Vascular and Endovascular Surgery

The outcomes of carotid surgery are commonly evaluated using parameters such as mortality and stroke. The importance of these parameters is based on doctors’ and scientific perspectives. Presently, patient centered health care aims to value the evaluation from patients’ perspective, mostly using Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs). The true significance of outcomes of carotid surgery that matter most to the patients is largely unknown. The aim of this study is to identify and verify the patients’ perspective on carotid surgery for patients with a symptomatic and significant carotid stenosis.

An exploratory semi-structured focus group discussion will be used, as a quality research method. Three groups consisting of 8 patients (n = 24), who underwent the carotid endarterectomy because of a significant and symptomatic stenosis of the internal carotid artery, will be enrolled. If data saturation is not reached, the sample size will be expanded. An expert medical psychologist will lead the focus group discussions. The interviews will be recorded, transcribed ‘verbatim’ and analyzed after each session. Items valuable to patients regarding their surgery and recovery will be discussed. This protocol will be published prior to the start of the Focus Group Discussion.

Patients’ perspective on outcomes regarding their carotid surgery will be explored and tried to be identified. The results of the focus group discussions may fuel the ongoing global discussion on improving evidence based and patient reported outcome measures and will help the clinical physician to ‘understand’ their patients better. Focus group discussions may aid in the purpose of verification of PROs and PROMs.

Chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) is mostly caused by arteriosclerosis, but is sometimes due to connective tissue disease. However, there is a limited knowledge of clinical outcomes of patients with CLTI with connective tissue disease. The objective of the study was to assess outcomes after distal bypass in these patients using global vascular guidelines.

Data from distal bypasses performed for CLTI at a single center from 2014 to 2023 were evaluated retrospectively. Clinical outcomes after distal bypass were compared for patients with CLTI with arteriosclerosis (AS group) and those with connective tissue disease (CD group). The primary endpoints were limb salvage and wound healing.

Of the 282 distal bypasses performed for 222 patients with CLTI, 22 were conducted for 21 patients with connective tissue disease (CD group). The connective tissue disease was progressive systemic scleroderma (n = 11 patients), pemphigoid diseases (n = 2), polyarteritis nodosa (n = 2), rheumatoid arthritis (n = 2), and others (n = 4). Compared with the AS group, the CD group included more females (P = .007) and had greater oral steroid use (P < .001) and a higher Global Limb Anatomical Staging System (GLASS) inframalleolar (IM) modifier P2 (P < .001). The mean follow-up period of the whole cohort was 27 ± 22 months with no significant difference between the groups (P = .25), and 22 limbs required major amputation during this period. The 2-year limb salvage rate was significantly lower in the CD group compared to the AS group (75% vs 94%, P = .020). Wound healing was achieved in 220 (78%) limbs, and the 12-month wound healing rate was significantly lower in the CD group (52% vs 86%, P = .006).

The low 2-year limb salvage and 12-month wound healing rates in patients with CLTI with connective tissue disease indicate that distal bypass may be challenging in these patients.

We aimed to investigate the prognostic value of the combined arteritis damage score (CARDS) in Takayasu arteritis (TAK) patients to predict the need for biologic treatment at diagnosis and the possible contribution of wall thickness (WT).

Blind evaluation of MRA/CTA at the time of diagnosis was performed by a reader rheumatologist (RR) and an interventional radiologist (RIR). The CARDS damage score for 21 arterial regions was assessed as normal, mild or moderate/severe stenosis, occclusion or aneursym/dilatation. Additionally, WT was scored for all regions as present or absent. A modified CARDS (mCARDS) was calculated as the sum of CARDS and the number of WT areas.

According to follow-up treatment, 10 patients with non-biologic treatment (non-BT) (F/M:8/2, median age 37.5 years) and 15 patients with biologic treatment (BT) (F/M:13/2, median age 30 years) were included. Indian Takatasu Arteritis Score (ITAS), CRP, and ESR levels were similar in both groups. CARDS (1.4 (0-7.2) vs 4.5 (.6-19), P: .003), WT (1.5 (0-8) vs 7 (1-21), P < .001), and mCARDS (4 (0-14.2) vs 11.4 (1.6-40), P < .001) scores were significantly higher in the BT group compared to nonBT group. Cohen’s kappa coefficient between RR and RIR for WT was .99 with 99.6% aggrement, and CARDS was .98 with 99.6% agreement. The AUC values for CARDS, WT, and mCARDS scores were .748 (.605-.892), .837 (.723-.950), and .847 (.735-.958), respectively, and P value was <.0001.

The prediction of prognosis and biologic treatment need at TAK diagnosis using non-invasive angiographic images can improve outcomes and prompt closer follow-up. The combination of CARDS and WT as mCARDS achieved the highest sensitivity and specificity, and all scores appear useful for predicting prognosis.

