Search

Patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) can choose open repair or endovascular repair (EVAR). While EVAR is less invasive, it requires lifelong surveillance and more frequent aneurysm-related reinterventions than open repair. A decision aid may help patients receive their preferred type of AAA repair.To determine the effect of a decision aid on agreement between patient preference for AAA repair type and the repair type they receive.In this cluster randomized trial, 235 patients were randomized at 22 VA vascular surgery clinics. All patients had AAAs greater than 5.0 cm in diameter and were candidates for both open repair and EVAR. Data were collected from August 2017 to December 2020, and data were analyzed from December 2020 to June 2021.Presurgical consultation using a decision aid vs usual care.The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who had agreement between their preference and their repair type, measured using χ2 analyses, κ statistics, and adjusted odds ratios.Of 235 included patients, 234 (99.6%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 73 (5.9) years. A total of 126 patients were enrolled in the decision aid group, and 109 were enrolled in the control group. Within 2 years after enrollment, 192 (81.7%) underwent repair. Patients were similar between the decision aid and control groups by age, sex, aneurysm size, iliac artery involvement, and Charlson Comorbidity Index score. Patients preferred EVAR over open repair in both groups (96 of 122 [79%] in the decision aid group; 81 of 106 [76%] in the control group; P = .60). Patients in the decision aid group were more likely to receive their preferred repair type than patients in the control group (95% agreement [93 of 98] vs 86% agreement [81 of 94]; P = .03), and κ statistics were higher in the decision aid group (κ = 0.78; 95% CI, 0.60-0.95) compared with the control group (κ = 0.53; 95% CI, 0.32-0.74). Adjusted models confirmed this association (odds ratio of agreement in the decision aid group relative to control group, 2.93; 95% CI, 1.10-7.70).Patients exposed to a decision aid were more likely to receive their preferred AAA repair type, suggesting that decision aids can help better align patient preferences and treatments in major cardiovascular procedures.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03115346.

Objective Type 3 Endoleaks (T3EL) following complex EVAR (c-EVAR) for abdominal aortic aneurysm have been historically difficult to study due to their relative rarity. Previous studies within standard infrarenal EVAR have found an association between T3EL and decreased survival. This study aims to evaluate the occurrence of T3EL in a national multicenter cohort, identify potential procedural characteristics associated with T3EL development, and determine their impact on clinical outcomes in c-EVAR. Methods A retrospective cohort review was conducted of elective c-EVAR for non-ruptured aneurysms within the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) between January 2010 and March 2020. The VQI standards define c-EVAR as suprarenal or pararenal AAA repaired with any thoracoabdominal repairs, fenestrated/branched repairs, parallel stent repairs, custom manufactured devices, and physician modified endografts. End-points assessed were rates of T3EL within c-EVAR, and impact of T3EL on reintervention and survival. Index endoleaks were defined as endoleaks discovered during index hospitalization. Incident endoleaks were defined as new endoleaks, that were not present at index hospitalization, discovered at follow-up. Results 4,070 c-EVAR cases were identified between January 2010 and March 2020, of which, 2,656 (65.2%) had appropriate follow-up data. Half the cohort had a modified or custom graft (n=2,055/4,070, 50.5%). Branches were employed in 3,687 patients (90.5%), while fenestrations and chimney techniques were documented in 13% (n=533) and 15.1% (n=613) respectively . The rate of index T3EL was 4.1% (n=167), and the rate of incident T3EL at follow-up was 0.04% (n=1). Devices categorized as either custom or physician modified were utilized more frequently in patients with index T3EL (78.4%, n=131/167) compared to patients without index T3EL (49.2%, n=1,924/3,903) (p Conclusions T3EL in c-EVAR remain relatively uncommon and are identified predominately at index hospitalization. Development of T3EL was associated with higher device modularity and modification, which suggests that as device technologies continue to advance and become more intricate the occurrence of T3EL may persist and continue to require evaluation. In this study, the presence of T3EL did not appear to have a statistically significant relationship with aortic reinterventions or survival, however these findings are not definitive due to low event rate numbers and high potential for Type 2 errors. Amid the theoretical risk of device fatigue and degeneration, continued evaluations of large cohorts at extended follow-up intervals and diligent reporting remain paramount.

