Stephen T. Smith

Trends and outcomes of concurrent carotid revascularization and coronary bypass

BACKGROUND The management of concurrent carotid and coronary artery disease is controversial. Although single-center observational studies have revealed acceptable outcomes of combined carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), community-based outcomes have been substantially inferior. Recently, carotid artery stenting (CAS) has been introduced for the management of high-risk patients with carotid stenosis, including those with severe coronary artery disease. This study was undertaken to evaluate the nationwide trends and outcomes of CAS before CABG vs combined CEA and CABG and to assess the risk for adverse events. METHODS The Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) was used to identify patients discharged after concurrent carotid and coronary revascularization procedures. All patients that underwent CAS before CABG and combined CEA-CABG during the years 2000 to 2004 were included. The type of revascularization and major adverse events (ie, in-hospital stroke and death rates) were determined by cross-tabulating discharge diagnostic and procedural codes. Risk stratification was performed using the Charlson Comorbidity Index. Weighted exact Cochrane-Armitage trend test and multivariate logistic regression were used to assess the association between types of revascularization, comorbidities, complications, and risk-adjusted mortality. RESULTS During the 5-year period, 27,084 concurrent carotid revascularizations and CABG were done. Of these, 96.7% underwent CEA-CABG, whereas only 3.3% (887 patients) had CAS-CABG. From 2000 to 2004, the proportion of patients undergoing CAS-CABG vs CEA-CABG did not significantly changed (P = .27). Patients undergoing CAS-CABG had fewer major adverse events than those undergoing CEA-CABG. CAS-CABG patients had a lower incidence of postoperative stroke (2.4% vs 3.9%), and combined stroke and death (6.9% v. 8.6%) than the combined CEA-CABG group (P < .001), although in-hospital death rates were similar (5.2% vs 5.4%). After risk-stratification, CEA-CABG patients had a 62% increased risk of postoperative stroke compared with patients undergoing CAS before CABG (odds ratio [OR], 1.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-2.5; P = .02). However, no differences in the risk of combined stroke and death were observed (OR, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.9-1.6; P = NS). CONCLUSION Although CAS may currently be performed for high-risk patients, it is still infrequently used in patients who require concurrent carotid and coronary interventions. In the United States, patients who undergo CAS-CABG have significantly decreased in-hospital stroke rates compared with patients undergoing CEA-CABG but similar in-hospital mortality. CAS may provide a safer carotid revascularization option for patients who require CABG.

Operative mortality for renal artery bypass in the United States: Results from the National Inpatient Sample

BACKGROUND The mortality rate for renal artery bypass grafting (RABG) is reported to be 0% to 4% for patients with renovascular hypertension and 4% to 7% for patients with ischemic nephropathy. However, these data come from high-volume referral centers known for their expertise in treating these conditions. Because of the relative infrequency of these operations in most vascular surgery practices, the nationwide outcomes for RABG are not known. The purpose of this study was to define the operative mortality rate for RABG in the United States and to identify risk factors for perioperative mortality. METHODS The National Inpatient Sample was analyzed to identify patients undergoing RABG for the years 2000 to 2004. Categoric data were analyzed using chi(2) and the Cochran-Armitage trend tests. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify risk factors for perioperative mortality after RABG. RESULTS During the study period, 6608 patients underwent RABG, representing a frequency of 3.51 operations per 100,000 discharges. More than two-thirds were performed at teaching hospitals (4564 vs 2,044; P < .0001). The frequency of RABG decreased by 30.7% between 2000 and 2004 (4.28 vs 2.96 RABGs per 100,000 discharges; P for trend < .0001). The in-hospital mortality for RABG was 10.0%. On univariate analysis, in-hospital mortality after RABG varied with increasing age, race, region of the country, and a preoperative history of chronic renal failure, congestive heart failure, or chronic lung disease. Logistic regression models identified advanced age (odds ratio [OR] 1.57; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.44-1.72], female gender (OR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.02-1.41), and a history of chronic renal failure (OR, 2.21; 95% CI, 1.75-2.78), congestive heart failure (OR, 1.94; 95% CI, 1.44-2.62), or chronic lung disease (OR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.18-1.67) as independent markers of risk-adjusted, in-hospital mortality (P < .0001 for each of these five variables). CONCLUSIONS Nationwide in-hospital mortality after RABG is higher than predicted by prior reports from high-volume referral centers. Advanced age, female gender, and a history of chronic renal failure, congestive heart failure, or chronic lung disease were predictive of perioperative death. For the typical vascular practice, these data may provide a rationale for lower risk alternatives, such as renal artery stenting or referral to high-volume referral centers for RABG.

Percutaneous Access for Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair: Can Selection Criteria Be Expanded?

