Search

The aim of this study was to compare the 2-year outcomes of de novo versus postendovascular lesion treatment of femoropopliteal occlusions included in a national, multicenter, observational, prospective registry based on the treatment of critical Limb-threatening IschaeMia with infragenicular Bypass adopting in situ SAphenous VEin technique (LIMBSAVE) registry.From January 2018 to December 2019, 541 patients from 43 centers have been enrolled in the LIMBSAVE registry. Of these patients, 460 were included in the present study: 341 (74.1%) with de novo lesions (DN group) and 119 (25.9%) with postendovascular treatment lesions (PE group). Initial outcome measures were assessed at 30 days after treatment. Furthermore, at the 2-year follow-up, the estimated outcomes of primary patency, primary-assisted patency, secondary patency, and limb salvage were analyzed with Kaplan-Meier curves and compared between groups with the log-rank test.Both groups were homogeneous in terms of demographic data, preoperative risk factors, and clinical presentation. However, compared with DN group, more patients in PE group had a great saphenous vein diameter of less than 3 mm (11.1% vs 21%; P = .007). Intraoperatively, both groups showed similar distal anastomosis sites: below-the-knee popliteal artery (63% DN group, 66.4% PE group) and tibial vessel (37% DN group, 33.6% PE group) (P = .3). The overall mean duration of follow-up was 11.6 months (range, 1-24 months). At the 2-year follow-up, there were no differences between the two groups in terms of primary patency (66.3% DN group vs 74.1% PE group; P = .9), primary-assisted patency (78.2% DN group vs 79.5% PE group; P = .2), secondary patency (85.1% DN group vs 91.4% PE group; P = .2), and limb salvage (95.2% DN group vs 95.1% PE group; P = .9).The LIMBSAVE registry did not show a worsening of overall patency and limb salvages rates at the 2-year follow-up in patients undergoing in situ saphenous bypass after a failed endovascular approach for long femoropopliteal occlusive disease. This finding is in contrast with what has been published in literature.

Objective: The characteristics and outcomes of patients undergoing vascular surgery hospitalised and managed in Lombardy are described with a comparison of patients tested positive for COVID-19 (CV19-pos) vs. those tested negative (CV19-neg). Methods: This was a multicentre, retrospective, observational cohort study which involved all vascular surgery services in Lombardy, Northern Italy. Data were retrospectively merged into a combined dataset covering the nine weeks of the Italian COVID-19 pandemic phase 1 (8 March 2020 to 3 May 2020). The primary outcome was freedom from in hospital death, secondary outcomes were re-thrombosis rate after peripheral revascularisation, and freedom from post-operative complication. Results: Among 674 patients managed during the outbreak, 659 (97.8%) were included in the final analysis: 121 (18.4%) were CV19-pos. CV19-pos status was associated with a higher rate of complications (OR 4.5; p < .001, 95% CI 2.64 – 7.84), and a higher rate of re-thrombosis after peripheral arterial revascularisation (OR 2.2; p = .004, 95% CI 1.29 – 3.88). In hospital mortality was higher in CV19-pos patients (24.8% vs. 5.6%; OR 5.4, p < .001;95% CI 2.86 – 8.92). Binary logistic regression analysis identified CV19-pos status (OR 7.6; p < .001, 95% CI 3.75 – 15.28) and age > 80 years (OR 3.2; p = .001, 95% CI 1.61 – 6.57) to be predictors of in hospital death. Conclusion: In this experience of the vascular surgery group of Lombardy, COVID-19 infection was a marker of poor outcomes in terms of mortality and post-operative complications for patients undergoing vascular surgery treatments.

Aortic graft infection represents one of the most challenging and life-threatening complication of surgical and endovascular treatment of aortic pathologies. The aim of this study was to report the results of a single center with in-situ revascularization for the treatment of aortic graft infections using the neo-aorto-iliac system (NAIS) and to review the literature about this surgical technique.We retrospectively reviewed our aortic graft infection case series and in-situ revascularization using the neo-aorto-iliac system. The study was conducted from January 2009 to June 2020. The primary outcomes analyzed were early mortality (30 days), late mortality (30 days), reinfection rate. Secondary outcomes were the primary patency rate, the secondary patency rate, and the lower limb salvage rate. A literature review of the last twenty years was performed on international medical databases Pubmed (Medline), Scopus and Web of Science.During study period, 12 patients, all male (median age of 69 years [range: 52-87 years]), underwent to infected graft explantation and revascularization by NAIS using femoral-popliteal veins. Six cases were complicated by aorto-enteric fistulas, five were duodenal and one was colon. Patients spent the immediate postoperative period in the Intensive Care Unit for a median time of 4 days (range: 0-9 days). The median length of hospital stay was 27.5 days (range: 1-66 days). The mean follow-up was 21.5 months (range: 0-120). The 30-day mortality rate was 25% (3 patients) due to postoperative complications. No patient dropped out of the follow-up protocol. The primary patency rate was 92% while the secondary patency rate was 100%. No patient underwent lower limb amputation. Persistence of infection occurred in 1 case (8.3%). Overall Kaplan-Meier survival estimates were 75% for 30 days, 50% for 1 year, 48% for 5 years. Literature analysis identified 19 case series.The literature regarding NAIS has low statistical evidence due to retrospective design of the studies. Our results are in agreement with retrospective studies in the literature. When the surgical team is confident with NAIS, this technique should be considered the preferred method, considering an acceptable and comparable mortality rate with other techniques and a better rate of patency, resistance to graft degeneration, recurrent infections and amputation rate.