In recent years, Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR) has become a primary modality of therapy in moderate-high risk patients with symptomatic aortic stenosis. Although clinicians remain vigilant about screening for both aortic stenosis, many patients still, nevertheless, often present only when they are symptomatic. Unfortunately, when isolated TAVR is performed in the context of hostile aortic pathology, it has been reported that patients suffer from higher rates of complications such as rupture, dissection, or death post-operatively.

To explore the utility of a simultaneous TAVR and endovascular aortic repair in addressing symptomatic aortic stenosis in challenging patients with hostile aortic pathology.

Retrospective case series within a tertiary care hospital between May 2017 and December 2023.

A total of 11 patients underwent simultaneous endovascular aortic repair and TAVR. TAVR was performed first in 9/11 (82%) of the procedures while endovascular aortic repair was performed first in 2/11 procedures (18%). The median age was 84 years old (IQR = 77-86 years old). The median LOS was 3 days (IQR = 2-10 days). The median procedure time was 155 minutes (IQR = 111-202 minutes) and the median contrast amount was 100 CC (IQR = 65-139 CC). 2 patients (18%) experienced post-operative complications. Both of these patients required re-intervention. This cohort of patients did not experience any mortality at 30 days related to pertinent complications or adverse MACE events. All patients were transferred to the PACU and ultimately discharged home.

Extending TAVR eligibility to high-risk patients with hostile aortic pathology through the implementation of simultaneous endovascular aortic repair, performed via the same access site, is an effective strategy for management of symptomatic aortic stenosis in the context of extensive cardiovascular co-morbidities.

Endovascular infra-renal abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) has proven to be an effective, less invasive alternative to open aortic aneurysm repair with decreased 30-day mortality. Historically, urinary drainage catheters were routinely placed preoperatively before EVAR in our institution. A shift to reduced catheter placement has occurred in conjunction with percutaneous EVARs becoming more routine. Urethral catheterization carries risk of infection (UTI), urinary retention and prostatic trauma inducing hematuria. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether avoidance of urinary catheter placement during EVAR is an effective practice to reduce cost and morbidity.

This was a single-institution, retrospective review of 177 consecutive patients who underwent elective infrarenal EVAR. Ruptured aneurysms and emergent EVAR were excluded. The study end points were postoperative UTI, urinary retention, length of stay, and readmission within 30 days. Univariable analysis was performed for these four outcomes in patients with (N = 92 and without (N = 65) preoperative urinary catheter placement. A more expansive multivariable investigation for risk of urinary retention following EVAR was conducted with binary logistic regression with co-variates including age, sex, femoral cutdown, estimated blood loss (EBL), urinary catheter, congestive heart failure, diabetes, and postoperative urinary retention as co-variates.

Patients who had a Urinary catheter placed had an over two fold higher event rate of urinary retention (10.9% vs 4.6%) This urinary retention trend lacked power to reach significance (OR 2.52 (.665-9.55). Placement of urinary catheter also had a strong trend towards increased rate of UTI but lacking power for significance (7.6% vs 3.10%, OR 1.96 (.556-6.57). There was no difference with or without urinary catheter placement regarding 30-day readmission (yes catheter 7.6% vs no catheter 6.2%, P = .725), or length of stay (yes catheter 2.13 days vs no catheter 1.74 days, P = .723). Urinary retention was significantly associated with the development of a UTI with 23% of patients who had retention developing UTI compared with 4.2% of patients without retention developing UTI (adjusted odds ratio = 17.98, P = .019). Increased blood loss (P = .027) was also associated with increased rate of UTI on multivariable analysis.

Avoidance of preoperative urinary catheter placement displays a trend towards avoiding urinary retention and UTI. Patients who develop post EVAR urinary retention experience a significantly increased rate of UTI. Selective urinary catheter placement should be used to help reduce urinary-related complications following elective EVAR.

Peripheral artery disease affects approximately 250 million people globally. Multiple randomised controlled trials have compared bypass and endovascular interventions but the optimum revascularisation approach remains unclear. The recently published BEST-CLI and BASIL-2 trials provide current and robust data addressing this question, however their findings are not concordant. This systematic review and meta-analysis provides an overview of the worldwide randomised evidence comparing bypass surgery and endovascular revascularisation in lower limb peripheral artery disease.

A comprehensive literature search of MEDLINE, Embase and CENTRAL databases was performed of all time periods up to 7 May 2023 to identify randomised controlled trials comparing bypass and endovascular revascularisation for treating lower limb peripheral artery disease. The primary outcome was major amputation. Secondary outcomes were mortality, re-intervention, 30-day adverse events and 30-day mortality. Odds ratios were calculated and pooled using the random-effects model. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias 2 tool.

