P. De Rango

Comparison of Surveillance Versus Aortic Endografting for Small Aneurysm Repair (CAESAR): Results from a Randomised Trial

BACKGROUND Randomised trials have failed to demonstrate benefit from early surgical repair of small abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) compared with surveillance. This study aimed to compare results after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) or surveillance in AAA <5.5 cm. METHODS Patients (50-79 years) with AAA of 4.1-5.4 cm were randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive immediate EVAR or surveillance by ultrasound and computed tomography (CT) and repair only after a defined threshold (diameter ≥5.5 cm, enlargement >1 cm /year, symptoms) was achieved. The main end point was all-cause mortality. Recruitment is closed; results at a median follow-up of 32.4 months are here reported. RESULTS Between 2004 and 2008, 360 patients (early EVAR = 182; surveillance = 178) were enrolled. One perioperative death after EVAR and two late ruptures (both in the surveillance group) occurred. At 54 months, there was no significant difference in the main end-point rate [hazard ratio (HR) 0.76; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.30-1.93; p = 0.6] with Kaplan-Meier estimates of all-cause mortality of 14.5% in the EVAR and 10.1% in the surveillance group. Aneurysm-related mortality, aneurysm rupture and major morbidity rates were similar. Kaplan-Meier estimates of aneurysms growth ≥5 mm at 36 months were 8.4% in the EVAR group and 67.5% in the surveillance group (HR 10.49; 95% CI 6.88-15.96; p < 0.01). For aneurysms under surveillance, the probability of delayed repair was 59.7% at 36 months (84.5% at 54 months). The probability of receiving open repair at 36 months for EVAR feasibility loss was 16.4%. CONCLUSION Mortality and rupture rates in AAA <5.5 cm are low and no clear advantage was shown between early or delayed EVAR strategy. However, within 36 months, three out of every five small aneurysms under surveillance might grow to require repair and one out of every six might lose feasibility for EVAR. Surveillance is safe for small AAA if close supervision is applied. Long-term data are needed to confirm these results. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION This study is registered, NCT Identifier: NCT00118573.

Chapter IV: Treatment of Critical Limb Ischaemia

Recommendations stated in the TASC II guidelines for the treatment of peripheral arterial disease (PAD) regard a heterogeneous group of patients ranging from claudicants to critical limb ischaemia (CLI) patients. However, specific considerations apply to CLI patients. An important problem regarding the majority of currently available literature that reports on revascularisation strategies for PAD is that it does not focus on CLI patients specifically and studies them as a minor part of the complete cohort. Besides the lack of data on CLI patients, studies use a variety of endpoints, and even similar endpoints are often differentially defined. These considerations result in the fact that most recommendations in this guideline are not of the highest recommendation grade. In the present chapter the treatment of CLI is not based on the TASC II classification of atherosclerotic lesions, since definitions of atherosclerotic lesions are changing along the fast development of endovascular techniques, and inter-individual differences in interpretation of the TASC classification are problematic. Therefore we propose a classification merely based on vascular area of the atherosclerotic disease and the lesion length, which is less complex and eases the interpretation. Lesions and their treatment are discussed from the aorta downwards to the infrapopliteal region. For a subset of lesions, surgical revascularisation is still the gold standard, such as in extensive aorto-iliac lesions, lesions of the common femoral artery and long lesions of the superficial femoral artery (>15 cm), especially when an applicable venous conduit is present, because of higher patency and limb salvage rates, even though the risk of complications is sometimes higher than for endovascular strategies. It is however more and more accepted that an endovascular first strategy is adapted in most iliac, superficial femoral, and in some infrapopliteal lesions. The newer endovascular techniques, i.e. drug-eluting stents and balloons, show promising results especially in infrapopliteal lesions. However, most of these results should still be confirmed in large RCTs focusing on CLI patients. At some point when there is no possibility of an endovascular nor a surgical procedure, some alternative non-reconstructive options have been proposed such as lumbar sympathectomy and spinal cord stimulation. But their effectiveness is limited especially when assessing the results on objective criteria. The additional value of cell-based therapies has still to be proven from large RCTs and should therefore still be confined to a research setting. Altogether this chapter summarises the best available evidence for the treatment of CLI, which is, from multiple perspectives, completely different from claudication. The latter also stresses the importance of well-designed RCTs focusing on CLI patients reporting standardised endpoints, both clinical as well as procedural.

