESO guidelines concurred that all AsxCS patients should receive risk factor modification and BMT, but CEA should or CAS may also be considered for certain AsxCS patient subgroups at high risk for future ipsilateral ischemic stroke.

Editor's Choice - Update of the European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) 2020 Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Management of Acute Limb Ischaemia in Light of the COVID-19 Pandemic, Based on a Scoping Review of the Literature.

OBJECTIVE: To perform a scoping review of how patients with COVID-19 are affected by acute limb ischaemia (ALI) and evaluate the recommendations of the 2020 ESVS ALI Guidelines for these patients. METHODS: Research questions were defined, and a systematic literature search was performed following the PRISMA guidelines. Abstracts and unpublished literature were not included. The definition of ALI in this review is in accordance with the ESVS guidelines. RESULTS: Most identified papers were case reports or case series, although population based data and data from randomised controlled trials were also identified. In total, 114 unique and relevant papers were retrieved. Data were conflicting concerning whether the incidence of ALI increased, or remained unchanged, during the pandemic. Case reports and series reported ALI in patients who were younger and healthier than usual, with a greater proportion affecting the upper limb. Whether or not this is coincidental remains uncertain. The proportion of men/women affected seems unchanged. Most reported cases were in hospitalised patients with severe COVID-19. Patients with ALI as their first manifestation of COVID-19 were reported. Patients with ALI have a worse outcome if they have a simultaneous COVID-19 infection. High levels of D-dimer may predict the occurrence of arterial thromboembolic events in patients with COVID-19. Heparin resistance was observed. Anticoagulation should be given to hospitalised COVID-19 patients in prophylactic dosage. Most of the treatment recommendations from the ESVS Guidelines remained relevant, but the following were modified regarding patients with COVID-19 and ALI: 1) CTA imaging before revascularisation should include the entire aorta and iliac arteries; 2) there should be a high index of suspicion, early testing for COVID-19 infection and protective measures are advised; and 3) there should be preferential use of local or locoregional anaesthesia during revascularisation. CONCLUSION: Although the epidemiology of ALI has changed during the pandemic, the recommendations of the ESVS ALI Guidelines remain valid. The above mentioned minor modifications should be considered in patients with COVID-19 and ALI.

Dataset of the vascular e-Learning during the COVID-19 pandemic (EL-COVID) survey.

This dataset supports the findings of the vascular e-Learning during the COVID-19 pandemic survey (the EL-COVID survey). The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) of the European Union was taken into consideration in all steps of data handling. The survey was approved by the institutional ethics committee of the Primary Investigator and an online English survey consisting of 18 questions was developed ad-hoc. A bilingual English-Mandarin version of the questionnaire was developed according to the instructions of the Chinese Medical Association in order to be used in mainland People's Republic of China. Differences between the two questionnaires were minor and did affect the process of data collection. Both questionnaires were hosted online. The EL-COVID survey was advertised through major social media. All national and regional contributors contacted their respective colleagues through direct messaging on social media or by email. Eight national societies or groups supported the dissemination of the EL-COVID survey. The data provided demographics information of the EL-COVID participants and an insight on the level of difficulty in accessing or citing previously attended online activities and whether participants were keen on citing these activities in their Curricula Vitae. A categorization of additional comments made by the participants are also based on the data. The survey responses were filtered, anonymized and submitted to descriptive analysis of percentage.

Vascular e-Learning During the COVID-19 Pandemic: The EL-COVID Survey.

BACKGROUND: The corona virus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has radically changed the possibilities for vascular surgeons and trainees to exchange knowledge and experience. The aim of the present survey is to inventorize the e-learning needs of vascular surgeons and trainees as well as the strengths and weaknesses of vascular e-Learning. METHODS: An online survey consisting of 18 questions was created in English, with a separate bilingual English-Mandarin version. The survey was dispersed to vascular surgeons and trainees worldwide through social media and via direct messaging from June 15, 2020 to October 15, 2020. RESULTS: Eight hundred and fifty-six records from 84 different countries could be included. Most participants attended several online activities (>4: n = 461, 54%; 2-4: n = 300, 35%; 1: n = 95, 11%) and evaluated online activities as positive or very positive (84.7%). In deciding upon participation, the topic of the activity was most important (n = 440, 51.4%), followed by the reputation of the presenter or the panel (n = 178, 20.8%), but not necessarily receiving accreditation or certification (n = 52, 6.1%). The survey identified several shortcomings in vascular e-Learning during the pandemic: limited possibility to attend due to lack of time and increased workload (n = 432, 50.5%), no protected/allocated time (n = 488, 57%) and no accreditation or certification, while technical shortcomings were only a minor problem (n = 25, 2.9%). CONCLUSIONS: During the COVID-19 pandemic vascular e-Learning has been used frequently and was appreciated by vascular professionals from around the globe. The survey identified strengths and weaknesses in current e-Learning that can be used to further improve online learning in vascular surgery.