Fourteen cohorts were identified across thirteen studies, enrolling 3840 patients. There was no significant difference in major amputation (OR 1.12; 95% CI 0.80-1.57) or mortality (OR 0.96; 95% CI 0.79-1.17) between the bypass and endovascular groups. Bypass was associated with a significant reduction in re-intervention compared with endovascular treatment (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.40-0.82).

These findings suggest that rates of major amputation and mortality are similar following bypass and endovascular interventions. Patients who undergo bypass surgery have a significantly lower re-intervention rate post-operatively.

The purpose of this study was to review the current literature of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) use in real world cohorts inclusive of chronic limb threatening ischemia (CLTI) patients and compare the outcomes to patients imaged by angiography alone.

The systematic review was registered in Research Registry. A literature search was performed across 4 databases: PubMed, Medline/Embase, Cochrane Review, and Web of Science for eligible comparative studies. The primary outcomes examined were clinically driven target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR), amputation (including minor below the ankle and major above the ankle), all-cause mortality, limb salvage and mean balloon dilation. A random effects model was used when pooling outcomes to account for heterogeneity. Publication bias was determined using eggers test and illustrated on a funnel plot.

Six studies were included in this review, with a total of 1883 subjects with Rutherford 1-6. Among the 1883 subjects, 940 had Rutherford 4-6. IVUS was used in 1294 subjects and angiography alone was used in 589 subjects. Pooled analysis determined no significant association in IVUS + angiography with CD-TLR (O.R = 1.43 [CI: 0.80, 2.58]), all-cause amputation (O.R = 0.63 [CI: 0.34, 1.17]), and all-cause mortality (O.R = 0.63 [CI: 0.34, 1.17]). Sub analysis of subjects with CLTI, Rutherford classes 4-6 showed an association between IVUS + angiography use with limb salvage at 1 year, O.R = 2.22 [1.24, 3.97].

The use of IVUS + angiography compared to angiography alone showed larger reference vessel diameter in both all-inclusive Rutherford classifications and the CLTI subset. The use of IVUS + angiography compared to angiography alone showed no difference in CD-TLR at 12 months, lower extremity amputation, and all-cause mortality for Rutherford 1-6. The use of IVUS + angiography compared to angiography alone in the CLTI subset analysis improved limb salvage.

We present the case of a 58-year-old male patient referred to our department from a smaller facility for further evaluation and treatment strategy regarding the choice between open or endovascular surgery. The patient was diagnosed with a 6 cm asymptomatic juxtarenal aortic aneurysm and a 5 mm diameter accessory renal artery (ARA) supplying the lower half of left kidney. Further diagnostic assessments indicated that the left ARA was perfusing over 40% of the left kidney.

Given the patient’s significant pre-existing medical conditions and elevated perioperative risk, the decision was made to proceed with minimally invasive endovascular surgery using a custom-made 5-branches stent graft (BEVAR).

In the early postoperative period, the patient reported left flank pain. A subsequent CT scan identified a partial infarction in the left kidney due to the occlusion of an early small branch from the upper left renal artery. However, laboratory results showed no significant change in renal function compared to preoperative values. The patient was discharged 6 days post-surgery, with no additional complications observed during the early postoperative period.

This case report demonstrates that BEVAR is acceptable technique with satisfactory early postoperative outcomes for treating juxtarenal aortic aneurysms with an accessory renal artery in patients who are high-risk candidates for open repair and anatomically unsuitable for FEVAR or Ch-EVAR procedures.

Pseudoxanthoma elasticum (PXE) is a rare metabolic disease, causing calcification in the arterial media layer and further peripheral artery disease (PAD). A high rate of failure has been reported after endovascular and open surgical management of PAD among patients with PXE. Critical limb ischemia (CLI) rarely develops in PXE, and there are only few reports of its treatment.

We present a case report of a 57 year-old female diagnosed with pseudoxanthoma elasticum (PXE). She presented with critical limb ischemia (CLI) and was successfully treated with pedal bypass using the great saphenous vein.

Despite obtaining suboptimal outcomes through the initial approach of percutaneous transluminal angioplasty to treat critical limb ischemia, the subsequent bypass operation proved to be a success. At the first follow-up appointment at 1 month, the patient was asymptomatic and the ulceration had almost healed. The patient underwent an ultrasound examination at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after discharge, and the surveillance was uncomplicated.

With a clear indication for surgery, limb-threatening ischemia can be successfully treated with distal bypass, if necessary, in patients with PXE similarly to atherosclerotic PADs. Appropriate diagnostic and surveillance imaging and the utilization of a multidisciplinary team are key components for effective management of PAD in patients with PXE.