Chapter V: Diabetic Foot

Ulcerated diabetic foot is a complex problem. Ischaemia, neuropathy and infection are the three pathological components that lead to diabetic foot complications, and they frequently occur together as an aetiologic triad. Neuropathy and ischaemia are the initiating factors, most often together as neuroischaemia, whereas infection is mostly a consequence. The role of peripheral arterial disease in diabetic foot has long been underestimated as typical ischaemic symptoms are less frequent in diabetics with ischaemia than in non-diabetics. Furthermore, the healing of a neuroischaemic ulcer is hampered by microvascular dysfunction. Therefore, the threshold for revascularising neuroischaemic ulcers should be lower than that for purely ischaemic ulcers. Previous guidelines have largely ignored these specific demands related to ulcerated neuroischaemic diabetic feet. Any diabetic foot ulcer should always be considered to have vascular impairment unless otherwise proven. Early referral, non-invasive vascular testing, imaging and intervention are crucial to improve diabetic foot ulcer healing and to prevent amputation. Timing is essential, as the window of opportunity to heal the ulcer and save the leg is easily missed. This chapter underlines the paucity of data on the best way to diagnose and treat these diabetic patients. Most of the studies dealing with neuroischaemic diabetic feet are not comparable in terms of patient populations, interventions or outcome. Therefore, there is an urgent need for a paradigm shift in diabetic foot care; that is, a new approach and classification of diabetics with vascular impairment in regard to clinical practice and research. A multidisciplinary approach needs to implemented systematically with a vascular surgeon as an integrated member. New strategies must be developed and implemented for diabetic foot patients with vascular impairment, to improve healing, to speed up healing rate and to avoid amputation, irrespective of the intervention technology chosen. Focused studies on the value of predictive tests, new treatment modalities as well as selective and targeted strategies are needed. As specific data on ulcerated neuroischaemic diabetic feet are scarce, recommendations are often of low grade.

Chapter II: Diagnostic Methods

Non-invasive vascular studies can provide crucial information on the presence, location, and severity of critical limb ischaemia (CLI), as well as the initial assessment or treatment planning. Ankle-brachial index with Doppler ultrasound, despite limitations in diabetic and end-stage renal failure patients, is the first-line evaluation of CLI. In this group of patients, toe-brachial index measurement may better establish the diagnosis. Other non-invasive measurements, such as segmental limb pressure, continuous-wave Doppler analysis and pulse volume recording, are of limited accuracy. Transcutaneous oxygen pressure (TcPO(2)) measurement may be of value when rest pain and ulcerations of the foot are present. Duplex ultrasound is the most important non-invasive tool in CLI patients combining haemodynamic evaluation with imaging modality. Computed tomography angiography (CTA) and magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) are the next imaging studies in the algorithm for CLI. Both CTA and MRA have been proven effective in aiding the decision-making of clinicians and accurate planning of intervention. The data acquired with CTA and MRA can be manipulated in a multiplanar and 3D fashion and can offer exquisite detail. CTA results are generally equivalent to MRA, and both compare favourably with contrast angiography. The individual use of different imaging modalities depends on local availability, experience, and costs. Contrast angiography represents the gold standard, provides detailed information about arterial anatomy, and is recommended when revascularisation is needed.

Role of surgical techniques and operative findings in cranial and cervical nerve injuries during carotid endarterectomy

OBJECTIVE To establish the incidence of cranial and cervical nerve injuries during CEA and their relationship to different surgical techniques and operative findings. DESIGN A prospective study. PATIENTS AND METHODS From January 1994 to April 1995, 187 consecutive patients undergoing 190 CEAs were evaluated. Pre- and postoperative cranial and cervical nerve assessments were carried out by a single otolaryngologist, blinded to the operative technique and findings. Deficits lasting more than 12 months were defined as permanent. Logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate the influence of surgical technique, type of anaesthesia, neck haematoma, and plaque extension on the onset of nerve injuries. RESULTS Postoperatively, nerve lesions were identified in 51 CEAs (27%) and non-neurological injuries (hemilaryngeal ecchymosis or oedema) causing postoperative dysphonia were present in 80 CEAs (42%). All non-neurological injuries were transient and 98% disappeared within 1 month of surgery. Thirteen (7%) nerve lesions were permanent, but none were disabling. Vagus nerve lesions were significantly associated with long (> 2 cm) carotid plaque (OR = 3.5; CI 1.09-12.37; p = 0.03). Cervical branch lesions were associated with the presence of neck haematoma (OR = 1.9; CI 0.7-4.7; p = 0.05). The incidence of single cranial nerve injuries was higher in patch (OR = 2.7) and eversion (OR = 1.9) procedures than in primary closure. Multiple deficits (2 or more) were most frequent in eversion CEAs (OR = 2.8) and in cases complicated by neck haematoma (OR = 3.8). CONCLUSIONS Cranial and cervical nerve lesions during CEA are common. However, our data showed that the majority of local complications are related to transient hemilaryngeal ecchymosis or oedema and, when permanent, are neither clinically relevant nor disabling at 1 year of follow up. Carotid plaque extension and neck haematoma appear to increase the incidence of cranial and cervical nerve lesions during CEA.

