An Assessment of the Society for Vascular Surgery Appropriate Use Criteria for the Management of Intermittent Claudication: Key Findings and Considerations for Implementation.

Background: Several concerns have been raised over the past several years about the potential for overuse of vascular interventions for peripheral artery disease. These interventions can have serious complications, including limb loss. Given that the natural history of intermittent claudication rarely includes limb loss, it is critically important that interventions to treat it have appropriate indications.
Methods: To address this matter, the Society for Vascular Surgery published an appropriate use criteria (AUC) document for the management of intermittent claudication in 2022. Using the rigorously studied University of California Los Angeles RAND Appropriateness Method, the rating panel assessed the appropriateness of 2,280 scenarios for [1] the initial management and [2] the management after a failed trial of exercise therapy.
Results: The findings of the rating panel included that medical management and exercise therapy are appropriate initial management in all scenarios. There were several scenarios in which revascularization was also considered appropriate, mainly influenced by severity of physical limitations and favorable lesion characteristics. When considering management after a failed trial of exercise, guiding principles cited by the rating panel included durability of intervention, smoking cessation, and evidence of prior good-faith effort at exercise therapy. There were many scenarios which were indeterminate. With respect to the infrapopliteal segment, the rating panelists unanimously agreed to forgo individual scenario ratings, since they deemed the risks outweigh the benefits in all cases.
Conclusions: The Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) AUC for intermittent claudication represents an important effort to identify and reduce overuse. There are several considerations for how they should be used. The simplest application is by practicing clinicians, at the bedside, as they engage in shared decision-making with patients. The matter of their use by payors is more complex. Ideally, decisions on how to best use AUC require additional study of their performance before they are used by payors for anything. Finally, these AUC have identified a myriad of areas where evidence is lacking. The AUC provide important targets for future research to improve the care of patients with intermittent claudication.
(Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)