Search

Background: There has been an increasing focus on gender disparities in the medical field and in the field of vascular surgery specifically. We aimed to characterize gender representation in vascular surgery innovation over the past 10 years, using metrics of patents and National Institutes of Health (NIH) support., Methods: We performed a retrospective review of all vascular-related patent filings (Google Scholar) and NIH-funded grants (NIH RePORTER) over a 10-year period (January 1st, 2012, to December 31st, 2021). Gender-API (Application Programming Interface) was used to identify the gender of the inventors, with manual confirmation of a 10% random sample. Gender representation for patent inventors and grant principal investigators (PIs) were compared using Chi-squared and Student's t-tests as appropriate. Yearly temporal changes in representation were analyzed using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests and linear regression analyses., Results: We identified 2,992 unique vascular device patents with 6,093 associated inventors over 10 years. Women were underrepresented in patent authorship overall (11.5%), and were least likely to be listed as first inventor (8.9%) and most commonly fourth and fifth inventors (15.5% and 14.1%, respectively) compared to men. There was no significant change in representation of women inventors over time (-0.2% females per year, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.54 to 0.10). We identified 1736 total unique NIH grants, with 23.8% of funded projects having women PIs. There was an increase in the proportion of women PIs over time (+1.31% per year, 95% CI 0.784 to 1.855; P < 0.001). Projects with women PIs received mean total awards that were significantly lower than projects with men PIs ($350,485 ± $220,072 vs. $451,493 ± $411,040; P < 0.001), but the overall ratio of funding:women investigators improved over time (+$11,531 per year, 95% CI $6,167 to $16,895; P = 0.0011)., Conclusions: While we have made strides in increasing the number of women in the surgical research space, there is still room for improvement in funding parity. In addition, we found substantial and persistent room for improvement in representation of women in surgical innovation. As we enter a new frontier of surgery hallmarked by equalizing gender representation, these data should serve as a call-to-action for initiative aimed at rebuilding the foundation of surgical innovations upon equal gender representation., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose of Review: The aim of this study was to highlight the current best practice for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk evaluation, including selective use of adjunctive tools for risk stratification [e.g. coronary artery calcium (CAC) scoring] and risk enhancement [e.g. lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)], polygenic risk scoring (PRS)]., Recent Findings: New studies have evaluated the efficacy of various risk assessment tools. These studies demonstrate the role of Lp(a) as a risk-enhancing factor ready for more widespread use. CAC is the gold standard method of assessing subclinical atherosclerosis, enabling true risk stratification of patients, and informing net benefit assessment for initiating or titrating lipid-lowering therapy (LLT)., Summary: Lp(a) concentration and CAC scoring, apart from the traditional risk factors, add the most value to the current CVD risk assessment approaches of all available tools, especially in terms of guiding LLT. In addition to new integrative tools such as the MESA CHD Risk Score and Coronary Age calculator, the future of risk assessment may include PRS and more advanced imaging techniques for atherosclerosis burden. Soon, polygenic risk scoring may be used to identify the age at which to begin CAC scoring, with CAC scores guiding preventive strategies., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Pollution is a leading cause of premature morbidity and mortality and an important risk factor for cardiovascular disease. Convincing data predict increased rates of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality with current and projected pollution burden trends. Multiple classes of pollutants - including criteria air pollutants, secondhand smoke, toxic steel pollutants, and manufactured chemical pollutants - are associated with varied cardiovascular disease risk profiles. To reduce the future risk of cardiovascular disease from anthropogenic pollution, mitigation strategies, both at the individual level and population level, must be thoughtfully and intentionally employed. The literature supporting individual level interventions to protect against cardiovascular disease is growing but lacks large clinical trials. Population level interventions are crucial to larger societal change and rely upon policy and governmental support. While these mitigation strategies can play a major role in maintaining the health of individuals, planetary health - the impact on human health because of anthropogenic perturbation of natural ecosystems - must also be acknowledged. Future research is needed to further delineate the planetary health implications of current and projected pollutant burden as well as the mitigation strategies employed to attenuate