Search

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated postponement of vascular surgery procedures nationally. Whether procedure volumes have since recovered remains undefined. Therefore, our objective was to quantify changes in procedure volumes and determine whether surgical volume has returned to its prepandemic baseline., Methods: This study was a retrospective cross-sectional study between 2018 and 2023 using the US Fee-for-Service Medicare 5% National Sample as part of the VA Disrupted Care National Project. We studied patients who underwent 1 of 3 procedures: abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair for intact aneurysms, carotid endarterectomy (CEA), and major lower extremity amputation (LEA). The case volume of each quarter of 2020-2023 was compared to its corresponding prepandemic quarter in 2019. We then performed a subanalysis of these trends by sex, age, and race., Results: We identified 21,031 procedures: 4,411 AAA repair, 8,361 CEA, and 8,259 LEA. The average percent change during the baseline prepandemic period from 2018 to 2019 was -4.3% for AAA repair, -8.5% for CEA, and -2.6% for LEA. Compared to Q2 of 2019, Q2 of 2020 demonstrated that AAA repair procedures decreased by 47%, CEA by 40%, and LEA by 14%. While procedures initially rebounded in Q3 of 2020, volumes did not return to their prepandemic baseline, demonstrating a persistent volume reduction (-16% AAA, -22% CEA, and -11% LEA). Thereafter, procedure counts again declined in Q1 of 2022 (-25% AAA, -34% CEA, and -25% LEA)., Conclusions: Despite a perception that vascular surgical care was singularly disrupted at the outset of the pandemic, there has been a sustained reduction in vascular surgical volume since 2019. Not only have procedure volumes not returned to prepandemic baseline but it also appears that there has been a cumulative incremental impact on overall procedure volume. The impact of these findings on long-term population health remains uncertain and necessitates a better understanding of postpandemic care delivery., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: There is persistent controversy surrounding the merit of surgical volume benchmarks being used solely as a sufficient proxy for assessing the quality of open abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. Importantly, operative volume quotas may fail to reflect a more nuanced and comprehensive depiction of surgical outcomes most relevant to patients. Accordingly, we herein propose a patient-centered textbook outcome (TO) for AAA repair that is analogous to other large magnitude extirpative operations performed in other surgical specialties, and test its feasibility to discriminate hospital performance using Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) volume guidelines., Methods: All elective open infrarenal AAA repairs (OAR) in the SVS-Vascular Quality Initiative were examined (2009-2022). The primary end point was a TO, defined as a composite of no in-hospital complication or reintervention/reoperation, length of stay of ≤10 days, home discharge, and 1-year survival rates. The discriminatory ability of the TO measure was assessed by comparing centers that did or did not meet the SVS annual OAR volume threshold recommendation (high volume ≥10 OARs/year; low volume <10 OARs/year). Logistic regression and multivariable models adjusted for patient and procedure-related differences., Results: A total of 9657 OARs across 198 centers were analyzed (mean age, 69.5 ± 8.4 years; female, 26%; non-White, 12%). A TO was identified in 44% (n = 4293) of the overall cohort. The incidence of individual TO components included no in-hospital complication (61%), no in-hospital reintervention or reoperation (92%), length of stay of ≤10 days (78%), home discharge (76%), and 1-year survival (91%). Median annual center volume was 6 (interquartile range, 3-10) and a majority of centers did not meet the SVS volume suggested threshold (<10 OARs/year, n = 148 [74%]). However, most patients (6265 of 9657 [65%]) underwent OAR in high-volume hospitals. When comparing high- and low-volume centers, a TO was more likely to occur in high-volume institutions: ≥10 OARs/year (46%) vs <10 OARs/year (42%; P = .0006). The association of a protective effect for higher center volume remained after risk adjustment (odds ratio, 1.1; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-1.26; P = .003)., Conclusions: TOs for elective OAR reflect a more nuanced and comprehensive patient centered proxy to measure care delivery, consistent with other surgical specialties. Surprisingly, a TO was achieved in <50% of elective AAA cases nationally. Although the likelihood of a TO seems to correlate with SVS center volume recommendations, it more importantly reflects elements which may be prioritized by patients and thus offers insights into further improving real-world AAA care., Competing Interests: Disclosures None., (Copyright © 2024 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the association of surgeon self-reported gender on clinical outcomes in contemporary US surgical practice., Background: Previous research has suggested that there are potentially improved surgical outcomes for female surgeons, yet the underlying causal path for this association remains unclear., Methods: Using the Vizient Clinical Database(2016-2021), 39 operations categorized by the CDC's National Healthcare Safety Network were analyzed. The surgeon self-reported gender as the primary exposure. The primary outcome was a composite of in-hospital death, complications, and/or 30-day readmission. Multivariable logistic regression and propensity score matching were used for risk adjustment., Results: The analysis included 4,882,784 patients operated on by 11,955 female surgeons (33% of surgeons performing 21% of procedures) and 23,799 male surgeons (67% of surgeons performing 79% of procedures). Female surgeons were younger (45±9 vs males-53±11 y; P <0.0001) and had lower operative volumes. Unadjusted incidence of the primary outcome was 13.6%(10.7%-female surgeons, 14.3%-male surgeons; P <0.0001). After propensity matching, the primary outcome occurred in 13.0% of patients [12.9%-female, 13.0%-male; OR (M vs. F)=1.02, 95% CI: 1.01-1.03; P =0.001), with female surgeons having small statistical associations with lower mortality and complication rates but not readmissions. Procedure-specific analyses revealed inconsistent or no surgeon-gender associations., Conclusions: In the largest analysis to date, surgeon self-reported gender had a small statistical, clinically marginal correlation with postoperative outcomes. The variation across surgical specialties and procedures suggests that the association with surgeon gender is unlikely causal for the observed differences in outcomes. Patients should be reassured that surgeon gender alone does not have a clinically meaningful impact on their outcome., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) has had a dynamic impact on abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) care, often supplanting open AAA repair (OAR). Accordingly, US AAA management is often highlighted by disparities in patient selection and guideline compliance. The purpose of this analysis was to define secular trends in AAA care., Methods: The Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative was queried for all EVARs and OARs (2011-2021). End points included procedure utilization, change in mortality, patient risk profile, Society for Vascular Surgery-endorsed diameter compliance, off-label EVAR use, cross-clamp location, blood loss, in-hospital complications, and post-EVAR surveillance missingness. Linear regression was used without risk adjustment for all end points except for mortality and complications, for which logistic regression with risk adjustment was used., Results: In all, 66 609 EVARs (elective, 85% [n=55 805] and nonelective, 15% [n=9976]) and 13 818 OARs (elective, 70% [n=9706] and nonelective, 30% [n=4081]) were analyzed. Elective EVAR:OAR ratios were increased (0.2 per year [95% CI, 0.01-0.32]), while nonelective ratios were unchanged. Elective diameter threshold noncompliance decreased for OAR (24%→17%; P =0.01) but not EVAR (mean, 37%). Low-risk patients increasingly underwent elective repairs (EVAR, +0.4%per year [95% CI, 0.2-0.6]; OAR, +0.6 points per year [95% CI, 0.2-1.0]). Off-label EVAR frequency was unchanged (mean, 39%) but intraoperative complications decreased (0.5% per year [95% CI, 0.2-0.9]). OAR complexity increased reflecting greater suprarenal cross-clamp rates (0.4% per year [95% CI, 0.1-0.8]) and blood loss (33 mL/y [95% CI, 19-47]). In-hospital complications decreased for elective (0.7% per year [95% CI, 0.4-0.9]) and nonelective EVAR (1.7% per year [95% CI, 1.1-2.3]) but not OAR (mean, 42%). A 30-day mortality was unchanged for both elective OAR (mean, 4%) and EVAR (mean, 1%). Among nonelective OARs, an increase in both 30-day (0.8% per year [95% CI, 0.1-1.5]) and 1-year mortality (0.8% per year [95% CI, 0.3-1.6]) was observed. Postoperative EVAR surveillance acquisition decreased (67%→49%), while 1-year mortality among patients without imaging was 4-fold greater (9.2% versus imaging, 2.0%; odds ratio, 4.1 [95% CI, 3.8-4.3]; P <0.0001)., Conclusions: There has been an increase in EVAR and a corresponding reduction in OAR across the United States, despite established concerns surrounding guideline adherence, reintervention, follow-up, and cost. Although EVAR morbidity has declined, OAR complication rates remain unchanged and unexpectedly high. Opportunities remain for improving AAA care delivery, patient and procedure selection, guideline compliance, and surveillance., Competing Interests: Disclosures Dr Scali is the chair of the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative Patient Safety Organization EVAR Registry (unpaid position). The other authors report no conflicts.