Cognitive Performance in Elderly Patients Undergoing Carotid Endarterectomy or Carotid Artery Stenting: A Twelve-Month Follow-Up Study

Background: It is still a matter of debate if and to what extent carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) impair cognitive functioning in the elderly. Methods: We conducted a nonrandomized clinical trial on subjects with asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis comparing CEA (n = 28; 24 males and 4 females; 72.6 ± 5.8 years old) with CAS (n = 29; 17 males and 12 females; 75.1 ± 5.7 years old). Cognition, mood and functional status were evaluated by a broad spectrum of tests performed on the day prior to carotid reopening as well as 3 and 12 months after. Results: No significant differences in scores on cognitive tests including the Babcock story recall test and Rey’s auditory verbal learning test (memory), category naming test (verbal fluency), trail-making test parts A and B (attention and executive function) and controlled oral word association test (executive functioning) were observed 3 and 12 months after carotid reopening independent of the technique used. Only scores on the copy drawing test (visuospatial and constructional abilities) slightly but significantly (p < 0.05) worsened in the CAS group 12 months after the intervention. No significant differences between the CEA and CAS groups were detected regarding mood and functional status after 3 and 12 months. Conclusions: CEA and CAS seem to be safe procedures in elderly patients in terms of cognitive, mood and functional status in the short and long term. CAS might be preferred for the shorter hospital stay, but further studies with a larger number of old and oldest old subjects with a longer follow-up are needed to better understand the cost-effectiveness of both treatments.

Is Haemodynamic Depression during Carotid Stenting a Predictor of Peri-procedural Complications?

OBJECTIVE The clinical significance of Haemodynamic Depression (HD) during carotid stenting (CAS) remains unclear. The aim of this study was to analyze the frequency and predictors of HD during CAS in a single centre experience. METHODS A prospective protocol for CAS was applied in a 15-month interval. Patients with restenosis, on betablockers, or with arrhythmias were excluded. A standardized dose of atropine (0.4mg) was given prior to stent deployment. Changes in heart rate, blood pressure, and neurological status were monitored and recorded. HD was defined as systolic pressure <90mmHg and/or heart rate <50 beats/min. Fifteen potential predictors of HD (age, gender, hypertension, smoking, diabetes, coronary artery disease, previous myocardial infarction, symptoms, degree of carotid stenosis contralateral CEA or CAS, calcified/hyperechoic plaque, plaque length, stent oversizing and type of stent) were tested in multivariate analysis. RESULTS Two hundred and twenty three consecutive patients were enrolled. HD occurred in 98 cases (44%): in 68 cases HD required additional pharmacological support. At 30 days, any stroke rate was 3.1% (3 major and 4 minor), TIA rate 1.8%, myocardial infarction rate 0.4%. No deaths were recorded. No difference in complication rates were found in patients with or without HD. From regression analysis only the presence of calcified plaque (HR 9.5; 95% CI 5.0 to 18.2; p<0.0001) and the plaque length (HR 1.77; 95% CI 1.03 to 3.06; p=0.038) were associated significantly with HD. CONCLUSIONS HD during CAS is a common, relatively benign event, without increased risk of peri-operative complications. Careful pharmacological treatment is necessary to decrease HD and the potential complications, especially in patients with more severe calcified lesions. These results require confirmation in a separate, larger cohort.