Effect of Rivaroxaban and Aspirin in Patients With Peripheral Artery Disease Undergoing Surgical Revascularization: Insights From the VOYAGER PAD Trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with peripheral artery disease requiring lower extremity revascularization (LER) are at high risk of adverse limb and cardiovascular events. The VOYAGER PAD trial (Vascular Outcomes Study of ASA [Acetylsalicylic Acid] Along With Rivaroxaban in Endovascular or Surgical Limb Revascularization for PAD) demonstrated that rivaroxaban significantly reduced this risk. The efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban has not been described in patients who underwent surgical LER. METHODS: The VOYAGER PAD trial randomized patients with peripheral artery disease after surgical and endovascular LER to rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily plus aspirin or matching placebo plus aspirin and followed for a median of 28 months. The primary end point was a composite of acute limb ischemia, major vascular amputation, myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, or cardiovascular death. The principal safety outcome was Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction major bleeding. International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis bleeding was a secondary safety outcome. All efficacy and safety outcomes were adjudicated by a blinded independent committee. RESULTS: Of the 6564 randomized, 2185 (33%) underwent surgical LER and 4379 (67%) endovascular. Compared with placebo, rivaroxaban reduced the primary end point consistently regardless of LER method (P-interaction, 0.43). After surgical LER, the primary efficacy outcome occurred in 199 (18.4%) patients in the rivaroxaban group and 242 (22.0%) patients in the placebo group with a cumulative incidence at 3 years of 19.7% and 23.9%, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.67-0.98]; P=0.026). In the overall trial, Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction major bleeding and International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis major bleeding were increased with rivaroxaban. There was no heterogeneity for Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction major bleeding (P-interaction, 0.17) or International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis major bleeding (P-interaction, 0.73) on the basis of the LER approach. After surgical LER, the principal safety outcome occurred in 11 (1.0%) patients in the rivaroxaban group and 13 (1.2%) patients in the placebo group; 3-year cumulative incidence was 1.3% and 1.4%, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.39-1.95]; P=0.75) Among surgical patients, the composite of fatal bleeding or intracranial hemorrhage (P=0.95) and postprocedural bleeding requiring intervention (P=0.93) was not significantly increased. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of rivaroxaban is associated with a benefit in patients who underwent surgical LER. Although bleeding was increased with rivaroxaban plus aspirin, the incidence was low, with no significant increase in fatal bleeding, intracranial hemorrhage, or postprocedural bleeds requiring intervention. Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique Identifier: NCT02504216.

Editor's Choice - International Variations and Sex Disparities in the Treatment of Peripheral Arterial Occlusive Disease: A Report from VASCUNET and the International Consortium of Vascular Registries.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine sex specific differences in the invasive treatment of symptomatic peripheral arterial occlusive disease (PAOD) between member states participating in the VASCUNET and International Consortium of Vascular Registries. METHODS: Data on open surgical revascularisation and peripheral vascular intervention (PVI) of symptomatic PAOD from 2010 to 2017 were collected from population based administrative and registry data from 11 countries. Differences in age, sex, indication, and invasive treatment modality were analysed. RESULTS: Data from 11 countries covering 671 million inhabitants and 1 164 497 hospitalisations (40% women, mean age 72 years, 49% with intermittent claudication, 54% treated with PVI) in Europe (including Russia), North America, Australia, and New Zealand were included. Patient selection and treatment modality varied widely for the proportion of female patients (23% in Portugal and 46% in Sweden), the proportion of patients with claudication (6% in Italy and 69% in Russia), patients' mean age (70 years in the USA and 76 years in Italy), the proportion of octogenarians (8% in Russia and 33% in Sweden), and the proportion of PVI (24% in Russia and 88% in Italy). Numerous differences between females and males were observed in regard to patient age (72 vs. 70 years), the proportion of octogenarians (28% vs. 15%), proportion of patients with claudication (45% vs. 51%), proportion of PVI (57% vs. 51%), and length of hospital stay (7 days vs. 6 days). CONCLUSION: Remarkable differences regarding the proportion of peripheral vascular interventions, patients with claudication, and octogenarians were seen across countries and sexes. Future studies should address the underlying reasons for this, including the impact of national societal guidelines, reimbursement, and differences in health maintenance.

WITHDRAWN: Nikolai Leontyevich Volodos: The Person Behind the Greatest Innovation in Aortic Surgery.

This article has been withdrawn at the request of the author(s) and/or editor. The Publisher apologizes for any inconvenience this may cause. The full Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal can be found at https://www.elsevier.com/about/our-business/policies/article-withdrawal.