Spinal cord ischemia (SCI) is a dreaded complication of thoracic and complex endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR/cEVAR). Controversy exists surrounding cerebrospinal fluid drain (CSFD) use, especially preoperative prophylactic placement, owing to concerns regarding catheter-related complications. However, these risks are balanced by the widely accepted benefits of CSFDs during open repair to prevent and/or rescue patients with SCI. The importance of this issue is underscored by the paucity of data on CSFD practice patterns, limiting the development of practice guidelines. Therefore, the purpose of the present analysis was to evaluate the differences between patients who developed SCI despite preoperative CSFD placement and those treated with therapeutic postoperative CSFD placement.All elective TEVAR/cEVAR procedures for degenerative aneurysm pathology in the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative from 2014 to 2019 were analyzed. CSFD use over time, the factors associated with preoperative prophylactic vs postoperative therapeutic CSFD placement in patients with SCI (transient or permanent), and outcomes were evaluated. Survival differences were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.A total of 3406 TEVAR/cEVAR procedures met the inclusion criteria, with an overall SCI rate of 2.3% (n = 88). The SCI rate decreased from 4.55% in 2014 to 1.43% in 2018. Prophylactic preoperative CSFD use was similar over time (2014, 30%; vs 2018, 27%; P = .8). After further exclusions to evaluate CSFD use in those who had developed SCI, 72 patients were available for analysis, 48 with SCI and prophylactic CSFD placement and 24 with SCI and therapeutic CSFD placement. Specific to SCI, the patient demographics and comorbidities were not significantly different between the prophylactic and therapeutic groups, with the exception of previous aortic surgery, which was more common in the prophylactic CSFD cohort (46% vs 23%; P .001). The SCI outcome was significantly worse for the therapeutic group because 79% had documented permanent paraplegia at discharge compared with 54% of the prophylactic group (P = .04). SCI patients receiving a postoperative therapeutic CSFD had had worse survival than those with a preoperative prophylactic CSFD (50% ± 10% vs 71% ± 9%; log-rank P = .1; Wilcoxon P = .05).Prophylactic CSFD use with TEVAR/cEVAR remained stable during the study period. Of the SCI patients, postoperative therapeutic CSFD placement was associated with worse sustained neurologic outcomes and overall survival compared with preoperative prophylactic CSFD placement. These findings highlight the need for a randomized clinical trial to examine prophylactic vs therapeutic CSFD placement in association with TEVAR/cEVAR.

Objective Previous publications have clearly established a correlation between timing of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) and complications after treatment of complicated acute type B aortic dissection (ATBAD). However, the temporal association of TEVAR with morbidity after uncomplicated presentations is poorly understood and has not previously been examined using real-world national data. Therefore, the objective of this analysis was to determine whether TEVAR timing of uncomplicated ATBAD (UATBAD) is associated with postoperative complications. Methods The Vascular Quality Initiative TEVAR and complex endovascular aneurysm repair registry was analyzed from 2010 to 2019. Procedures performed for non-dissection-related disease as well as for ATBAD with malperfusion or rupture were excluded. Because of inherent differences between timing cohorts, propensity score matching was performed to ensure like comparisons. Univariate and multivariable analysis after matching was used to determine differences between timing groups (symptom onset to TEVAR: acute, 1-14 days; subacute, 15-90 days) for postoperative mortality, in-hospital complications, and reintervention. Results A total of 688 cases meeting inclusion criteria were identified. After matching 187 patients in each of the 1- to 14-day and 15- to 90-day treatment groups, there were no statistically significant differences between groups. On univariate analysis, the 1- to 14-day treatment group had a higher proportion of cases requiring reintervention within 30 days (15.3%) compared with UATBAD patients undergoing TEVAR within 15 to 90 days (5.2%; P = .02). There was also a difference (P = .007) at 1 year, with 33.8% of the 1- to 14-day UATBAD patients undergoing reintervention compared with 14.5% for the 15- to 90-day group. There were no statistically significant differences on multivariable analysis for long-term survival, complications, or long-term reintervention. There was a trend toward significance (P = .08) with the 1- to 14-day group having 2.3 times the odds of requiring an in-hospital reintervention compared with the 15- to 90-day group. Conclusions Timing of TEVAR for UATBAD does not appear to predict mortality or postoperative complications. However, there is a strong association between repair within 1 to 14 days and higher risk of reintervention. This may in part be related to the 1- to 14-day group's representing an inherently higher anatomic or physiologic risk population that cannot be entirely accounted for with propensity analysis. The role of optimal timing to intervention should be incorporated into future study design of TEVAR trials for UATBAD.

Enhanced recovery programs (ERPs) have gained wide acceptance across multiple surgical disciplines to improve postoperative outcomes and to decrease hospital length of stay (LOS). However, there is limited information in the existing literature for vascular patients. We describe the implementation and early results of an ERP and barriers to its implementation for lower extremity bypass surgery. Our intention is to provide a framework to assist with implementation of similar ERPs.Using the plan, do, check, adjust methodology, a multidisciplinary team was assembled. A database was used to collect information on patient-, procedure-, and ERP-specific metrics. We then retrospectively analyzed patients' demographics and outcomes.During 9 months, an ERP (n = 57) was successfully developed and implemented spanning preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative phases. ERP and non-ERP patient demographics were statistically similar. Early successes include 97% use of fascia iliaca block and multimodal analgesia administration in 81%. Barriers included only 47% of patients achieving day of surgery mobilization and 19% receiving celecoxib preoperatively. ERP patients had decreased total and postoperative LOS compared with non-ERP patients (n = 190) with a mean (standard deviation) total LOS of 8.32 (8.4) days vs 11.14 (10.1) days (P = .056) and postoperative LOS of 6.12 (6.02) days vs 7.98 (7.52) days (P = .089). There was significant decrease in observed to expected postoperative LOS (1.28 [0.66] vs 1.82 [1.38]; P = .005). Variable and total costs for ERP patients were significantly reduced ($13,208 [$9930] vs $18,777 [$19,118; P .01] and $29,865 [$22,110] vs $40,328 [$37,820; P = .01], respectively).Successful implementation of ERP for lower extremity bypass carries notable challenges but can have a significant impact on practice patterns. Further adjustment of our current protocol is anticipated, but early results are promising. Implementation of a vascular surgery ERP reduced variable and total costs and decreased total and postoperative LOS. We believe this protocol can easily be implemented at other institutions using the pathway outlined.