Background: The historical size threshold for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair is widely accepted to be 5.5 cm for men and 5.0 cm for women. However, contemporary AAA rupture risks may be lower than historical benchmarks, which has implications for when AAAs should be repaired. Our objective was to use contemporary AAA rupture rates to inform optimal size thresholds for AAA repair., Methods: We used a Markov chain analysis to estimate life expectancy for patients with AAA. The primary outcome was AAA-related mortality. We estimated survival using Social Security Administration life tables and published contemporary AAA rupture estimates. For those undergoing repair, we modified survival estimates using data from the Vascular Quality Initiative and Medicare on complications, late rupture, and open conversion. We used this model to estimate the AAA repair size threshold that minimizes AAA-related mortality for 60-year-old average-health men and women. We performed a sensitivity analysis of poor-health patients and 70- and 80-year-old base cases., Results: The annual risk of all-cause mortality under surveillance for a 60-year-old woman presenting with a 5.0 cm AAA using repair thresholds of 5.5 cm, 6.0 cm, 6.5 cm, and 7.0 cm was 1.7%, 2.3%, 2.7%, and 2.8%, respectively. The corresponding risk for a man was 2.3%, 2.9%, 3.3%, and 3.4% for the same repair thresholds, respectively. For a 60-year-old average-health woman, an AAA repair size of 6.1 cm was the optimal threshold to minimize AAA-related mortality. Life expectancy varied by <2 months for repair at sizes from 5.7 cm to 7.1 cm. For a 60-year-old average-health man, an AAA repair size of 6.9 cm was the optimal threshold to minimize AAA-related mortality. Life expectancy varied by <2 months for repair at sizes from 6.0 cm to 7.4 cm. Women in poor health, at various age strata, had optimal AAA repair size thresholds that were >6.5 cm, whereas men in poor health, at all ages, had optimal repair size thresholds that were >8.0 cm., Conclusions: The optimal threshold for AAA repair is more nuanced than a discrete size. Specifically, there appears to be a range of AAA sizes for which repair is reasonable to minmized AAA-related mortality. Notably, they all are greater than current guideline recommendations. These findings would suggest that contemporary AAA size thresholds for repair should be reconsidered., (Copyright © 2024 Society for Vascular Surgery. All rights reserved.)

Background: Shared decision-making tools have been underused by clinicians in real-world practice. Changes to the National Coverage Determination by Medicare for carotid stenting greatly expand the coverage for patients, but simultaneously require a shared decision-making interaction that involves the use of a validated tool. Accordingly, our objective was to evaluate the currently available decision aids for carotid stenosis., Methods: We conducted a review of the literature for published work on decision aids for the treatment of carotid disease., Results: Four publications met inclusion criteria. We found the format of the decision aid impacted patient comprehension and decision making, although patient characteristics also played a role in the therapeutic decisions made. Notably, none of the available decision aids included the widely adopted transcarotid artery revascularization as an option., Conclusions: Further work is needed in the development of a widespread validated decision aid instrument for patients with carotid stenosis., Competing Interests: Disclosures None., (Copyright © 2023 Society for Vascular Surgery. All rights reserved.)

Objective/background: Endovascular thoracoabdominal and pararenal aortic aneurysm repair is more complex and requires more devices than infrarenal aneurysm repair. It is unclear if current reimbursement covers the cost of delivering this more advanced form of vascular care. The objective of this study was to evaluate the economics of fenestrated-branched (FB-EVAR) physician-modified endograft (PMEG) repairs., Methods: We obtained technical and professional cost and revenue data for four consecutive fiscal years (July 1, 2017, to June 30, 2021) at our quaternary referral institution. Inclusion criteria were patients who underwent PMEG FB-EVAR in a uniform fashion by a single surgeon for thoracoabdominal/pararenal aortic aneurysms. Patients in industry-sponsored clinical trials or receiving Cook Zenith Fenestrated grafts were excluded. Financial data were analyzed for the index operation. Technical costs were divided into direct costs that included devices and billable supplies and indirect costs including overhead., Results: 62 patients (79% male, mean age: 74 years, 66% thoracoabdominal aneurysms) met inclusion criteria. The mean aneurysm size was 6.0 cm, the mean total operating time was 219 minutes, and the median hospital length of stay was 2 days. PMEGs were created with a mean number of 3.7 fenestrations, using a mean of 8.6 implantable devices per case. The average technical cost per case was $71,198, and the average technical reimbursement was $57,642, providing a net negative technical margin of $13,556 per case. Of this cohort, 31 patients (50%) were insured by Medicare remunerated under diagnosis-related group code 268/269. Their respective average technical reimbursement was $41,293, with a mean negative margin of $22,989 per case, with similar findings for professional costs. The primary driver of technical cost was implantable devices, accounting for 77% of total technical cost per case over the study period. The total operating margin, including technical and professional cost and revenue, for the cohort during the study period was negative $1,560,422., Conclusions: PMEG FB-EVAR for pararenal/thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms produces a substantially negative operating margin for the index operation driven largely by device costs. Device cost alone already exceeds total technical revenue and presents an opportunity for cost reduction. In addition, increased reimbursement for FB-EVAR, especially among Medicare beneficiaries, will be important to facilitate patient access to such innovative technology., (Copyright © 2023 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To measure the frequency of preoperative stress testing and its association with perioperative cardiac events., Background: There is persistent variation in preoperative stress testing across the United States. It remains unclear whether more testing is associated with reduced perioperative cardiac events., Methods: We used the Vizient Clinical Data Base to study patients who underwent 1 of 8 elective major surgical procedures (general, vascular, or oncologic) from 2015 to 2019. We grouped centers into quintiles by frequency of stress test use. We computed a modified revised cardiac risk index (mRCRI) score for included patients. Outcomes included in-hospital major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), myocardial infarction (MI), and cost, which we compared across quintiles of stress test use., Results: We identified 185,612 patients from 133 centers. The mean age was 61.7 (±14.2) years, 47.5% were female, and 79.4% were White. Stress testing was performed in 9.2% of patients undergoing surgery, and varied from 1.7% at lowest quintile centers, to 22.5% at highest quintile centers, despite similar mRCRI comorbidity scores (mRCRI>1: 15.0% vs 15.8%; P =0.068). In-hospital MACE was less frequent among lowest versus highest quintile centers (8.2% vs 9.4%; P <0.001) despite a 13-fold difference in stress test use. Event rates were similar for MI (0.5% vs 0.5%; P =0.737). Mean added cost for stress testing per 1000 patients who underwent surgery was $26,996 at lowest quintile centers versus $357,300 at highest quintile centers., Conclusions: There is substantial variation in preoperative stress testing across the United States despite similar patient risk profiles. Increased testing was not associated with reduced perioperative MACE or MI. These data suggest that more selective stress testing may be an opportunity for cost savings through a reduction of unnecessary tests., Competing Interests: J.A.C. and D.H.S. had support from the Hitchcock Foundation outside of the submitted work. S.T.S. had support from the National Institutes of Health outside of the submitted work. The remaining authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has made the prevention of in-hospital Clostridium difficile infection a priority. However, whether there is a differential impact of Clostridium difficile on surgical patients remains undefined. Therefore, we quantified the procedure-specific association between postoperative Clostridium difficile and surgical outcomes to define opportunities for targeted quality improvement., Methods: We studied patients undergoing major cardiac, vascular, general, or oncologic procedures using the Vizient database from 2015 to 2019. Our primary exposure was postoperative Clostridium difficile infection. Our primary outcomes were postoperative length of stay, hospitalization cost, readmission, and in-hospital mortality. We used linear and logistic regression for risk adjustment., Results: The incidence of Clostridium difficile infection was 1.6% (n = 6,506/397,750). Patients with Clostridium difficile were older, more comorbid, and more frequently underwent urgent surgery. The median postoperative length of stay was 7 days (interquartile range: 5-11 days), and it was 66% longer among those with Clostridium difficile (P < .001). Similarly, the median hospitalization cost was $31,000 (interquartile range: $20,000-$49,000), and it was 51% greater among patients with Clostridium difficile (P < .001). Postoperative Clostridium difficile was associated with more readmissions after coronary artery bypass grafting, small bowel resection, colectomy, gastrectomy, pancreatectomy, and infrainguinal bypass (adjusted odds ratio range: 1.4-1.7), but not after open aneurysm repair, suprainguinal bypass, or esophagectomy. Clostridium difficile was associated with increased mortality after coronary artery bypass grafting, small bowel resection, colectomy, and infrainguinal bypass (adjusted odds ratio range: 1.3-2.7), but not after open aneurysm repair, suprainguinal bypass, esophagectomy, gastrectomy, or pancreatectomy., Conclusion: Postoperative Clostridium difficile infection was differentially associated with increased length of stay, cost, readmissions, and mortality across specific procedures. This was most apparent after infrainguinal bypass, small bowel resection, colectomy, and coronary artery bypass grafting. Accordingly, a targeted Clostridium difficile reduction effort for these procedures may offer a more effective approach toward reducing infection rates., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The widespread application of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) has ushered in an era of requisite postoperative surveillance and the potential need for reintervention. The national prevalence and results of EVAR conversion to open repair, however, remain poorly defined. The purpose of this analysis was to define the incidence of open conversion and its associated outcomes., Methods: The SVS Vascular Quality Initiative EVAR registry linked to Medicare claims via Vascular Implants Surveillance and Interventional Outcomes Network was queried for open conversions after initial EVAR procedures from 2003 to 2016. Cumulative conversion incidence within up to 5 years after EVAR and outcomes after open intervention were determined. Multivariable logistic regressions were used to identify independent predictors of conversion and mortality., Results: Among 15,937 EVAR patients, 309 (1.9%) underwent an open conversion: 43% (n = 132) early (<30 days) and 57% (n = 177) late (>30 days). The longitudinally observed rate of conversion was constant over time, as well as by geographic region. Independent predictors of conversion included female sex (hazard ratio [HR], 1.49; P < .001), aneurysm diameter or more than 6.0 cm at the time of index EVAR (HR, 1.74; P < .001), nonelective repair (compared with elective presentation: HR, 1.72; P < .001), and aortouni-iliac repairs (HR, 2.19; P < .001). In contrast, adjunctive operative procedures such as endo-anchors or cuff extensions (HR, 0.62; P = .06) were protective against long-term conversion. Both early (HR, 1.6; P < .001) and late (HR, 1.26; P = .07) open conversions were associated with significant 30-day (total cohort, 15%) and 1-year mortality (total cohort, 25%). Patients undergoing open conversion experienced high rates of 30-day readmission (42%) and cardiac (45%), renal (32%), and pulmonary (30%) complications., Conclusions: This large, registry-based analysis is among the first to document the incidence and outcomes for open conversion after EVAR in a national cohort with long-term follow-up. Importantly, women, patients with large aneurysms, and complex anatomy, as well as urgent or emergent EVARs are at an increased risk for open conversion. It seems that more conversions are performed in the early postoperative period, despite perceptions that conversion is a delayed phenomenon. In all instances, conversion is associated with significant morbidity and mortality and highlights the importance of appropriate patient selection at the time of index EVAR., (Copyright © 2022 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: There is mounting controversy surrounding the appropriate use of endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) in contemporary practice. Persistent debate hinges on durability, cost, and survival. Accordingly, guidelines have attempted to clarify appropriate EVAR indications. The purpose of this analysis was to examine trends in EVAR practice throughout the United States and measure compliance with Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) clinical practice diameter guidelines (CPGs)., Methods: We analyzed all elective repairs in the SVS Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) EVAR registry from 2015 to 2019 (n = 25,112) and included patients with aneurysms confined to the infrarenal abdominal aorta. Center and surgeon variation with CPG diameter compliance was examined. Using a previously validated logistic regression model for risk adjustment, patients were stratified into predicted 1-year mortality risk tertiles and comparisons were made between patients meeting diameter guidelines (men ≥5.5;women ≥5.0 cm) and those who did not., Results: Non-diameter-compliant EVAR occurred in 38.5% (n = 9675; diameter compliant, 61.5% [n = 15,437]). There was significant variation in CPG diameter compliance when stratified by VQI participating centers (range, 21%-95%; median, 61%; P < .001). This observation was amplified when categorized at the surgeon level (range, 0-100%; median, 63%; P < .0001). Notably, 82% of VQI surgeons (n = 852 of 1048) were non-diameter-compliant in more than 20% of their repairs. Moreover, among the 38.5% of patients failing to meet CPG diameter thresholds, 22.4% (n = 2171) were at high physiologic risk as determined by the validated SVS-VQI 1-year mortality calculator. Notably, the 1-year survival for the high-physiologic risk patients receiving non-guideline-compliant EVAR was worse compared with low- to intermediate-risk patients who were treated within recommended CPGs (92 ± 2% vs 97 ± 1%; log-rank P < .0001)., Conclusions: A significant percentage of current US EVAR practice fails to adhere to the SVS diameter guidelines, as highlighted by the tremendous variation among VQI centers and surgeons. Furthermore, as noted by the 22% of patients undergoing noncompliant repair deemed to be at high physiologic risk, patient selection for EVAR seems to be suboptimal. Surprisingly, these findings are observed among the majority of VQI surgeons performing EVAR. In light of issues surrounding durability and cost, efforts to constrain observed deviation from recommended therapeutic size threshold guidelines would likely serve to improve abdominal aortic aneurysm care throughout the United States., (Copyright © 2022 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Compliance with Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) clinical practice guideline (CPG)-diameter thresholds is variable for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). To evaluate the implications and appropriateness of repairs that are noncompliant with current guidelines, we investigated the long-term outcomes, adherence to imaging follow-up, and associated health care costs in patients undergoing EVAR for AAA who do or do not meet recommended diameter thresholds., Methods: All patients receiving elective EVAR from 2003 to 2016 in the SVS Vascular Quality Initiative with linked Medicare claims were reviewed. Weekend procedures and isolated iliac aneurysms, as well as symptomatic and ruptured presentations, were excluded. Diameter thresholds for noncompliant repairs were defined as: men <55 mm; women <50 mm who did not have an iliac diameter ≥30 mm. We evaluated adherence to postoperative imaging surveillance, reimbursement amounts, reintervention, rupture, and all-cause mortality. We defined an EVAR quality metric as performance of the index procedure with freedom from conversion to open repair, 5-year rupture-free survival, and adherence to minimum imaging surveillance (at least one computed tomography scan documented between 6 and 24 months postoperatively)., Results: Among 19,018 elective EVARs, 35% did not meet CPG diameter thresholds (26% within 5 mm of threshold). The rate of noncompliant repairs increased over time (24% in 2003 vs 36% in 2016; P < .001). Patients undergoing noncompliant repairs were younger, less likely to have multiple comorbidities, and more likely to receive EVAR with adherence to instructions for use criteria (89% vs 79%; P < .001). Patients undergoing noncompliant repairs had greater 5-year freedom from reintervention (86% vs 81%; P < .001), rupture-free survival (94% vs 92%; P = .01), and overall survival rates (71% vs 61%; P < .001) compared with repairs that complied with CPG diameter thresholds. Although noncompliant repairs had higher rates of 1-year imaging surveillance, overall differences were modest (68% vs 65%; P = .003). Importantly, for the entire cohort, follow-up imaging surveillance decreased over time (93% in 2003 vs 63% in 2014; P < .001). Notably, although noncompliant repairs had higher rates of achieving the composite quality metric compared with compliant repairs (43% vs 38%; P < .001), failure occurred with a significant majority of all repairs., Conclusions: Compliance with SVS-endorsed CPG diameter thresholds for elective EVAR is poor, and rates of noncompliance are increasing. Noncompliant repairs appear to be offered more commonly to patients with fewer comorbidities and favorable anatomy, and these repairs are associated with improved rates of reintervention, rupture, and survival compared with procedures meeting CPG diameter thresholds. Importantly, noncompliant repairs fail to meet minimum quality standards in a majority of cases, which underscores the need for further policies to improve the overall quality and appropriateness of AAA care delivery nationally., (Copyright © 2021 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Sex-based disparities in surgical outcomes have emerged as an important focus in contemporary healthcare delivery. Likewise, the appropriate usage of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) in the United States remains a subject of ongoing controversy, with a significant number of U.S. EVARs failing to adhere to the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) clinical practice guideline (CPG) diameter thresholds. The purpose of the present study was to determine the effect of sex among patients undergoing EVAR that was not compliant with the SVS CPGs., Methods: All elective EVAR procedures for abdominal aortic aneurysms without a concomitant iliac aneurysm (≥3.0 cm) in the SVS Vascular Quality Initiative were analyzed (2015-2019; n = 25,112). SVS CPG noncompliant repairs were defined as a size of <5.5 cm for men and <5.0 cm for women. The primary endpoint was 30-day mortality. The secondary endpoints were all-cause mortality, complications, and reintervention. Logistic regression was performed to control for surgeon- and patient-level factors. Freedom from the endpoints was determined using the Kaplan-Meier method., Results: Noncompliant EVAR was performed in 9675 patients (38.5%). Although men were significantly more likely to undergo such procedures (90% vs 10%; odds ratio [OR], 3.