future pollutant burden., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (© 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Assessment of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk is the cornerstone of primary ASCVD prevention, enabling targeted use of the most aggressive therapies in those most likely to benefit, while guiding a conservative approach in those who are low risk. ASCVD risk assessment begins with the use of a traditional 10-year risk calculator, with further refinement through the consideration of risk-enhancing factors (particularly lipoprotein(a)) and subclinical atherosclerosis testing (particularly coronary artery calcium (CAC) testing). In this review, we summarize the current field of ASCVD risk assessment in primary prevention and highlight new guidelines from the Endocrine Society., Competing Interests: Disclosure E. Goldsborough has no financial disclosures or competing interests to report. N. Osuji has no financial disclosures or competing interests to report., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: A transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) device was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2015 for carotid revascularization in patients at high risk for stroke, cranial nerve injury, or major cardiac event. It is unclear how the introduction of TCAR has changed the use of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TFCAS)., Objective: To quantify the temporal changes in the operative approach to carotid revascularization (CEA vs TFCAS vs TCAR), and to identify patient and disease characteristics commonly associated with each approach., Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study obtained data from the Vascular Quality Initiative database from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2019. Patients with carotid artery stenosis who underwent CEA, TFCAS, or TCAR were included. Data were analyzed from January to April 2022., Exposures: Month and year of surgery as well as patient risk status., Main Outcomes and Measures: Number and proportion of carotid revascularization procedures by operative approach., Results: A total of 108 676 patients (mean [SD] age 56.6 [12.5] years; 66 684 men [61.4%]) were included in the analysis. The most common operative approach overall was CEA (n = 81 508 [75.0%]), followed by TFCAS (n = 15 578 [14.3%]) and TCAR (n = 11 590 [10.7%]). The number of procedures increased over the study period (16 754 in 2015 vs 27 269 in 2019; P < .001). In 2015, CEA was used in 84.9% of all cases, followed by TFCAS (14.4%) and TCAR (0.8%). In 2019, CEA was used in 64.8% of cases, followed by TCAR (21.9%) and TFCAS (13.3%). The proportional use of CEA decreased by 5.0% (95% CI, -7.4% to -2.6%) per year, and TCAR use increased by 5.3% (95% CI, 2.3%-8.3%) per year. Among patients at high risk, the change was greater: CEA use decreased by 7.8% (95% CI, -11.9% to -3.8%) per year, TFCAS decreased by 4.8% (95% CI, -9.5% to -0.14%) per year, and TCAR increased by 12.6% (95% CI, 7.1%-18.1%) per year. Multinomial logistic regression showed that patient risk status was the most important characteristic associated with TCAR compared with CEA (relative risk ratio, 36.10; 95% CI, 29.24-44.66; P < .001) and TFCAS (relative risk ratio, 14.10; 95% CI, 11.86-16.66; P < .001). Linear regression revealed no association between year of surgery and in-hospital myocardial infarction, stroke, or mortality., Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this study indicate that TCAR has become the dominant carotid revascularization approach, surpassing TFCAS and CEA in patients at high risk for stroke, cranial nerve injury, or cardiovascular events. Patient high-risk status was the main characteristic associated with a stenting approach, highlighting the perceived importance of carotid stenting therapies in this patient population.

Background Context: Intramedullary spinal cord tumors (IMSCTs) are rare tumors associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Surgical resection is often indicated for symptomatic lesions but may result in new neurological deficits and decrease quality of life. Identifying predictors of these adverse outcomes may help target interventions designed to reduce their occurrence. Nonetheless, most prior studies have employed population-level datasets with limited granularity., Purpose: To determine independent predictors of nonroutine discharge, prolonged length of stay (LOS), and 30 day readmission and reoperation, and to deploy these results as a web-based calculator., Study Design: Retrospective cohort study PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 235 patients who underwent resection of IMSCTs at a single comprehensive cancer center., Outcome Measures: Nonroutine discharge, prolonged LOS, 30 day readmission, and 30 day reoperation METHODS: Patients who underwent surgery from June 2002 to May 2020 at a single tertiary center were included. Data was collected on patient demographics, clinical presentation, tumor histology, surgical procedures, and 30 day readmission and reoperation. Functional status was assessed using the Modified McCormick Scale (MMS) and queried preoperative neurological symptoms included weakness, urinary and bowel dysfunction, numbness, and