Although endovascular peripheral vascular interventions (PVI) are typically limited to vessels above the knee in intermittent claudication (IC), some patients have concomitant or isolated infrapopliteal disease with IC. The benefits and risks of undergoing tibial intervention remain unclear in IC patients. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the prevalence and outcomes of infrapopliteal PVI for IC.The Vascular Quality Initiative was queried for PVI procedures performed for IC between 2003 and 2018. Patients were divided into 3 groups: isolated femoropopliteal (FP), isolated infrapopliteal (IP), and combined above and below knee interventions (COM). Multivariable logistic regression models identified predictors of minor and major amputation, as well as freedom from reintervention. Kaplan-Meier plots estimate amputation-free survival.We identified 34,944 PVI procedures for IC. There were 31,110 (89.0%) FP interventions, 1,045 (3.0%) IP interventions, and 2,789 (8.0%) COM interventions. Kaplan-Meier plots of amputation-free survival revealed that patients with any IP intervention had significantly higher rates of both minor and major amputation (log rank0.001). Freedom from reintervention at 1-year was 89.2% for the FP group, 91.3% for the IP group, and 85.3% for the COM group (P 0.0001). In multivariable analysis, factors associated with an increased risk of major amputation included isolated IP intervention (OR 6.47, 95% CI, 6.45-6.49; P 0.0001), COM interventions (OR 2.32, 95% CI, 2.31-2.33; P 0.0001), dialysis dependence (OR 3.34, 95% CI, 3.33-3.35; P 0.0001), CHF (OR 1.86, 95% CI, 1.85-1.86; P = 0.021) and, nonwhite race (OR 1.64, 95% CI, 1.63-1.64; P = 0.013).PVI in the infrapopliteal vessels for IC is associated with higher amputation rates. This observation may suggest the need for more careful patient selection when performing PVI in patients with IC where disease extends into the infrapopliteal level.

In this study, pre-operative medical complexity is estimated by the independently validated Vascular Quality Initiative VQI Cardiac Risk Index (CRI). This study aims to identify and correlate trends of CRI for open abdominal aortic aneurysm (OAR) with trends in the CRI for corresponding endovascular aortic repair (EVAR). This assessment of differences in estimated procedural risks will be used to support the theory that, patient migration is an important factor contributing to decreased POMI following open vascular procedures.A retrospective review of VQI data from 2003 to 2020 for all patients undergoing elective aortic repairs (OAR and EVAR) was conducted. The CRI scoring developed for the open repair (oCRI) was applied to both the OAR and EVAR cohorts, with variables specific to EVAR translated from similar open repair factors in the model where feasible. To evaluate for changes across time, patients were grouped into Eras based on year of procedure, subsequently, univariate analysis of post-operative myocardial infarction (POMI) rates and CRI scores were perfomed between each era.A total of 56,067 elective aortic repairs were identified (83% EVAR, 17% OAR). Within the OAR cohort, the average oCRI estimate was 7.1% with significant decrease across the studied timeframe (8% ± 4.6%→6.9% ± 4.4%, P 0.001), which corresponded to a significant decrease in observed clinical myocardial infarction (MI) rate (4.1%→1.4%, P 0.001). Over that same time period, the open CRI was applied to the EVAR cohort, and the average oCRI estimate was 7.2% and showed a significant increase (6.6% ± 2.8%→7.2% ± 4.4%, P 0.001). Within the EVAR cohort, the eCRI estimate did not show any significant changes over time (average 0.48%), while the actual rate of clinical MI showed a significant decrease (1.1%→0.3%, P = 0.002). Gap analysis was conducted within the EVAR cohort between CRI estimates of procedural risks from an open operation versus an EVAR, which demonstrated that patients within the EVAR cohort would, on an average, has had 6.7% higher risk of POMI had they undergone an open procedure.Paradigm shifts with regard to patient selection for aortic repair is evident within this large national cohort. Over time, OAR patients had fewer preoperative estimated cardiac comorbidities and there is a corresponding decrease in POMI rates. As high-risk patients migrate from OAR to EVAR, there has been a subsequent increase in EVAR estimated pre-operative risks as the patients become more medically high-risk. Despite increasing complexity, rates of POMI in EVAR significantly decreased, potentially explained by improved operative technique and peri-operative care.