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.9-3.4; P < .0001), the 30-day mortality was greater for the women than the men (1.8% vs 0.5%; P = .0003). Women also experienced significantly higher rates of multiple complications, including postoperative myocardial infarction (1% vs 0.3%; P = .006), respiratory failure (1.4% vs 0.6%; P = .01), intestinal ischemia (0.7% vs 0.2%; P = .003), access vessel hematoma (3% vs 1.2%; P = .0006), and iliac access vessel injury (2.4% vs 0.8%; P < .0001). Additionally, women experienced increased overall 1-year reintervention rates (11.5% vs 5.8%; P < .0001). In the adjusted analysis, 30-day mortality and any in-hospital complication risk remained significantly greater for the women (30-day death: OR, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.6-5.8; P = .0005; in-hospital complication: OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.4-2.6; P < .0001). Women also experienced increased reintervention rates over time compared with men (OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-2.2; P = .02)., Conclusions: Although men were more likely to undergo non-CPG compliant EVAR, women experienced increased short-term morbidity and 30-day mortality and higher rates of reintervention when undergoing non-CPG compliant EVAR. These unanticipated findings necessitate increased scrutiny of current U.S. sex-based EVAR practice and should caution against the use of non-CPG compliant EVAR for women., (Copyright © 2021 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background Patients hospitalized with COVID-19 have an increased risk of thromboembolic events. Whether sex, race or ethnicity impacts these events is unknown. We studied the association between sex, race, and ethnicity and venous and arterial thromboembolic events among adults hospitalized with COVID-19. Methods and Results We used the American Heart Association Cardiovascular Disease COVID-19 registry. Primary exposures were sex and race and ethnicity, as defined by the registry. Primary outcomes were venous thromboembolic events and arterial thromboembolic events. We used logistic regression for risk adjustment. We studied 21 528 adults hospitalized with COVID-19 across 107 centers (54.1% men; 38.1% non-Hispanic White, 25.4% Hispanic, 25.7% non-Hispanic Black, 0.5% Native American, 4.0% Asian, 0.4% Pacific Islander, and 5.9% other race and ethnicity). The rate of venous thromboembolic events was 3.7% and was more common in men (4.2%) than women (3.2%; P <0.001), and in non-Hispanic Black patients (4.9%) than other races and ethnicities (range, 1.3%-3.8%; P <0.001). The rate of arterial thromboembolic events was 3.9% and was more common in men (4.3%) than women (3.5%; P =0.002), and in non-Hispanic Black patients (5.0%) than other races and ethnicities (range, 2.3%-4.7%; P <0.001). Compared with men, women were less likely to experience venous thromboembolic events (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.71; 95% CI, 0.61-0.83) and arterial thromboembolic events (adjusted OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.66-0.89). Compared with non-Hispanic White patients, non-Hispanic Black patients had the highest likelihood of venous thromboembolic events (adjusted OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.04-1.54) and arterial thromboembolic events (adjusted OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.11-1.65). Conclusions Men and non-Hispanic Black adults hospitalized with COVID-19 are more likely to have venous and arterial thromboembolic events. These subgroups may represent at-risk patients more susceptible to thromboembolic COVID-19 complications.

Background: Reintervention after endovascular repair (EVR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms is common. However, the cumulative financial impact of reintervention after EVR on a national scale is poorly defined. Our objective was to describe the cost to Medicare for aneurysm treatment (EVR plus reinterventions) among a cohort of patients with known follow-up for 5 years after repair., Methods: We identified patients who underwent EVR within the Vascular Quality Initiative who were linked to their respective Medicare claims file (n = 13,995). We excluded patients who underwent EVR after September 30, 2010, and those who had incomplete Medicare coverage (n = 12,788). The remaining cohort (n = 1207) had complete follow-up until death or 5 years (Medicare data available through September 30, 2015). We then obtained and compiled the corresponding Medicare reimbursement data for the index EVR hospitalization and all subsequent reinterventions., Results: We studied 1207 Medicare patients who underwent EVR and had known follow-up for reinterventions for 5 years. The mean age was 76.2 years (±7.1 years), 21.6% of patients were female, and 91.1% of procedures were elective. The Kaplan-Meier reintervention rate at 5 years was 18%. Among patients who underwent reintervention, 154 (73.7%) had a single reintervention, 40 (19.1%) had two reinterventions, and 15 (7.2%) had three or more reinterventions. The median cost to Medicare for the index EVR hospitalization was $25,745 (interquartile range, $21,131-$28,774). The median cost for subsequent reinterventions was $22,165 (interquartile range, $17,152-$29,605). The cumulative cost to Medicare of aneurysm treatment (EVR plus reinterventions) increased in a stepwise fashion among patients who underwent multiple reinterventions, with each reintervention being similar in cost to the index EVR., Conclusions: The overall cost incurred by Medicare to reimburse for each reintervention after EVR is roughly the same as for the initial procedure itself, meaning that Medicare cost projections would be greater than $100,000 for any individual who undergoes an EVR with three reinterventions. The long-term financial impact of EVR must be considered by surgeons, patients, and healthcare systems alike as these cumulative costs may hinder the fiscal viability of an EVR-first therapeutic approach and highlight the need for judicious patient selection paradigms., (Copyright © 2020 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The fiscal impact of endovascular repair (EVR) of aortic aneurysms and the requisite device costs have previously highlighted the tenuous long-term financial sustainability among Medicare beneficiaries. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services have since reclassified EVR remuneration paradigms with new Medicare Severity Diagnosis-Related Groups (MS-DRGs) intended to better address the procedure's cost profile. The impact of this change remains unknown. The purpose of this analysis was to compare EVR-specific costs and revenue among Medicare beneficiaries both before and after this change., Methods: All infrarenal EVRs performed in fiscal years (FYs) 2014 and 2015, before the MS-DRG change, and those performed in FYs 2017 and 2018, after the MS-DRG change, were identified using the DRG codes 238 (n = 108) and 269 (n = 84), respectively. We then identified those who were treated according to the instructions for use guidelines with a single manufacturer's device and billed to Medicare (n = 23 in FY14-15; n = 22 in FY17-18). From these cohorts, we determined total procedure technical costs, technical revenue, and net technical margin in conjunction with the hospital finance department. Results were then compared between these two groups., Results: The two cohorts demonstrated similar demographic profiles (FY14-15 vs FY17-18 cohort: age, 78 years vs 74 years; median length of stay, 1.0 day vs 1.0 day). Mean total technical costs were slightly higher in the FY17-18 group ($24,511 in FY14-15 vs $26,445 in FY17-18). Graft implants continued to account for a significant portion of the total cost, with the device cost accounting for 56% of the total procedure costs in both cohorts. Net revenue was greater in the FY17-18 group by $5800 ($30,698 in FY14-15 vs $36,498 in FY17-18), resulting in an increased overall margin in the FY17-18 group compared with the FY14-15 group ($6188 in FY14-15 vs $10,053 in FY17-18)., Conclusions: Device costs remain the single greatest cost driver associated with EVR delivery. DRG reclassification of EVR to address total procedure and implant costs appears to better address the requisite associated procedure costs and may thereby better support long-term fiscal sustainability of this procedure for hospitals and health systems alike., (Copyright © 2020 Society for Vascular Surgery. All rights reserved.)