back and radicular pain. Variables significant on univariable analysis at the α≤0.15 level were entered into a stepwise multivariable logistic regression model., Results: Of 235 included cases, 131 (56%) experienced a nonhome discharge and 68 (29%) experienced a prolonged LOS. Of 178 patients with ≥ 30 days of follow-up, 17 (9.6%) were readmitted within 30 days and 13 (7.4%) underwent reoperation. Wound dehiscence (29%) was the most common reason for readmission. Nonhome discharge was independently predicted by older age (OR=1.03/year; p<.01), thoracic location of the tumor (OR=2.36; p=.01), presenting with bowel dysfunction (OR=4.09; p=.03), and longer incision length (OR=1.44 per level; p=.03). Independent predictors of prolonged LOS included presenting with urinary incontinence (OR=2.65; p=.05) or a higher preoperative white blood cell count (OR=1.08 per 10 3 /μL); p=.01), while GTR predicted shorter LOS (OR=0.40; p=.02). Independent predictive factors for 30 day unplanned readmission included experiencing ≥1 complications during the first hospitalization (OR=6.13; p<.01) and having a poor (A-C) versus good (D-E) baseline neurological status on the ASIA impairment scale (OR=0.23; p=.03). The only independent predictor of unplanned 30 day reoperation was experiencing ≥1 inpatient complications during the index hospitalization (OR=6.92; p<.01). Receiver operating curves for the constructed models produced C-statistics of 0.67-0.77 and the models were deployed as freely available web-based calculators (https://jhuspine5.shinyapps.io/Intramedullary30day)., Conclusions: We found that neurological presentation, patient demographics, and incision length were important predictors of adverse perioperative outcomes in patients with IMSCTs. The calculators can be used by clinicians for risk stratification, preoperative counseling, and targeted interventions., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Surgical resection is considered standard of care for primary intramedullary astrocytomas, but the infiltrative nature of these lesions often precludes complete resection without causing new post-operative neurologic deficits. Radiotherapy and chemotherapy serve as potential adjuvants, but high-quality data evaluating their efficacy are limited. Here we analyze the experience at a single comprehensive cancer center to identify independent predictors of postoperative overall and progression-free survival., Methods: Data was collected on patient demographics, tumor characteristics, pre-operative presentation, resection extent, long-term survival, and tumor progression/recurrence. Kaplan-Meier curves modeled overall and progression-free survival. Univariable and multivariable accelerated failure time regressions were used to compute time ratios (TR) to determine predictors of survival., Results: 94 patients were included, of which 58 (62%) were alive at last follow-up. On multivariable analysis, older age (TR = 0.98; p = 0.03), higher tumor grade (TR = 0.12; p < 0.01), preoperative back pain (TR = 0.45; p < 0.01), biopsy [vs GTR] (TR = 0.18; p = 0.02), and chemotherapy (TR = 0.34; p = 0.02) were significantly associated with poorer survival. Higher tumor grade (TR = 0.34; p = 0.02) and preoperative bowel dysfunction (TR = 0.31; p = 0.02) were significant predictors of shorter time to detection of tumor growth., Conclusion: Tumor grade and chemotherapy were associated with poorer survival and progression-free survival. Chemotherapy regimens were highly heterogeneous, and randomized trials are needed to determine if any optimal regimens exist. Additionally, GTR was associated with improved survival, and patients should be counseled about the benefits and risks of resection extent., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) may be a useful adjunct to lower extremity peripheral vascular interventions (PVI) in certain clinical scenarios. We aimed to identify patient- and physician-level characteristics associated with the use of IVUS during first-time femoropopliteal PVI., Methods: We included all Medicare beneficiaries undergoing elective femoropopliteal PVI for claudication or chronic limb-threatening ischemia between 01/01/2019 and 12/31/2019. We excluded patients with prior open or endovascular femoropopliteal intervention and all physicians performing ≤10 PVI during the study period. We calculated the proportion of patients who had IVUS performed as part of their index PVI for each physician. Hierarchical logistic regression was used to evaluate patient- and physician-level factors associated with use of IVUS., Results: We identified 58,552 patients who underwent index femoropopliteal PVI, of whom 11,394 (19%) received IVUS. A total of 1,628 physicians performed >10 procedures during the study period, with IVUS utilization ranging from 0-100%. After hierarchical regression, claudication (versus chronic limb-threatening ischemia: OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.11-1.36), stenting (versus angioplasty alone: OR 1.57, 1.33-1.86) and atherectomy (versus angioplasty alone: OR 2.09, 1.83-2.39) were associated with higher odds of IVUS utilization. Higher-volume providers (tertile 3 vs. tertile 1: OR 3.78, 2.43-5.90) and those with high rates of service provided in an office-based laboratory (tertile 3 