OBJECTIVES: Statin therapy has been associated with improved clinical outcomes in patients undergoing treatment for vascular disease. Current guidelines do not address statin therapy in isolated abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) in the absence of other atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). This study aims to elucidate effects of statin therapy, either as monotherapy or combined with antiplatelet agents, on the long-term mortality of patients with and without ASCVD who undergo elective AAA repair. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed on all AAA patients treated electively with endovascular (EVAR) and open aortic repair (OAR) in the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative from 2003–2020. Long-term mortality was evaluated based on the presence of statin and antiplatelet medication use at discharge stratified by those with and without a history of ASCVD. Unadjusted survival was estimated by Kaplan Meier methodology. Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to determine mortality risk after adjusting for key factors. RESULTS: A total of 47,012 AAA repairs were selected for analysis: 80.7% EVAR (N=40,153) and 19.3% OAR (N=6,859). EVAR patients on combined statin/antiplatelet (AP) therapy had significantly better survival irrespective of whether they had known ASCVD. In the presence of ASCVD, EVAR patients on statin alone had improved survival compared to those not on a statin (10.9±0.5 vs 10.5±0.4 years, Log Rank

Clinical trials at the advent of endovascular aortic aneurysm repairs (EVARs) demonstrated improved early survival with EVAR compared to open repairs; however, characterizations of routine contemporary care have been limited. This study compares postoperative survival among Veterans in clinical care following abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair with EVAR versus open repairs since the widespread adoption of EVAR.This retrospective cohort analysis of Veterans with AAA repairs from 2007 to 2020 at Veterans Affairs (VA) facilities evaluated survival by a repair method. Administrative International Classification of Diseases 9/10 codes and sociodemographic characteristics from structured charting were used for characterization and adjusted analyses. Demographics were compared via Chi-squared and Wilcoxon rank-sum testing and mortality evaluated using Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard analyses.Among 15,480 AAA repairs (3566 open, and 11,914 EVAR), patients receiving open repairs were younger with lower Charlson scores compared to EVARs. EVAR was associated with better survival until 2.4 y post-procedure. Mean long-term survival, however, was higher for open surgery (6.3 ± 3.8 versus 5.8 ± 3.1 y in EVAR). After adjustment for gender, race, and ethnicity, EVAR was associated with worse survival (mortality hazard ratio [HR] 1.17; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.11-1.24) as was each increment in Charlson score (HR 1.11; CI 1.10-1.12), whereas service-connected care (HR 0.73; CI, 0.70-0.77) and age (HR 0.99; CI, 0.98-0.99) were associated with better survival.In contemporary Veteran aneurysm repairs, although a higher early survival rate was observed in EVAR repairs, long-term survival was higher for open repairs. Service-connected care was independently associated with greater survival after aneurysm repair.

Statin use is recommended in all patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD) owing to its morbidity and mortality benefits. However, the effect of statin use on limb salvage in patients with PAD after intervention is unclear. We examined the effect of statin use on limb salvage and survival among patients with PAD undergoing surgical or endovascular intervention.A total of 488 patients with PAD were identified who underwent surgical (n = 297) or endovascular (n = 191) intervention between 2009 and 2010. Information was collected from electronic medical records and the Social Security Death Index. Predictors of ongoing statin use were identified first by univariate analysis and then via multivariable logistic regression. Survival and freedom from amputation were identified using Kaplan-Meier plots and adjusted hazard ratios by Cox regression.Of the 488 patients with PAD with intervention, 39% were non-whites, 44% were females, 41% received statins, 56% received antiplatelets, 26% received oral anticoagulants, 9% required a major amputation, and 11% died during follow-up of up to 88 months. Statin users were more often male (P = .03), white (P = .03), smokers (P .01), and had higher comorbidities such as coronary artery disease (P .01), hypertension (P .01), and diabetes (P .01). Antiplatelet use was not associated with limb salvage (P = .13), but did improve survival (P .01). Dual antiplatelet therapy did not show any benefit over monotherapy for limb salvage (P = .4) or survival (P = .3). Statin use was associated with improved survival (P = .04), and improved limb salvage (hazard ratio, 0.3; 95% confidence interval, 0.1-0.7) after adjusting for severity of disease, traditional risk factors, and concurrent antiplatelet use.Statin use in patients with PAD with interventions was associated with improved limb salvage and survival. Despite existing guidelines, statin therapy was low in our PAD population, and efforts are ongoing to increase their use across the health care system.

We investigated the clinical practice and volume trends of inferior vena cava filter (IVCF) usage at a single institution for an extended period and identified the potential factors affecting the clinical decision for placement, follow-up, and retrieval.An institutional database was queried for IVCFs placed from 2000 to 2018 using the Current Procedural Terminology codes. The medical records were reviewed to evaluate the demographics, economic status, placement indication, IVCF type, follow-up evaluation for retrieval, and retrieval success rates. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS, and t tests for continuous and χA total of 3915 IVCFs were placed from 2000 to 2018. The placement of IVCFs had increased steadily from 2000 (127 IVCFs/y), peaking in 2010 at 371 IVCFs/y and representing a 292% increase in IVCF usage. Since 2010, the number of IVCFs placed has steadily declined until 2016 to 2018, with a 426% decrease from the peak. In a subgroup of IVCFs placed for prophylaxis, the total volume trends paralleled a shift in clinical indications, peaking in 2010 and accounting for 45% of all IVCFs placed and then decreasing from 2013 to 2018 to ≤10%. Overall, 989 permanent IVCFs (25.3%) and 2926 retrievable IVCFs (74.7%) were placed during the entire study period. Before dedicated efforts to implement retrieval follow-up visits, the successful retrieval rate was ∼1% from 2000 to 2006 and had increased to ∼10% to 15% from 2007 to 2015, 36.7% in 2016, 40.2% in 2017, and 40.3% in 2018 after implementation of more active retrieval follow-up protocols. The predictors for the lack of evaluation for IVCF retrieval included an extended length of stay (P = .004) and geographic distance (P .001).The use of IVCFs during the past 19 years at our institution reflected increased usage from 2000 to 2010, corresponding to an increase in prophylactic placement, followed by a decreasing total volume from 2011 to 2018, largely attributable to decreased prophylactic IVCF placement. Improved retrieval rates were seen after implementation of an active IVCF retrieval program.