The Vascular Implant Surveillance and Interventional Outcomes Network (VISION) is a Coordinated Registry Network (CRN) a member of Medical Device Epidemiology Network, a U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-supported global public-private partnership that seeks to advance the collection and use of real-world data to improve patient outcomes. The VISION CRN began in September 2015 and held its first strategic meeting on September 10, 2018, at the FDA headquarters in Silver Spring, Maryland. VISION is a collaboration of the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI), the FDA, and other stakeholders. At this annual meeting, leaders from the FDA, VQI, industry representatives, population health researchers, and regulatory science experts gathered to discuss strategic goals and opportunities for VISION. One of the key focus areas for VISION is linkage of VQI registry data to Medicare, longitudinal data sources maintained by various states, and other relevant data sources, as a model for efficient, cost-saving, and effectual evidence generation and appraisal. This would provide the means to expand data collection, assess long-term procedural outcomes across the carotid, lower extremity, aortic, and venous intervention datasets, and execute registry-based trials through the CRN structure in an efficient, cost-effective manner. Looking forward, VISION strives to validate long-term outcome data in the VQI using industry datasets, in hopes of using CRNs to make device regulatory decisions. With the guidance of a steering committee, VISION will provide vascular surgeons, industry, and regulators the appropriate data to improve care for patients with vascular disease., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: Controversy persists regarding the use of protamine during carotid endarterectomy (CEA), despite real world evidence to support its use. The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of protamine reversal of heparin anticoagulation on the outcome of CEA in the USA., Methods: A prospective national registry (Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative) of 72 787 patients undergoing elective asymptomatic CEA by 1879 surgeons from 316 centres in the USA and Canada from 2012 to 2018 was reviewed. Protamine use varied by both surgeon (20% rare use [< 10%], 30% variable use [11%-79%], 50% routine use [> 80% cases]) and geographical region (44% vs. 96%). Temporal trends in protamine use were also determined. End points included post-operative re-operation for bleeding, as well as potential protamine related thrombotic complications, including stroke, death, and myocardial infarction (MI). Predictors of end points were determined by multivariable logistic regression. Propensity matching was additionally used to control for differences between groups., Results: Of the 72 787 patients who underwent CEA, 69% received protamine, while 31% did not. Protamine use increased over time from 60% (2012) to 73% (2018). In total, 378 patients (0.7%) in the protamine treated group underwent re-operation for bleeding vs. 342 patients (1.4%) in the untreated cohort (p < .001). Protamine use did not affect the rate of MI (0.7% vs. 0.8%; p = .023), stroke (1.1% vs. 1.0%; p = .20), or in hospital death (0.2% vs. 0.2%; p = 0.70) between treated and untreated patients, respectively. On multivariable analysis, protamine use was independently associated with reduced risk of re-operation for bleeding (odds ratio 0.5, 95% confidence interval 0.39-0.55; p < .001). Independent of protamine exposure, the consequences of a return to the operating room (RTOR) for bleeding were statistically significant, with a sevenfold increase in MI (RTOR 4.9% vs. no RTOR 0.7%; p < .001), an eightfold increase in stroke (RTOR 7.2% vs. no RTOR 0.9%; p < .001), and a 13 fold increase in death (RTOR 2.4% vs. no RTOR 0.2%; p < .001)., Conclusion: Protamine reduces serious bleeding complications at the time of CEA without increasing the risk of MI, stroke, or death, in this large North American analysis. Based on this and previous regional work regarding protamine use in CEA, it is believed that there is now sufficient evidence to support its routine use, and it should be considered as a benchmark for quality during CEA., (Copyright © 2020 European Society for Vascular Surgery. All rights reserved.)

For patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), randomized trials have found endovascular AAA repair (EVAR) is associated with lower perioperative morbidity and mortality than open surgical repair (OSR). However, OSR has fewer long-term aneurysm-related complications, such as endoleak or late rupture. Patients treated with EVAR and OSR have similar survival rates within two years after surgery, and OSR does not require intensive surveillance. Few have examined if patient preferences are aligned with the type of treatment they receive for their AAA. Although many assume that patients may universally prefer the less-invasive nature of EVAR, our preliminary work suggests that patients who value the lower risk of late complications may prefer OSR. In this study, called The PReferences for Open Versus Endovascular Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm (PROVE-AAA) trial, we describe a cluster-randomized trial to test if a decision aid can better align patients' preferences and their treatment type for AAA. Patients enrolled in the study are candidates for either endovascular or open repair and are followed up at VA hospitals by vascular surgery teams who regularly perform both types of repair. In Aim 1, we will determine patients' preferences for endovascular or open repair and identify domains associated with each repair type. In Aim 2, we will assess alignment between patients' preferences and the repair type elected and then compare the impact of a decision aid on this alignment between the intervention and control groups. This study will help us to accomplish two goals. First, we will better understand the factors that affect patient preference when choosing between EVAR and OSR. Second, we will better understand if a decision aid can help patients be more likely to receive the treatment strategy they prefer for their AAA. Study enrollment began on June 1, 2017. Between June 1, 2017 and November 1, 2018, we have enrolled 178 of a total goal of 240 veterans from 20 VA medical centers and their vascular surgery teams across the country. We anticipate completing enrollment in PROVE-AAA in June 2019, and study analyses will be performed thereafter., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVR) has a major financial impact on health care systems. We characterized reimbursement for index EVR hospitalizations among Medicare beneficiaries having surgery at Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) centers., Methods: We linked Medicare claims to VQI clinical registry data for patients undergoing EVR from 2003 to 2015. Analysis was limited to patients fully covered by fee-for-service Medicare parts A and B in the year of their operation and assigned a corresponding diagnosis-related group for EVR. The primary outcome was Medicare's reimbursement for inpatient hospital and professional services, adjusted to 2015 dollars. We performed descriptive analysis of reimbursement over time and univariate analysis to evaluate patient demographics, clinical characteristics, procedural variables, and postoperative events associated with reimbursement. This informed a multilevel regression model used to identify factors independently associated with EVR reimbursement and quantify VQI center-level variation in reimbursement., Results: We studied 9,403 Medicare patients who underwent EVR at VQI centers during the study period. Reimbursements declined from $37,450 ± $9,350 (mean ± standard deviation) in 2003 to $27,723 ± $10,613 in 2015 (test for trend, P < 0.001). For patients experiencing a complication (n = 773; 8.2%), mean reimbursement for EVR was $44,858 ± $23,825 versus $28,857 ± $9,258 for those without complications (P < 0.001). Intestinal ischemia, new dialysis requirement, and respiratory compromise each doubled Medicare's average reimbursement for EVR. After adjusting for diagnosis-related group, several patient-level factors were independently associated with higher Medicare reimbursement; these included ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (+$2,372), additional day in length of stay (+$1,275), and being unfit for open repair (+$501). Controlling for patient-level factors, 4-fold variation in average reimbursement was seen across VQI centers., Conclusions: Reimbursement for EVR declined between 2003 and 2015. We identified preoperative clinical factors independently associated with reimbursement and quantified the impact of different postoperative complications on reimbursement. More work is needed to better understand the substantial variation observed in reimbursement at the center level., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To evaluate safety and effectiveness of the iCAST Covered Stent for treatment of iliac artery atherosclerotic lesions., Materials and Methods: The iCARUS trial (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00593385) was a single-arm, prospective, multicenter study that enrolled 152 per protocol subjects at 25 sites in the United States and Germany. Subjects with multiple lesions and/or stents were eligible. The primary endpoint was the composite rate of death within 30 days, target lesion revascularization (TLR) within 9 months, or restenosis at 9 months after procedure. Secondary endpoints included major adverse vascular events (MAVEs), primary patency, freedom from TLR, and clinical success., Results: Device and acute procedural success were achieved in 98.7% and 92.7% of cases, respectively. MAVE rate was 4.6% at 30 days. The 9-month primary composite endpoint rate was 8.1% (10/123), which was below the performance goal of 16.57%. Nine-month primary patency, defined as continuous flow without revascularization, bypass, or target limb amputation, was 96.4%. Freedom from TLR at 9 months and 3 years was 97.2% and 86.6%, respectively. Early clinical success was seen in 88.7% of subjects at 30 days with sustained clinical benefit in 72.4% of subjects at 3 years., Conclusions: The iCARUS study demonstrated that the iCAST Covered Stent was safe and effective for treatment of atherosclerotic iliac artery lesions with sustained clinical benefit out to 3 years., (Copyright © 2019 SIR. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Major (above-knee or below-knee) amputation is a complication of diabetes and is seen more common among black and Hispanic patients. While amputation rates have declined for patients with diabetes in the last decade, it remains unknown if these improvements have equitably extended across racial groups and if measures of diabetic care, such as hemoglobin A1c testing, are associated with these improvements. We set out to characterize secular changes in amputation rates among black, Hispanic, and white patients, and to determine associations between hemoglobin A1c testing and amputation risk., Methods: We identified 11,942,840 Medicare patients (55% female) with diabetes over the age of 65 years between 2002 and 2012 and followed them for a mean of 6.6 years. Of these, 86% were white, 11.5% were black, and 2.5% were Hispanic. We recorded the occurrence of major amputation and hemoglobin A1c testing during this time period and studied secular changes in amputation rate by race (black, Hispanic, and white). Finally, we examined associations between amputation risk and hemoglobin A1c testing. We measured both the presence of any testing and testing consistency using 3 categories: poor consistency (hemoglobin A1c testing in 0-50% of years), medium consistency (testing in 50-90% of years), and high consistency (testing in >90% of the years in the cohort)., Results: Between 2002 and 2012, the average major lower-extremity amputation rate in diabetic Medicare patients was 1.78 per 1,000 per year for black patients, 1.15 per 1,000 per year for Hispanic patients, and 0.56 per 1,000 per year for white patients (P < 0.001). Over the study period, the incidence of major amputation in Medicare patients with diabetes declined by 54%, from 1.15 per 1,000 in 2002 to 0.53 per 1,000 in 2012 (rate ratio = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.51-0.54). The reduction in amputation rate was similar across racial groups: 52% for black patients, 61% for Hispanic patients, and 55% for white patients. In multivariable analysis adjusting for patient characteristics, including race, any use of hemoglobin A1c testing was associated with a 15% decline in amputation risk (hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.83-0.87; P < 0.001). High consistency hemoglobin A1c testing was associated with a 39% decline in amputation (hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.59-0.62; P < 0.0001)., Conclusions: Although more frequent among racial minorities, major lower-extremity amputation rates have declined similarly across black, Hispanic, and white patients over the last decade. Hemoglobin A1c testing, particularly the consistency of testing over time, may be an effective component metric of longitudinal quality measures toward limiting amputation in all races., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Risk of open conversion after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR-c) is poorly defined. The purpose of this analysis was to determine outcomes of elective EVAR-c compared with elective primary open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (PAR) in the Vascular Quality Initiative., Methods: Vascular Quality Initiative patients who underwent elective EVAR-c and PAR (2002-2014) were reviewed. Candidate predictors of major adverse cardiac event (MACE) and/or 30-day mortality were entered into a multivariable model, and stepwise elimination was used to reduce the number of covariates to a best subset of predictors. To estimate the additive risk of EVAR-c for MACE or 30-day mortality over PAR, this variable was added along with the best subset of predictors into generalized estimating equations logistic regression models., Results: We identified 159 EVAR-c and 3741 PAR patients. EVAR-c patients were older (73.5 ± 8.1 vs 69.5 ± 8.4 years; P < .0001), more likely to have diabetes (21% vs 15%; P = .03), and history of lower extremity bypass (9% vs 4%; P = .0006). EVAR-c was associated with a higher incidence of retroperitoneal aortic exposure (41%; n = 64 vs PAR, 26%, n = 976; P < .0001), use of a bifurcated graft (65%; n = 101 vs PAR, 52%; n = 1923; P = .001), greater blood loss (median [interquartile range], 2000 mL [1010-3500] vs PAR, 1200 mL [750-2000]; P < .0001) and longer procedure times (EVAR-c, 275 ± 122 minutes vs PAR, 232 ± 9 minutes; P < .0001). However, PAR more frequently was completed with a suprarenal and/or mesenteric cross-clamp (74%, n = 2749 vs EVAR-c, 53%, n = 83; P < .0001) and had a higher incidence of concomitant procedures (26%; n = 972 vs EVAR-c, 18%; n = 28; P = .03). Nonadjusted 30-day mortality was greater after EVAR-c: EVAR-c, 8% (n = 10) vs PAR, 3% (n = 105); P = .009. There was no difference in complication rates: EVAR-c, 33% (n = 52) vs PAR, 28% (n = 1056); P =.3. Preoperative 30-day mortality predictors included age (odds ratio [OR], 1.06/y, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-1.1; P < .0001), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.6-3.5; P < .0001), history of leg bypass (OR, 2.3, 1.2-4.4;P =.01), suprarenal cross-clamp (OR 2.2, 1.2-4.1;P =.01), prior carotid revascularization (OR 2.2; 95% CI, 1.3-3.8; P = .0004), congestive heart failure (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 0.9-3.5; P = .08), and female sex (OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1-2.3; P = .02; area under the curve, 0.75). When controlling for covariates, EVAR-c was not significantly associated with MACE (OR, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.7-2.0; P = .4) or 30-day mortality (OR, 2.0; 0.9-4.2; P = .08)., Conclusions: EVAR-c patients are typically older, have more comorbidities, and experience greater blood loss and longer procedure times compared with PAR patients. However, postoperative morbidity and mortality are primarily driven by patient covariates and intraoperative factors, rather than the need for endograft explantation. Several preoperative variables were identified as predictors of 30-day mortality after elective EVAR-c and should be considered during the decision-making process for remedial treatment of failed endovascular PAR., (Copyright © 2016 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Carotid artery stenting (CAS) has become an alternative to carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for select patients with carotid atherosclerosis. We hypothesized that the choice of CAS vs CEA varies as a function of treating physician specialty, which would result in regional variation in the relative use of these treatment types., Methods: We used Medicare claims (2002-2010) to calculate annual rates of CAS and CEA and examined changes by procedure type over time. To assess regional preferences surrounding CAS, we calculated the proportion of revascularizations by CAS, across hospital referral regions, defined according to the Dartmouth Atlas of Healthcare. We then examined relationships between patient factors, physician specialty, and regional use of CAS., Results: The annual number of all carotid revascularization procedures decreased by 30% from 2002 to 2010 (3.2 to 2.3 per 1000; P = .005). Whereas rates of CEA declined by 35% during these 8 years (3.0 to 1.9 per 1000; P < .001), CAS utilization increased by 5% during the same interval (0.30 to 0.32 per 1000; P = .014). Variation in utilization of carotid revascularization varied across the Unites States, with some regions performing as few as 0.7 carotid procedure per 1000 beneficiaries (Honolulu, Hawaii) and others performing nearly 8 times as many (5.3 per 1000 in Houma, La). Variation in procedure type (CEA vs CAS) was evident as well, as the proportion of carotid revascularization procedures that were constituted by CAS varied from 0% (Casper, Wyo, and Meridian, Miss) to 53% (Bend, Ore). The majority of CAS procedures were performed by cardiologists (49% of all CAS cases), who doubled their rates of CAS during the study period from 0.07 per 1000 in 2002 to 0.15 per 1000 in 2010., Conclusions: Variation in rates of carotid revascularization exists. Whereas rates of carotid revascularization have declined by more than 30% in recent years, utilization of CAS has increased. The proportion of all carotid revascularization procedures performed as CAS varies markedly by geographic region, and regions with the highest proportion of cardiologists perform the most CAS procedures. Evidence-based guidelines for carotid revascularization will require a multidisciplinary approach to ensure uniform adoption across specialties that care for patients with carotid artery disease., (Copyright © 2016 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Optimal patient selection for lower extremity revascularization remains a clinical challenge among the hemodialysis-dependent (HD). The purpose of this study was to examine contemporary real world open and endovascular outcomes of HD patients to better facilitate patient selection for intervention., Methods: A regional multicenter registry was queried between 2003 and 2013 for HD patients (N = 689) undergoing open surgical bypass (n = 295) or endovascular intervention (n = 394) for lower extremity revascularization. Patient demographics and comorbidities were recorded. The primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes included graft patency, freedom from major adverse limb events, and amputation-free survival (AFS). Multivariate analysis was performed to identify independent risk factors for death and amputation., Results: Among the 689 HD patients undergoing lower extremity revascularization, 66% were male, and 83% were white. Ninety percent of revascularizations were performed for critical limb ischemia and 8% for claudication. Overall survival at 1, 2, and 5 years survival remained low at 60%, 43%, and 21%, respectively. Overall 1- and 2-year AFS was 40% and 17%. Mortality accounted for the primary mode of failure for both open bypass (78%) and endovascular interventions (80%) at two years. Survival, AFS, and freedom from major adverse limb event outcomes did not differ significantly between revascularization techniques. At 2 years, endovascular patency was higher than open bypass (76% vs 26%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.28-0.71; P = .02). Multivariate analysis identified age ≥80 years (hazard ratio [HR], 1.9; 95% CI, 1.4-2.5; P < .01), indication of rest pain or tissue loss (HR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.3-2.6; P < .01), preoperative wheelchair/bedridden status (HR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-2.1; P < .01), coronary artery disease (HR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.2-1.9; P < .01), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (HR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.1-1.8; P = .01) as independent predictors of death. The presence of three or more risk factors resulted in predicted 1-year mortality of 64%., Conclusions: Overall survival and AFS among HD patients remains poor, irrespective of revascularization strategy. Mortality remains the primary driver for these findings and justifies a prudent approach to patient selection. Focus for improved results should emphasize predictors of survival to better identify those most likely to benefit from revascularization., (Copyright © 2015 Society for Vascular Surgery. All rights reserved.)