Previous reports suggest that percutaneous access for endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (P-EVAR) is as safe as open access (O-EVAR) in patients with favorable femoral anatomy. Severe femoral artery calcification and obesity have been considered relative contraindications to P-EVAR, but these criteria have not been evaluated. The purpose of this study was to assess the postoperative anatomic changes associated with P-EVAR versus O-EVAR using three-dimensional (3-D) computed tomographic (CT) reconstruction and to evaluate the overall results of the two procedures in a group of patients with suboptimal femoral anatomy. During a recent 26-month period, 173 patients underwent EVAR at our institutions, including 35 P-EVARs. Of these, 22 (63%) had complete pre- and postoperative CT imaging of the femoral arteries. These subjects were compared to 22 matched controls who underwent O-EVAR during the same period. Automated 3-D reconstructions were used to measure the following anatomic femoral artery parameters before and after EVAR: arterial depth, calcification score, minimum diameter and area, and maximum diameter and area. Of the 88 study arteries, 50 underwent open access and 38 percutaneous access (Proglide, n=11; Prostar XL, n=27). Both groups were similar regarding sheath size, number of components, operative time, blood loss, and length of stay. Significantly more O-EVAR subjects suffered groin complications (p=0.02), including five hematomas, two wound infections, two femoral thromboses, and one vessel which required patch repair. In the P-EVAR group there was only one hematoma, which was managed conservatively. There was no difference between the P-EVAR and O-EVAR groups with respect to femoral artery calcification (Agatston scores 667+/-719 vs. 945+/-1,248, p=0.37). Obesity (body mass index >30) was documented in six (27%) of both the P-EVAR and O-EVAR groups (p=nonsignificant). Pre- and postoperative CT-derived anatomic data showed a significant decrease in the minimal vessel area with O-EVAR compared to P-EVAR (p=0.02). This study demonstrates that patients with obesity or severely calcified femoral arteries can be successfully treated percutaneously with fewer minor groin complications.

Femoral vein harvest for vascular reconstructions: pitfalls and tips for success.

The femoral-popliteal vein has proved to be an excellent conduit for a variety of indications. These include in situ reconstruction of infected aortic grafts, and mesenteric, brachiocephalic, and lower-extremity bypasses. This article discusses the technical details of successful deep vein harvest. Information regarding the preoperative evaluation, postoperative surveillance, reintervention, and venous morbidity is provided. The femoral-popliteal vein graft has proven to be a durable conduit with minimal late venous morbidity.

Secondary Aortoenteric Fistulas Versus Paraprosthetic Erosions: Is Bleeding Associated with a Worse Outcome?

BACKGROUND Direct communication between an aortic prosthesis and the gastrointestinal (GI) tract may present with GI bleeding (aortoenteric fistulas [AEF]) or be incidental to a graft infection (paraprosthetic erosions [PPE]). The purposes of this study were to compare the outcomes of AEF versus PPE and to determine predictors of mortality associated with these lesions. STUDY DESIGN Since 1992, 38 patients (23 men, 15 women; mean age 67 years) presented with AEF (n=16) or PPE (n=22). RESULTS After complete graft excision, 26 patients (8 AEF, 18 PPE) underwent in situ revascularization using femoral vein (n=24) or rifampin-soaked prosthetic graft (n=2); 12 (8 AEF, 4 PPE) underwent extraanatomic bypass. There was no significant difference in mortality for AEF versus PPE (38% versus 36%). Postoperative complications developed in 25 (66%) patients, including 10 (26%) with GI complications requiring reintervention (5 colon necrosis, 5 duodenal bleed or leak). There were no differences between AEF and PPE in operative transfusions, operative times, GI complications, ICU stay, hospital stay, or final discharge status. Multivariate stepwise logistic regression analysis revealed that GI complications (odds ratio [OR], 52.5; 95% CI, 3.5 to 781; p=0.004) and age (OR, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.3; p=0.026) were the only independent predictors of in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS Surgical management of AEF and PPE should be tailored to patient illness and the extent of graft infection. Mortality from both lesions is dependent on patient and technical factors, not on the mode of presentation.

Successful percutaneous angioplasty and stenting of the radial artery in a patient with chronic upper extremity ischemia and digital gangrene.

Purpose: To report percutaneous treatment of a chronic radial artery occlusion in a multimorbid patient with ischemic tissue loss. Case Report: A 62-year-old man with multiple comorbidities, including renal failure and severe coronary artery disease, presented with painful, ulcerated lesions of his right hand. He has severe peripheral vascular disease, with a history of 4 digital amputations of the left hand, a right above-knee amputation, and a left femoral to peroneal artery bypass. Arteriography demonstrated chronic occlusion of the radial and ulnar arteries, with a patent interosseous and collateral flow to the distal radial artery filling the palmar arch. Angioplasty and stenting of the radial artery was performed, relieving the patients symptoms and allowing the lesions to heal. Conclusion: Percutaneous intervention can treat severe upper extremity ischemia with gangrene in patients with severe chronic ischemia and multiple comorbidities.

Training and Credentialing in Vascular and Endovascular Surgery

The previous decade has seen explosive growth in technological advances in the endovascular arena. A partial list of these technologies would include carotid angioplasty and stenting, refinements in thoracic and abdominal endografts, and lower extremity angioplasty stenting, atherectomy, and mechanical thrombectomy. The field of vascular surgery has completely embraced these minimally invasive techniques and adapted its training paradigms accordingly. With the increasing complexity and breadth of endovascular interventions, vascular surgery has become a distinct surgery specialty. Reflecting this change, candidates for the Vascular Surgery Board examination of the American Board of Surgery (VSB-ABS) can sit for the examination after completion of an Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited vascular residency without previous certification in general surgery.