Introduction Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair may be performed through open or endovascular approaches, but the factors influencing a patient's repair-type preference are not well characterized. Here we performed a qualitative analysis to better understand factors influencing patient preference within the Preference for Open Versus Endovascular Repair of AAA Trial. Methods Open-ended responses regarding primary (n = 21) and secondary (n = 47) factors influencing patient preference underwent qualitative analysis using the constant comparative method with iterative reviews. Codes were used to generate themes and themes grouped into categories, with each step conducted via consensus agreement between three researchers. Relative prevalence of themes were compared to ascertain trends in patient preference. Results Patient responses regarding both primary and secondary factors fell into four categories: Short-term concerns, long-term concerns, advice & experience, and other. Patients most frequently described short-term concerns (23) as their primary influence, with themes including post-op complications, hospitalization & recovery, and intraoperative concerns. Long-term concerns were more prevalent (20) as secondary factors, which included themes such as survival, and chronic management. The average age of patients voicing only long-term concerns as a primary factor was 11 years younger than those listing only short-term concerns. Conclusion Short-term concerns relating to the procedure and recovery are more often the primary factor influencing patient preference, while long term concerns play a more secondary role. Long-term concerns are more often a primary factor in younger patients. Vascular surgeons should consider this information in shared decision making to reach an optimal outcome.

Introduction Mental health disorders (MHD), including substance abuse, have been associated with aortic dissection (AD). Aneurysmal degeneration in the residual untreated aorta after both open and endovascular treatment is not uncommon in AD. Thus, diligent long-term follow-up is necessary and MHD may play a role in treatment plan and surveillance. The impact of MHD on management, outcomes and follow-up after AD treatment is unknown and here we sought to evaluate these associations. Methods A retrospective review was performed on all patients diagnosed with Stanford Type A and B dissections from 2008 to 2018 at a tertiary referral center. MHD was defined by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-V). Patient demographics, procedural characteristics, and outcomes were analyzed. Results A total of 649 non-traumatic aortic dissections were identified in the study timeframe. The cohort consisted of 51% Type A (n = 334) dissection and 49% Type B (n = 315) dissection. Mental health disorders were present in 49.3% of the cohort. Notably, the timing of MHD diagnosis relative to development of AD is unknown in the majority of patients. Within the Type A population, a MHD was present in 50.6% (N = 162) of patients, of which the most common indication for MHD was the presence of antidepressant or antipsychotic medication (28.6%). In patients with Type A dissections, the presence of a MHD did not significantly affect the rate of index hospitalization intervention (68%) or long-term mortality (12.5% in patients with a MHD). Within the Type B population, a MHD was present in 49.4% (n = 158) of patients, of which the most common indication for MHD was the presence of antidepressant or antipsychotic medication (30.5%). In patients with Type B dissections, the presence of a MHD did not significantly affect the rate of index hospitalization intervention (50.3% in patients with a MHD) or long-term mortality (10.1% in patients with a MHD). The overall participation in follow-up care was not significantly decreased based on the presence of a MHD compared to those without a MHD (1.66 ± 2.16 years vs. 1.68 ± 2.20 years, P = 0.93). Conclusion MHD is more prevalent in AD patients than in the general population, but demonstrating a causal relationship between MHD and development/progression of AD is challenging. Despite a high prevalence of MHD in AD patients, in-hospital mortality and follow-up compliance was similar to non-MHD patients.