The intensity and quality of medical care provided to patients with critical limb ischemia (CLI) varies by geography, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. Although vascular surgery societal performance goals have been set forth, no consensus criteria exist by which to benchmark the quality of health care delivery specifically for CLI patients. We review existing broad performance measures for patients with peripheral vascular disease and suggest those with optimal care delivery suited for CLI (eg, ankle-brachial index, optimal medical therapy, smoking cessation, and duplex surveillance). Further, we propose that diabetic management, degree of wound healing, and quality of life measures be considered as additional quality measures for CLI management. In combination, these criteria provide a simple yet powerful metric that might allow for standardization of CLI care and comparisons across institutions, with the potential for diminishing the disparity that exists in current treatment practices., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is associated with significant direct device costs. Such costs place EVAR at odds with efforts to constrain healthcare expenditures. This study examines the procedure-associated costs and operating margins associated with EVAR at a tertiary care academic medical center., Methods: All infrarenal EVARs performed from April 2011 to March 2012 were identified (n = 127). Among this cohort, 49 patients met standard commercial instruction for use guidelines, were treated using a single manufacturer device, and billed to Medicare diagnosis-related group (DRG) 238. Of these 49 patients, net technical operating margins (technical revenue minus technical cost) were calculated in conjunction with the hospital finance department. EVAR implant costs were determined for each procedure. DRG 238-associated costs and length of stay were benchmarked against other academic medical centers using University Health System Consortium 2012 data., Results: Among the studied EVAR cohort (age 75, 82% male, mean length of stay, 1.7 days), mean technical costs totaled $31,672. Graft implants accounted for 52% of the allocated technical costs. Institutional overhead was 17% ($5495) of total technical costs. Net mean total technical EVAR-associated operating margins were -$4015 per procedure. Our institutional costs and length of stay, when benchmarked against comparable centers, remained in the lowest quartile nationally using University Health System Consortium costs for DRG 238. Stent graft price did not correlate with total EVAR market share., Conclusions: EVAR is currently associated with significant negative operating margins among Medicare beneficiaries. Currently, device costs account for over 50% of EVAR-associated technical costs and did not impact EVAR market share, reflecting an unawareness of cost differential among surgeons. These data indicate that EVAR must undergo dramatic care delivery redesign for this practice to remain sustainable., (Copyright © 2014 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Clinical pathways aimed at reducing hospital length of stay following vascular surgery have been broadly implemented to reduce costs. However, early hospital discharge may adversely affect the risk of readmission or mortality. To address this question, we examined the relationship between early discharge and 30-day outcomes among patients undergoing a high-risk vascular surgery procedure, thoracic aortic aneurysm (TAA) repair., Methods: Using Medicare claims from 2000 to 2007, we identified all patients who were discharged home following elective thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR) and open repair for nonruptured TAAs. For each procedure, we examined the correlation between early discharge (<3 days for TEVAR, <7 days for open TAA repair) and 30-day readmission, 30-day mortality, and hospital costs. Predictors of readmission were evaluated using logistic regression models controlling for patient comorbidities, perioperative complications, and discharge location., Results: Our sample included 9764 patients, of which 7850 (80%) underwent open TAA repair, and 1914 (20%) underwent TEVAR. Patients discharged to home early were more likely to be female (66% early vs 56% late), Caucasian (94% early vs 91% late), younger (73 years early vs 74 years late), and have fewer comorbidities (mean Charlson score: 0.7 early vs 1.0 late) than patients discharged home late (all P < .01). As compared with patients who were discharged late, patients discharged home early following uncomplicated open TAA repair and TEVAR had significantly lower 30-day readmission rates ([open: 17% vs 24%; P < .001] [TEVAR: 12% vs 23%; P < .001]) and hospital costs ([open: $73,061 vs $136,480; P < .001] [TEVAR: $58,667 vs $128,478; P < .001]), without an observed increase in 30-day postdischarge mortality. In multivariable analysis, early hospital discharge was associated with a significantly lower likelihood of readmission following both open TAA repair (odds ratio, 0.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.57-0.85; P < .001) and TEVAR (odds ratio, 0.57; 95% confidence interval, 0.38-0.85; P < .01) procedures., Conclusions: Discharging patients home early following uncomplicated TEVAR or open TAA repair is associated with reduced hospital costs without adversely impacting 30-day readmission or mortality rates. These data support the safety and cost-effectiveness of programs aimed at early hospital discharge in selected vascular surgery patients., (Copyright © 2013 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Volume-based disparities in surgical care are often associated with poorer results in African American patients. We examined the effect of treatment patterns and outcomes, by race, for isolated thoracic aortic aneurysm (TAA)., Methods: Using Medicare claims (1999-2007), we studied all patients undergoing repair of TAAs, via open surgery or thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR). We studied 30-day mortality and complications by race, procedure type, and hospital volume., Results: We studied 12,573 patients who underwent open TAA repair (4% of whom were black) and 2732 patients who underwent TEVAR (8% of whom were black). In open repair, black patients had higher 30-day mortality than white patients (18% vs 10%; P<.001), while mortality rates were similar with TEVAR (8% black vs 9% white; P=.56). For open repair, black patients were more likely to undergo surgery at low-volume hospitals, where overall operative mortality was highest (14% at very low-volume hospitals, 7% at very high-volume hospitals; P<.001). However, for TEVAR, black patients were not more likely to undergo repair at low-volume hospitals, and mortality differences were not evident across volume strata (9% at very low-volume hospitals, 7% at very high-volume hospitals; P=.328). Multivariable analyses adjusting for age, sex, race, comorbidity, and volume confirmed that increased perioperative mortality was associated with black race for open surgery (OR, 2.0, 95% CI, 1.5-2.5; P<.001) but not TEVAR (OR, 0.9, 95% CI, 0.6-1.5; P=.721)., Conclusions: While racial disparities in surgical care have a significant effect on mortality with open thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair, black patients undergoing TEVAR obtain similar outcomes as white patients. New technology can limit the effect of racial disparities in surgical care., (Copyright © 2013 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) is a quality measure recorded by initiatives such as the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP). However, because surveillance-detected DVT rates may be higher than symptomatic DVT rates, we examined how differences in the method of DVT detection may affect the use of this quality measure., Methods: Using the NSQIP database (2007-2009), we compared DVT rates of vascular (amputation, open aortic procedures, and lower extremity bypass) and nonvascular (prostatectomy, gastric bypass [GBP], and hip arthroplasty) operations. Using a predefined literature search strategy, we compared the incidence of DVT in NSQIP to the incidence of DVT reported in published literature, diagnosed by symptomatic status or by surveillance