vs. tertile 1: OR 10.72, 6.78-19.93) were more likely to utilize IVUS. Radiologists (OR 11.23, 5.96-21.17) and cardiologists (OR 1.97, 1.32-2.93) used IVUS more frequently than vascular surgeons., Conclusions: Wide variability exists in the use of IVUS for first-time femoropopliteal PVI. The association of IVUS with claudication, atherectomy, and office-based laboratories raises concern about its potential overuse by some physicians., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The Aortic Dissection (AD) Collaborative was established to evaluate patient-centered research priorities in AD. Education was identified as a topic of interest by the stakeholders. The AD Collaborative Education Working Group evaluated existing educational resources and identified areas amenable to comparative effectiveness research. The most important positive qualities of available AD education resources are ease of use, diversity of representation, accessibility, and organization. The most important negative qualities of these resources are non-patient-centered language, promotional themes, and those with limited applicability and accessibility. Through a series of focus groups, the Working Group identified target audiences for AD education and educational material content and critically assessed and prioritized barriers to effective AD education. Both the target audiences and the barriers include clinicians and patients themselves. The Working Group defined initiatives to overcome barriers, to include a comprehensive, universally agreed on AD resource that is updated in real time and making education accessible to all relevant target audiences. The Working Group then prioritized needs for comparative effectiveness research in AD education and determined that clinician education is the top priority for future efforts. The Working Group determined that assessment and evaluation of specific and appropriate screening strategies is the second most important priority. Finally, the Working Group identified patient education as the third most important priority, specifically determining how patients and their support groups learn best, the ideal strategies for information dissemination, and methods of assessing understanding and satisfaction with the education process., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Intramedullary spinal cord tumors (IMSCTs) are rare neoplasms whose treatment is often technically challenging. Given the low volume seen at most centers, perioperative outcomes have been reported infrequently. Here, the authors present the largest single-institution series of IMSCTs, focusing on the clinical presentation, histological makeup, perioperative outcomes, and long-term survival of surgically treated patients., Methods: A cohort of patients operated on for primary IMSCTs at a comprehensive cancer center between June 2002 and May 2020 was retrospectively identified. Data on patient demographics, tumor histology, neuraxial location, baseline neurological status, functional deficits, and operative characteristics were collected. Perioperative outcomes of interest included length of stay, postoperative complications, readmission, reoperation, and discharge disposition. Data were compared across tumor histologies using the Kruskal-Wallis H test, chi-square test, and Fisher exact test. Pairwise comparisons were conducted using Tukey's honest significant difference test, chi-square test, and Fisher exact test. Long-term survival was assessed across tumor categories and histological subtype using the log-rank test., Results: Three hundred two patients were included in the study (mean age 34.9 ± 19 years, 77% white, 57% male). The most common tumors were ependymomas (47%), astrocytomas (31%), and hemangioblastomas (11%). Ependymomas and hemangioblastomas disproportionately localized to the cervical cord (54% and 59%, respectively), whereas astrocytomas were distributed almost equally between the cervical cord (36%) and thoracic cord (38%). Clinical presentation, extent of functional dependence, and postoperative 30-day outcomes were largely independent of underlying tumor pathology, although tumors of the thoracic cord had worse American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) grades than cervical tumors. Rates of gross-total resection were lower for astrocytomas than for ependymomas (54% vs 84%, p < 0.01) and hemangioblastomas (54% vs 100%, p < 0.01). Additionally, 30-day readmission rates were significantly higher for astrocytomas than ependymomas (14% vs 6%, p = 0.02). Overall survival was significantly affected by the underlying pathology, with astrocytomas having poorer associated prognoses (40% at 15 years) than ependymomas (81%) and hemangioblastomas (66%; p < 0.01) and patients with high-grade ependymomas and astrocytomas having poorer long-term survival than those with low-grade lesions (p < 0.01)., Conclusions: The neuraxial location of IMSCTs, extent of resection, and postoperative survival differed significantly across tumor pathologies. However, perioperative outcomes did not vary significantly across tumor cohorts, suggesting that operative details, rather than pathology, may have a stronger influence on the short-term clinical course, whereas pathology appears to have a stronger impact on long-term survival.