ObjectivesType 3 endoleaks (T3ELs) represent a lack of aneurysm protection from systemic pressure. Previous studies have found a ~2% incidence of T3EL after standard infrarenal endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR); however, no prior studies with new-generation devices have been able to determine an association between T3EL and clinical outcomes. Here we examine T3EL within the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) to define rates of occurrence, rates and modes of reintervention, and clinical consequences of these endoleaks.Design and settingParticipants receiving infrarenal EVAR in the VQI from January 2003 to September 2018 were analyzed in a retrospective cohort study.ParticipantsOf 42 246 entries in the EVAR procedural registry, 41 604 had complete procedural information and were included in analysis. Of these, 36 082 had long-term follow-up, and 26 422 had follow-up (9–21 months per VQI reporting standards) with complete endoleak data recorded.InterventionsAll patients included in this study underwent an infrarenal EVAR.ResultsWithin the VQI database, the rate of T3EL in infrarenal EVAR during index hospitalization was 0.37% (n=157/41 604), of which 85% were due to midgraft separation and 15% were due to fabric disruptions. Out of the 157 index hospitalization T3ELs, 4.5% (n=7) received procedural reintervention during that hospitalization, which accounted for 1% of all index hospitalization reinterventions. During the 21-month follow-up, the rate of incident T3EL was 0.7% (n=205/26 422), which accounted for 5% of all endoleaks seen during follow-up. Reinterventions for incident T3EL at follow-up were done in 30 patients (rate 0.1%), which accounted for 9% of endoleak reinterventions and 3.3% of all reinterventions. The presence of incident T3EL found during follow-up was associated with a significant decrease in 5-year survival (74% vs 80%, respectively; p=0.041) in Kaplan-Meier analysis.ConclusionT3ELs rates at placement and follow-up remain low; however, the majority reported in long-term follow-up are incident and these incident endoleaks are associated with decreased survival in EVAR.

Vascular surgery has seen rapid increase in the use of less invasive endovascular therapies along with advancements in cardiac perioperative optimization in the past 2 decades. However, a recent American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database study found no improvement in postoperative myocardial infarction (POMI) over a 10-year period in high-risk procedures. The national Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) registry provides a more in-depth characterization of vascular surgery procedures. Here, we sought to evaluate long-term trends in POMI using VQI registry data for patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA), thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), endovascular aortic repair (EVAR), open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (oAAA), suprainguinal bypass (SIB), and infrainguinal bypass (IIB).A retrospective cohort study was performed using data on elective procedures from 2003 to 2017. Procedures were subdivided by date of operation into 3-year era consecutive groups for subanalysis (2003-05, 2006-08, 2009-11, 2012-14, and 2015-17). The incidence of POMI, preoperative risk factors (including individual patient VQI cardiac risk index (CRI)), and demographics were determined over time.A total of 227,837 elective procedures were identified: CEA (n = 88,805, 39.0%), TEVAR (n = 7,494, 3.3%), EVAR (n = 34,376, 15.1%), oAAA (n = 7,568, 3.3%), SIB (n = 11,354, 5.0%), and IIB (n = 34,661, 15.2%). Across all procedures, the overall rate of POMI was 1.3%. POMI rates from 2003-05 to 2015-17 for CEA decreased from 0.9% to 0.7% (P = 0.21), EVAR from 2.0% to 0.7%, P = 0.003, oAAA from 6.8% to 5.1% (P = 0.12), and IIB from 3.8% to 2.4% (P = 0.003). SIB POMI decreased from 3.06% to 2.95%, P = 0.85 from 2009 to 17. While POMI after TEVAR increased from 2.40% to 2.56% from 2009 to 17, P = 0.91. Over these same time periods, only EVAR and IIB had a reduction in CRIs (P = 0.059 and P 0.001, respectively). CEA, EVAR, IIB, and oAAA all showed a significant (P 0.001) increase in preoperative statin use.Except for TEVAR, the incidence of POMI has remained unchanged or decreased over the past 15 years in VQI registries. Patients undergoing IIB and EVAR demonstrated decreases in POMI rates that correspond with a reduction in CRIs and increased preoperative statin use. CEA and SIB had no significant change in POMI rates nor CRIs. The etiology of decreased POMI rate is uncertain, but increasing statin use, patient-specific factors, and patient selection for procedures may be important drivers of this improvement.

Postoperative acute kidney injury (AKI) may complicate both open and endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) and is associated with substantial morbidity, mortality, and health care expense. We aim to evaluate the incidence of postoperative AKI and factors associated with its occurrence and the effects of postoperative AKI on long-term renal function and mortality after open and EVAR in the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative registry.Elective aneurysm cases were identified including thoracic endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (TEVAR) and complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (cEVAR), infrarenal endovascular repair (EVAR) and infrarenal open repair (OAR) from 2003 to 2019. The preoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was calculated using the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease formula and stratified based on chronic kidney disease (CKD) grades. Postoperative AKI was defined per the Vascular Quality Initiative definition as a creatinine increase of 0.5 mg/dL or if postoperative dialysis was required. Patients on preprocedural hemodialysis and those with previous renal transplant were excluded. Demographics and procedural factors were evaluated for predicting in-hospital postoperative AKI (all approaches) and at 9 to 21 months of long-term follow-up (EVAR only) using logistic regression modeling.We identified a total of 2813 cEVAR, 2995 TEVAR, 39,945 EVAR, and 8143 OAR patients. Of those, postoperative AKI occurred in 377 cEVAR (13.5%), 199 TEVAR (6.7%), 1099 EVAR (2.8%), and 1249 OAR (15.5%). Risk factors for postoperative AKI across all groups were worse preoperative eGFR, total number of blood transfusions, perioperative anemia, reinterventions, and postoperative respiratory complications. Additional procedure-specific risk factors of postoperative AKI were preoperative hemoglobin of less than 10 and contrast volume of 125 to 150 mL, hypertension, a low ejection fraction, and a history of percutaneous revascularization for EVAR; for both EVAR/cEVAR, renal artery coverage was a risk factor, whereas for OAR, male sex, non-White race, hypertension, suprarenal aortic cross-clamp, and increased renal ischemic time were risk factors. Among 8133 EVAR patients with long-term follow-up, a decrease in kidney function occurred in 56.7% of patients with postoperative AKI vs 19.9% without postoperative AKI (P .001). The following risk factors were associated with a decrease in renal function at long-term follow-up: postoperative AKI, a preoperative eGFR of less than 90, and hypertension. A preoperative hemoglobin of greater than 12 was protective. Postoperative AKI was associated with significantly lower survival compared with no postoperative AKI across all procedures (log rank 0.001).Postoperative AKI occurs more often in patients with worse preoperative renal function, lower preoperative hemoglobin, and in open surgeries with inter-renal or suprarenal cross-clamping. Importantly, postoperative AKI is associated with increased mortality across all types of aortic repair. Given the long-term impact of postoperative AKI on outcomes for all aortic repairs and the limitations of current insensitive functional indices, there is a need to seek more sensitive indicators of decreases in early renal structural in this population.