studies., Results: Within NSQIP, the overall incidence of postoperative DVT was 0.7%. This varied from 0.3% after GBP to 1.8% after open aortic surgery. Across all procedures except amputation, the incidence of DVT in NSQIP was similar to the incidence of DVT reported in our literature survey of "symptomatic" DVTs. The relative rate (RR) of literature-derived symptomatic DVTs to NSQIP ranged from 0.7 for aortic cases (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.3-1.7) to 1.4 (95% CI, .7-3.1) for GBP. Overall, surveillance studies had 11.6 higher RR of DVT compared to NSQIP (95% CI, 10.5-13), ranging from 2.6 for GBP (95% CI, 1.4-5) to 14 .5 for hip arthroplasty (95% CI, 10.5-20)., Conclusions: The incidence of DVT reported in NSQIP is similar to the reported incidence of symptomatic DVT for many high-risk procedures but is much lower than rates of DVT reported in surveillance studies. Clear delineation of symptomatic vs surveillance detection of DVT would improve the usefulness of this measurement in quality improvement registries., (Copyright © 2012 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Some patients who undergo lower extremity bypass (LEB) for critical limb ischemia ultimately require amputation. The functional outcome achieved by these patients after amputation is not well known. Therefore, we sought to characterize the functional outcome of patients who undergo amputation after LEB, and to describe the pre- and perioperative factors associated with independent ambulation at home after lower extremity amputation., Methods: Within a cohort of 3,198 patients who underwent an LEB between January, 2003 and December, 2008, we studied 436 patients who subsequently received an above-knee (AK), below-knee (BK), or minor (forefoot or toe) ipsilateral or contralateral amputation. Our main outcome measure consisted of a "good functional outcome," defined as living at home and ambulating independently. We calculated univariate and multivariate associations among patient characteristics and our main outcome measure, as well as overall survival., Results: Of the 436 patients who underwent amputation within the first year following LEB, 224 of 436 (51.4%) had a minor amputation, 105 of 436 (24.1%) had a BK amputation, and 107 of 436 (24.5%) had an AK amputation. The majority of AK (75 of 107, 72.8%) and BK amputations (72 of 105, 70.6%) occurred in the setting of bypass graft thrombosis, whereas nearly all minor amputations (200 of 224, 89.7%) occurred with a patent bypass graft. By life-table analysis at 1 year, we found that the proportion of surviving patients with a good functional outcome varied by the presence and extent of amputation (proportion surviving with good functional outcome = 88% no amputation, 81% minor amputation, 55% BK amputation, and 45% AK amputation, p = 0.001). Among those analyzed at long-term follow-up, survival was slightly lower for those who had a minor amputation when compared with those who did not receive an amputation after LEB (81 vs. 88%, p = 0.02). Survival among major amputation patients did not significantly differ compared with no amputation (BK amputation 87%, p = 0.14, AK amputation 89%, p = 0.27); however, this part of the analysis was limited by its sample size (n = 212). In multivariable analysis, we found that the patients most likely to remain ambulatory and live independently despite undergoing a lower extremity amputation were those living at home preoperatively (hazard ratio [HR]: 6.8, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.94-49, p = 0.058) and those with preoperative statin use (HR: 1.6, 95% CI: 1.2-2.1, p = 0.003), whereas the presence of several comorbidities identified patients less likely to achieve a good functional outcome: coronary disease (HR: 0.6, 95% CI: 0.5-0.9, p = 0.003), dialysis (HR: 0.5, 95% CI: 0.3-0.9, p = 0.02), and congestive heart failure (HR: 0.5, 95% CI: 0.3-0.8, p = 0.005)., Conclusions: A postoperative amputation at any level impacts functional outcomes following LEB surgery, and the extent of amputation is directly related to the effect on functional outcome. It is possible, based on preoperative patient characteristics, to identify patients undergoing LEB who are most or least likely to achieve good functional outcomes even if a major amputation is ultimately required. These findings may assist in patient education and surgical decision making in patients who are poor candidates for lower extremity bypass., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: The goal of this study was to describe short- and long-term survival of patients with descending thoracic aortic aneurysms (TAAs) after open and endovascular repair (TEVAR)., Methods and Results: Using Medicare claims from 1998 to 2007, we analyzed patients who underwent repair of intact and ruptured TAA, identified from a combination of procedural and diagnostic International Classification of Disease, ninth revision, codes. Our main outcome measure was mortality, defined as perioperative mortality (death occurring before hospital discharge or within 30 days), and 5-year survival, from life-table analysis. We examined outcomes across repair type (open repair or TEVAR) in crude, adjusted (for age, sex, race, procedure year, and Charlson comorbidity score), and propensity-matched cohorts. Overall, we studied 12 573 Medicare patients who underwent open repair and 2732 patients who underwent TEVAR. Perioperative mortality was lower in patients undergoing TEVAR compared with open repair for both intact (6.1% versus 7.1%; P=0.07) and ruptured (28% versus 46%; P<0.0001) TAA. However, patients with intact TAA selected for TEVAR had significantly worse survival than open patients at 1 year (87% for open, 82% for TEVAR; P=0.001) and 5 years (72% for open; 62% for TEVAR; P=0.001). Furthermore, in adjusted and propensity-matched cohorts, patients selected for TEVAR had worse 5-year survival than patients selected for open repair., Conclusions: Although perioperative mortality is lower with TEVAR, Medicare patients selected for TEVAR have worse long-term survival than patients selected for open repair. The results of this observational study suggest that higher-risk patients are being offered TEVAR and that some do not benefit on the basis of long-term survival. Future work is needed to identify TEVAR candidates unlikely to benefit from repair.

Objectives: Successful surgical management of thoracic aortic aneurysms (TAA) and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAA) has historically relied upon open surgical repair (OSR). More recently, the advent and application of thoracic endovascular stent graft aneurysm repair (TEVAR) permutations have become increasingly performed in contemporary practice. To better determine the effect of TEVAR techniques on OSR, we examined national and regional trends in treatment use., Methods: All Medicare patients from 1998 through 2007 undergoing isolated TAA and TAAA repair were analyzed using a clinically validated algorithm using diagnostic International Classification of Disease 9th revision (ICD-9; 441.1, 441.2, 441.6, 441.7, 441.9) codes and procedural (ICD-9 OSR: 38.35, 38.45 and TEVAR: 39.73, 39.79) codes. Differential rates of OSR and TEVAR were compared across census tract regions during the study interval., Results: Total complex aortic repairs increased by 60%, from 10.8 to 17.8/100,000, between 1998 and 2007 (P < .001). A dramatic increase occurred in TEVAR (not performed in 1998, 5.8/100,000 in 2007) during the study period, but OSR rates remained stable during the same interval (10.7 to 12.0/100,000 in 2007, P = NS). There was substantial regional variation for both OSR and TEVAR. This regional variation was greater in OSR (range, 8.8-16.7/100,000) than in TEVAR (range, 4.5-6.9/100,000)., Conclusions: Degenerative TAA and TAAA aneurysms are being repaired in the United States at an increasing rate. This reflects the rapid acceptance of TEVAR, which apparently supplements rather than supplants OSR. There appears to be greater regional variation in OSR compared with TEVAR. These data may have significant implications for those interested in the effect of new technologies on health care and cost containment., (Copyright © 2011 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)