Vascular anastomoses typically involve a handsewn technique requiring significant surgical training, expertise, and time. The aim of our systematic review was to identify and describe sutureless vascular anastomosis techniques. We performed a systematic review of all sutureless vascular anastomosis technologies published in MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Scopus Library databases and a patent review using US Patent and Trade Office Application, US Patent and Trademark Office Patent, Google Patents, Lens, Patent Quality Through Artificial Intelligence, SureChEMBL, and E-Space Net. Data from inclusion studies and patents published between January 1, 1980 and July 15, 2021 were abstracted to describe their category, anastomosis type and configuration, study types, and advantages and disadvantages encountered with each technology. Two hundred eleven original studies and 475 patents describing sutureless vascular anastomosis technologies were identified. In the literature, stents/stent-grafts/grafts (n = 61), lasers (n = 53), and couplers (n = 27) were the predominant device categories. In the patent review, adhesive technologies (n = 103), stents/stent-grafts/grafts (n = 68), and mechanical connectors (n = 61) predominated. The majority of studies involved in vivo animal studies (n = 193); 32.2% (n = 68) of investigations involved human trials; and 17.9% (n = 85) of patent technologies were approved by the US Food and Drug Administration. The main advantages described for sutureless anastomosis technologies included faster procedure time and greater patency rates compared with handsewn anastomoses. The main disadvantages included reduced vessel compliance, stenosis, leakage, and device costs. The appeal of sutureless technology is substantiated by numerous animal trials, but their use in humans remains limited. This may be a reflection of strict regulatory criteria and/or vascular complications associated with currently available technologies., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Frailty-the state defined by decreased physiological reserve and increased vulnerability to physiological stress-is exceedingly common in oncology patients. Given the palliative nature of spine metastasis surgery, it is imperative that patients be healthy enough to tolerate the physical insult of surgery. In the present study, the authors compared the association of two frailty metrics and the widely used Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) with postoperative morbidity in spine metastasis patients., Methods: A retrospective cohort of patients who underwent operations for spinal metastases at a comprehensive cancer center were identified. Data on patient demographic characteristics, disease state, medical comorbidities, operative details, and postoperative outcomes were collected. Frailty was measured with the modified 5-item frailty index (mFI-5) and metastatic spinal tumor frailty index (MSTFI). Outcomes of interest were length of stay (LOS) greater than the 75th percentile of the cohort, nonroutine discharge, and the occurrence of ≥ 1 postoperative complication., Results: In total, 322 patients were included (mean age 59.5 ± 12 years; 56.9% of patients were male). The mean ± SD LOS was 11.2 ± 9.9 days, 44.5% of patients had nonroutine discharge, and 24.0% experienced ≥ 1 postoperative complication. On multivariable analysis, increased frailty on mFI-5 and MSTFI was independently predictive of all three outcomes: prolonged LOS (OR 1.67 per point, 95% CI 1.06-2.63, p = 0.03; and OR 1.63 per point, 95% CI 1.29-2.05, p < 0.01, respectively), nonroutine discharge (OR 2.65 per point, 95% CI 1.74-4.04, p < 0.01; and OR 1.69 per point, 95% CI 1.36-2.11, p < 0.01), and ≥ 1 complication (OR 1.95 per point, 95% CI 1.23-3.09, p = 0.01; and OR 1.41 per point, 95% CI 1.12-1.77, p < 0.01). CCI was found to be independently predictive of only the occurrence of ≥ 1 postoperative complication (OR 1.45 per point, 95% CI 1.22-1.72, p < 0.01)., Conclusions: Frailty measured with either mFI-5 or MSTFI scores was a more robust independent predictor of adverse postoperative outcomes than the more widely used CCI. Both mFI-5 and MSTFI were significantly associated with prolonged LOS, higher complication rates, and nonroutine discharge. Further investigation in a prospective multicenter cohort is merited.

A previously published review focused on generic and disease-specific patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) relevant to vascular surgery but limited to arterial conditions. The objective of this project was to identify all available PROMs relevant to diseases treated by vascular surgeons and to evaluate vascular surgeon perceptions, barriers to widespread implementation, and concerns regarding PROMs. We provide an overview of what a PROM is and how they are developed, and summarize currently available PROMs specific to vascular surgeons. We also report results from a survey of 78 Society for Vascular Surgery members serving on committees within the Policy and Advocacy Council addressing the barriers and facilitators to using PROMs in clinical practice. Finally, we report the qualitative results of two focus groups conducted to assess granular perceptions of PROMS and preparedness of vascular surgeons for widespread implementation of PROMs. These focus groups identified a lack of awareness of existing PROMs, knowledge of how PROMs are developed and validated, and clarity around how PROMs should be used by the clinician as main subthemes for barriers to PROM implementation in clinical practice., (Copyright © 2021 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)