Background Vein conduit is known to have better patency than prosthetic for infrainguinal bypass. Here we explore if racial disparities exist in infrainguinal bypass vein conduit use amid preoperative patient and systemic factors. Methods Retrospective Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative data for 23,959 infrainguinal bypasses between 2003 and 2017 for occlusive disease were analyzed. For homogeneity, only infrainguinal bypasses originating from the common femoral artery were included. Demographics of patients receiving vein vs prosthetic were compared and logistic regression analyses were performed with race and preoperative factors to evaluate for predictors of vein conduit use. Results Adjusted regression models demonstrated black patients were 76% as likely ( p Conclusion Racial disparities exist in conduit use for infrainguinal bypass, with black and Hispanic patients less likely to receive vein bypasses. However, the contribution of race to conduit selection is small in adjusted and unadjusted models. Overall, pre-operative variables in the Vascular Quality Initiative poorly predicted vein conduit use for infrainguinal bypass.

Objective Thoracofemoral bypass (TFB) is used infrequently but is an alternative for selective patients with aortoiliac occlusive disease. There is limited data in the existing literature regarding TFB, with all studies being small, single-center series. We aim to describe perioperative and long-term survival, patency, and rate of major perioperative complications following TFB in a large national registry. Methods The Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) suprainguinal bypass module was used to identify patients undergoing TFB for occlusive disease from 2009-2019. A descriptive analysis was performed to provide rates of survival, patency, major complications, and freedom from major amputation in the perioperative period and at 1-year follow up. Major complications were compared by procedure indication with categorical variables analyzed using chi-square tests while continuous variables were analyzed using ANOVA. Kaplan Meier curve analysis was used to estimate survival at 1 and 5-year follow up intervals as well as freedom from major amputation at 1 year. Results There were 154 TFB procedures identified. Fifty-nine patients (38.3%) had prior inflow bypass while 22 patients (14.2%) had prior leg bypass. Procedure indications included claudication (42.9%, n=66), rest pain (38.3%, n=59), tissue loss (12.3%, n=19), and acute limb ischemia (6.5%, n=10). Major complication (wound infection, respiratory, major stroke, new dialysis, cardiac, embolic, major amputation, occlusion) occurred in 31.2% of the cohort, and when examined by indication, acute limb ischemia and claudication cohorts had increased rate of major complication (acute limb ischemia: 60.0%, claudication: 34.8%, critical limb ischemia: 24.4%; p=.05). Survival at 30 days was 95.5% with Kaplan Meier estimated 1-year survival of 92.7% ± 2.2%. Primary patency at discharge from the index hospitalization was 92.9% and 89.0% at 1 year. Postoperative major amputation occurred in 1 patient during index hospitalization with Kaplan Meier estimated freedom from major amputation at 1-year follow up of 97.1% ± 2.2%. Two patients developed in-hospital bypass occlusion and 3 additional patients had occlusion occurring within 1 year for an overall freedom from occlusion rate of 96.8% at 1 year. Conclusion Thoracofemoral bypass is associated with a high rate of perioperative major complications; however, long-term survival and patency following the procedure remain acceptable when performed for limb salvage. High perioperative complication rates of TFB procedures performed for claudication suggest this procedure should be used rarely in this population. These data can be used to counsel patients and aid in decision making prior to operative intervention.

The Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative is a patient safety organization and a collection of procedure-based registries that can be utilized for quality improvement initiatives and clinical outcomes research. The Vascular Quality Initiative consists of voluntary participation by centers to collect data prospectively on all consecutive cases within specific registries which physicians and centers elect to participate. The data capture extends from preoperative demographics and risk factors (including indications for operation), through the perioperative period, to outcomes data at up to 1-year of follow-up. Additionally, longer-term follow-up can be achieved by matching with Medicare claims data, providing long-term longitudinal follow-up for a majority of patients within the Vascular Quality Initiative registries. We present the unique characteristics of the Vascular Quality Initiative registries and highlight important insights gained specific to open and endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

Prior studies have evaluated the effects of statin and antiplatelet agent (APA) medications on patients with peripheral arterial disease. Although the benefits of statin and APA use are well-described, there is a paucity of research into the specific outcomes of patients who are not compliant or those who are unable to take the medication owing to intolerance. Here we examine the outcomes of patients intolerant to statin and APA and compare them with patients who are compliant or noncompliant with these therapies.Patients treated from 2005 to 2018 in the Vascular Quality Initiative registry were included. Patients with missing data or deaths within 30 days of procedure were removed. Patients were considered noncompliant if they were previously prescribed a medication at discharge but were not taking it at 1-year follow-up or if the patient was reported to be noncompliant in the registry. Medication intolerance was defined if listed as "no, for medical reasons," and mortality data were ascertained using the Social Security Death Index, which is regularly cross-referenced to the Vascular Quality Initiative registry.We identified 105,628 patients who met our inclusion criteria. Statin intolerance was noted in 2.3% at discharge and 2.1% at the 1-year follow-up, with 0.7% listed as intolerant at all stages. Factors associated with increased risk of intolerance to statins included female gender (P = .001), discharge APA intolerance (P = .004), insurance status (non-U.S. insurance) (P .001), discharge APA noncompliance (P = .019), and discharge angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor noncompliance (P = .005). Patients who were compliant with statins showed a 91% survival at 5 years vs 87% survival in noncompliant patients and 87% in intolerant patients at 5 years (P .001). Patients with statin intolerance have a similar survival curve as noncompliant patients across all registry cohorts. Noncompliance with statins was correlated with noncompliance with APA medications (R = 0.16, P .001). Factors associated with increased risk of statin noncompliance included preoperative ambulatory status (requiring assistance) (P = .039), female sex (P .001), peripheral vascular intervention (P .001) or infrainguinal open bypass procedure surgery (P = .001), discharge status (to nursing home) (P = .006) and insurance (self-pay) (P .001).Patients not taking statin and APA medications have a substantially decreased 5-year survival irrespective of the reason for not taking. Importantly, patients noted to be intolerant have a similar survival curve as noncompliant patients across all registry cohorts. Intolerant patients may benefit from attempts to alter statin dose, type (hydrophilic vs lipophilic), or from newer agents such as PCSK9 inhibitors.

Background Despite the recognized benefits of smoking cessation, many clinicians question if a brief smoking cessation intervention can help dedicated smokers with peripheral arterial disease understand nicotine dependence and harms related to smoking. We investigated the impact and durability of a multimodal smoking cessation intervention on patient attitudes regarding nicotine dependence and the health effects of smoking. Methods We conducted a pilot cluster-randomized trial of a brief smoking cessation intervention at 8 vascular surgery practices between September 1, 2014 and August 31, 2015. Compared with control sites, patients at intervention sites received protocolized brief cessation counseling, medications, and referrals to a quitline. After their clinic visit and again at 3 months, participants completed a brief survey about patient attitudes regarding nicotine dependence and the health effects of smoking. Responses to questions were analyzed using chi-squared test and Student's t-test. Results All trial participants (n = 156) complete the initial survey, and 75 (45%) participants completed the follow-up survey. Intervention and control patients both reported a greater than 30-pack-year history (80% vs. 90%, P = 0.07) and previous failed quit attempts (77% vs. 78%, P = 0.8). Compared with usual care, patients in the intervention group were more likely to describe hearing advice to quit from their surgeon (98% vs. 77%, P

Objective Shared medical decision making is most important when there are competing options for repair such as in treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). We sought to understand the sources of patients' pre-existing knowledge about AAA to better inform treating physicians about patients' needs for preoperative counseling. Methods We performed a multicenter survey of patients facing AAA repair at 20 Veterans Affairs hospitals across the United States as part of the Preferences for Open Versus Endovascular Repair of AAA study. A validated survey instrument was administered to examine the sources of information available and commonly used by patients to learn about their repair options. The survey was administered by study personnel before the patient had any interaction with the vascular surgeon because survey data were collected before the vascular clinic visit. Results Preliminary analysis of data from 99 patients showed that our cohort was primarily male (99%) and elderly (mean age 73 years). Patients commonly had a history of hypertension (86%), prior myocardial infarction (32%), diabetes (32%), and were overweight (58%). Patients arrived at their surgeon's office appointment with limited information. A majority of patients (52%) reported that they had not talked to their primary care physician at all about their options for AAA repair, and one-half (50%) reported that their view of the different surgical options had not been influenced by anyone. Slightly less than one-half of patients reported that they did not receive any information about open surgical aneurysm repair and endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (41% and 37%, respectively). Few patients indicated using the internet as their main source of information about open surgical aneurysm repair and endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (10% and 11%, respectively). Conclusions Patients are commonly referred for AAA repair having little to no information regarding AAA pathology or repair options. Fewer than one in five patients searched the internet or had accessed other sources of information on their own. Most vascular surgeons should assume that patients will present to their first vascular surgery appointment with minimal understanding of the treatment options available to them.