Eversion versus Conventional Carotid Endarterectomy: A Prospective Study

OBJECTIVES To analyse comparatively eversion and conventional CEA for later association with restenosis, perioperative stroke/death and ipsilateral cerebrovascular events (early, late, disabling and non-disabling). DESIGN Prospective non-randomised clinical study. MATERIALS AND METHODS A total of 469 patients underwent 514 procedures; 274 (53%) eversion CEA and 240 (47%) conventional CEA. Perioperative monitoring was carried out by clinical evaluation under local anaesthesia or by transcranial Doppler under general anaesthesia. Follow-up was carried out by clinical evaluation and Duplex scanning. RESULTS Clamping time was significantly shorter in the eversion group (25.5 +/- 7.4 vs. 28.3 +/- 10.1 min; p = 0.0001; CI delta 4.40/1.12). The perioperative disabling stroke/death rate was 0.7% for eversion vs. 1.2% for conventional CEA, p = 0.6; odds ratio (OR), 0.58. There were two early carotid occlusions (within 30 days) in both groups. According to life-table analysis, after 3 years the probability of > 50% carotid restenosis was significantly lower in the eversion group (2.2% vs. 6.9%, p = 0.03; relative risk reduction 67%). There were no significant differences between the two groups relative to new cerebrovascular events (92% in both groups, p = 0.6). Using multivariate analysis (Cox regression), eversion CEA, and to a lesser extent standard CEA with patch, appeared to protect the vessel from restenosis. CONCLUSIONS The eversion technique was associated with reduced clamping time and probability of restenosis. However, because of the nature of a non-randomised study, the present analysis should be confirmed by a multicentre randomised trial.

Quality of life in patients with small abdominal aortic aneurysm: the effect of early endovascular repair versus surveillance in the CAESAR trial.

OBJECTIVE To evaluate and compare changes over time in health-related quality of life reported by patients with small (4.1-5.4 cm) abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) undergoing endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) or surveillance. METHODS Participants were randomly assigned to receive either early EVAR or surveillance within a multicentre, randomised clinical trial on small AAA (Comparison of surveillance vs. Aortic Endografting for Small Aneurysm Repair, CAESAR). Patient-reported health-related quality of life was assessed before randomisation, at 6 months and yearly thereafter using the Short Form 36 (SF-36) Health Survey. RESULTS Between 2004 and 2008, 360 patients (345 males, mean age 68.9 years) were randomised, 182 to early EVAR and 178 to surveillance. There was one perioperative death. Mean follow-up was 31.8 months. No significant difference in survival was found. At baseline, comparable quality of life scores were recorded in both treatment groups: Total SF-36: 73.0 versus 75.5 (p = 0.18), Physical domain: 71.4 versus 73.3 (p = 0.33); Mental health domain: 70.9 versus 72.7 (p = 0.33), in the EVAR arm versus the surveillance arm, respectively. Six months after randomisation, Total SF-36 and Physical and Mental domain scores were all significantly higher with respect to baseline in the EVAR group, while patients of the surveillance group scored lower. The differences between EVAR and surveillance arms in score changes at 6 months were significant and in favour of EVAR: Total score: difference 5.4; p = 0.0017; Physical: difference 3.8; p = 0.02; and Mental: difference 6.0; p = 0.0005. Differences between EVAR and surveillance diminished over time. At the last assessment, patients in both groups had decreased scores with a significant drop with respect to the baseline (-3.9 in EVAR, -6.3 in surveillance). There were no significant differences between the EVAR and surveillance arms: Total score: p = 0.25; Physical: p = 0.47; and Mental: p = 0.38. CONCLUSIONS Patients with small AAA under surveillance compared with early EVAR had significant impaired functional health at 6 months after assignment. After a mean of 31.8 months, SF-36 health-related quality of life in patients allocated to early EVAR and surveillance was similar.

Chapter VI: Follow-up after revascularisation.

Structured follow-up after revascularisation for chronic critical limb ischaemia (CLI) aims at sustained treatment success and continued best patient care. Thereby, efforts need to address three fundamental domains: (A) best medical therapy, both to protect the arterial reconstruction locally and to reduce atherosclerotic burden systemically; (B) surveillance of the arterial reconstruction; and (C) timely initiation of repeat interventions. As most CLI patients are elderly and frail, sustained resolution of CLI and preserved ambulatory capacity may decide over independent living and overall prognosis. Despite this importance, previous guidelines have largely ignored follow-up after CLI; arguably because of a striking lack of evidence and because of a widespread assumption that, in the context of CLI, efficacy of initial revascularisation will determine prognosis during the short remaining life expectancy. This chapter of the current CLI guidelines aims to challenge this disposition and to recommend evidentially best clinical practice by critically appraising available evidence in all of the above domains, including antiplatelet and antithrombotic therapy, clinical surveillance, use of duplex ultrasound, and indications for and preferred type of repeat interventions for failing and failed reconstructions. However, as corresponding studies are rarely performed among CLI patients specifically, evidence has to be consulted that derives from expanded patient populations. Therefore, most recommendations are based on extrapolations or subgroup analyses, which leads to an almost systematic degradation of their strength. Endovascular reconstruction and surgical bypass are considered separately, as are specific contexts such as diabetes or renal failure; and critical issues are highlighted throughout to inform future studies.