The aim was to demonstrate contemporary outcomes of in situ saphenous vein bypass using a valvulotome.Analysis of two year outcomes of a multicentre registry based on the treatment of critical Limb Ischaemia with infragenicular Bypass adopting in situ SAphenous VEin technique (LIMBSAVE). Between January 2018 and December 2019, 541 patients in 43 centres were enrolled. In all patients an innovative valvulotome was used. Early outcomes were assessed. Two year outcomes according to Kaplan-Meier curves in terms of patency and limb salvage were evaluated. Associations between patient and procedure variables were analysed with univariable and multivariable analyses.In all cases, a valvulotome was able to lyse the valves. Vein injury due to the in situ technique was 3.5%. Thirty day mortality and major amputation rates were 3% and 0.9%, respectively. Mean follow up was 12.1 months. Two year estimated primary patency, primary assisted patency, secondary patency, and limb salvage were 69.1%, 81.4%, 86.5%, and 94.5%, respectively. Multivariable analysis showed an association between pre-operative vein diameter3 mm and lower primary patency (hazard ration [HR] 14.3, p.001), primary assisted patency (HR 9.4, p = .002), secondary patency (HR 7.2, p = .007), and limb salvage (HR 7.8, p = .005) rates. Distal anastomosis to a tibial or foot vessel was also associated with lower primary patency (HR 4.8, p = .033), and primary assisted patency (HR 6, p = .011) rates. Use of a suprafascial tributary collateral as a graft was associated with lower primary patency (HR 6.7, p = .013), and primary assisted patency (HR 4.2, p = .042) rates.Vein diameter3 mm, distal anastomosis on a tibial or foot vessel, and use of a suprafascial tributary collateral as a graft were significantly associated with loss of patency and limb loss during follow up.

BACKGROUND: To highlight clinical practice among referral (Hub, HH) or satellite (Spoke, SH) hospitals Vascular Surgery Units (VSUs) in Lombardy, during the COVID-19 pandemic "phase 1" period (March 8 - May 3, 2020). METHODS: The Vascular Surgery Group of Regione Lombardia Register, a real-word, multicenter, retrospective register was interrogated. All patients admitted with vascular disease were included. Patients' data on demographics, COVID-19 positivity, comorbidities and outcomes were extrapolated. Two cohorts were obtained: patients admitted to HH or SH. Primary endpoint was 30- day mortality rate. Secondary outcomes were 30-day complications and amputation (in case of peripheral artery disease [PAD]) rates. Univariate and multivariate analysis were used to compare HH and SH groups and predictors of poor outcomes. RESULTS: During the study period, 659 vascular patients in 4 HH and 27 SH were analyzed. Among these, 321 (48.7%) were admitted to a HH. No difference in COVID-19 positive patients was described (21.7% in HH vs 15.9% in SH; p=.058). After 30 days from intervention, HH and SH experienced similar mortality and no-intervention-related complication rate (12.1% vs 10.0%; p=.427 and 10.3% vs 8.3%; p=.377, respectively). Conversely, in HH postoperative complications were higher (23.4% vs 16.9%, p=.038) and amputations in patients treated for PAD were lower (10.8% vs 26.8%; p

OBJECTIVES: Feasibility and results of cardiovascular hub-spoke networks to face COVID19 pandemic. The COVID-19 pandemic in Italy had the primary outbreak in the northern part of the country forcing the regional health care system to expand the availability of beds in the wards and intensive care units and to institute a Hub and Spoke hospital network to ensure assistance continuity for urgencies and emergencies. We report a descriptive analysis of the activity of the first 30 days of the Hub center. METHODS: Role of our Hub center was to guarantee 24/24h 7/7days cardiovascular surgical care for an area of 3.145.312 inhabitants’ area. Hub-spoke reorganization permitted a significant increase of ICU and ward beds availability for COVID patients needing hospitalization in all peripheral centers. Records of all consecutive patients admitted were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: a total of 100 patients were evaluated in the study period . Hub and spoke cooperation have been successful, all patients affected by cardiovascular urgencies or emergencies found a highly specialized hospital and was evaluated and treated. Global reduction of elective and non-deferrable interventions in spoke centers was achieved for both vascular and cardiac surgery while we detected a significant increase of urgent vascular interventions for acute limb ischemia. We did not observe an increase of in-hospital mortality in non-infected patients. CONCLUSION: Hub and spoke network for cardiovascular pathology is an effective way to face healthcare needs during the pandemic.

Lower limb amputation is in effect decisive surgery in the treatment of ischemic gangrene whether nature of post-traumatic or secondary to arterial disease of the lower limbs. The amputation is not however to be considered debulking surgery. The demolition regards the limb behind which we do not have the presence scotomize amputee who requires to be accompanied in dealing with a new life that has as its main objective the autonomy scope family and society. The search for a good level of amputation surgery then makes reconstructive surgery. The level of amputation will allow in fact the use ofprincipals able to guarantee the total autonomy. After an analysis of surgical techniques the author will then analyze the latest devices available in the permit to pursue the best possible level of amputation even in cases where the disease is starting to discourage the doctor.