Background and Purpose-We systematically compared and appraised contemporary guidelines on management of asymptomatic and symptomatic carotid artery stenosis. Methods-We systematically searched for guideline recommendations on carotid endarterectomy (CEA) or carotid angioplasty/stenting (CAS) published in any language between January 1, 2008, and January 28, 2015. Only the latest guideline per writing group was selected. Each guideline was analyzed independently by 2 to 6 authors to determine clinical scenarios covered, recommendations given, and scientific evidence used. Results-Thirty-four eligible guidelines were identified from 23 different regions/countries in 6 languages. Of 28 guidelines with asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis procedural recommendations, 24 (86%) endorsed CEA (recommended it should or may be provided) for ≈50% to 99% average-surgical-risk asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis, 17 (61%) endorsed CAS, 8 (29%) opposed CAS, and 1 (4%) endorsed medical treatment alone. For asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis patients considered high-CEA-risk because of comorbidities, vascular anatomy, or undefined reasons, CAS was endorsed in 13 guidelines (46%). Thirty-one of 33 guidelines (94%) with symptomatic carotid artery stenosis procedural recommendations endorsed CEA for patients with ≈50% to 99% average-CEA-risk symptomatic carotid artery stenosis, 19 (58%) endorsed CAS and 9 (27%) opposed CAS. For high-CEA-risk symptomatic carotid artery stenosis because of comorbidities, vascular anatomy, or undefined reasons, CAS was endorsed in 27 guidelines (82%). Guideline procedural recommendations were based only on results of trials in which patients were randomized 12 to 34 years ago, rarely reflected medical treatment improvements and often understated potential CAS hazards. Qualifying terminology summarizing recommendations or evidence lacked standardization, impeding guideline interpretation, and comparison. This systematic review of contemporary international guidelines was performed to compare and appraise recommendations for the management of patients with ACS and SCS (including accessibility, organization, clarity, and consistency) and the evidence used in making these recommendations. Conclusions-This Methods Guideline SearchesGuidelines with recommendations on the use of CEA or CAS or both patients with ACS or SCS or both were sought systematically using popular search engines, bibliographies, and author professional networks. PubMed and ISI Web of Knowledge were searched independently and synchronously by 2 authors on September 9, 2013 (A.L.A., K.I.P.). PubMed was searched using carotid guideline and then stroke guideline in the title, yielding 91 references after duplicate removal. ISI Web of Knowledge was searched using carotid and guideline and then stroke and guideline in the title, yielding 422 references after removal of duplicates, abstracts, reference materials, letters, corrections, meetings, news, and case reports. Wider searches using the words carotid or stroke and guideline in any ...
In complex popliteal to infrapopliteal occlusions, an antegrade recanalization attempt can fail in up to 20% of the cases. The additional use of a retrograde approach seems feasible and safe and can favorably modify this failure rate. This technique could be valuable for patients with critical limb ischemia due to popliteal and infrapopliteal occlusions once larger studies with follow-up confirm safety, efficacy, and clinical benefit.
Purpose: To report a prospective, multicenter, observational study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01609621) of the safety and effectiveness of tibiopedal access and retrograde crossing in the treatment of infrainguinal chronic total occlusions (CTOs). Methods: Twelve sites around the world prospectively enrolled 197 patients (mean age 71±11 years, range 41-93; 129 men) from May 2012 to July 2013 who met the inclusion criterion of at least one CTO for which a retrograde crossing procedure was planned or became necessary. The population consisted of 64 (32.5%) claudicants (Rutherford categories 2/3) and 133 (67.5%) patients with critical limb ischemia (Rutherford category ≥4). A primary antegrade attempt to cross had been made prior to the tibiopedal attempt in 132 (67.0%) cases. Techniques used for access, retrograde lesion crossing, and treatment were at the operator’s discretion. Follow-up data were obtained 30 days after the procedure. Results: Technical tibiopedal access success was achieved in 184 (93.4%) of 197 patients and technical occlusion crossing success in 157 (85.3%) of the 184 successful tibial accesses. Failed access attempts were more common in women (9 of 13 failures). The rate of successful crossing was roughly equivalent between sexes [84.7% (50/59) women compared to 85.6% (107/125) men]. Technical success did not differ significantly based on a prior failed antegrade attempt: the access success rate was 92.4% (122/132) after a failed antegrade access vs 95.4% (62/65) in those with a primary tibiopedal attempt (p=0.55). Similarly, crossing success was achieved in 82.8% (101/122) after a failed antegrade access vs 90.3% (56/62) for patients with no prior antegrade attempt (p=0.19). Minor complications related to the access site occurred in 11 (5.6%) cases; no patient had access vessel thrombosis, compartment syndrome, or surgical revascularization. Conclusion: Tibiopedal access appears to be safe and can be used effectively for the crossing of infrainguinal lesions in patients with severe lower limb ischemia.
This MOXY approach appears to be safe when implanted in patients with limb-threatening ischemia undergoing endovascular recanalization and is effective in reporting local tissue oxygen concentrations over a course of 28 days. Further testing is needed to determine its potential effect on clinical decision making, both acutely on-table and chronically as a surveillance modality, which ultimately can lead to improved healing and limb salvage.
Stenting of the popliteal artery using the Supera stent system appears to be safe and effective. The interwoven stent design may better serve areas under extreme mechanical stress. Our results with this highly diseased patient population justify a prospective trial in this subject.
Acute mesenteric ischemia (AMI) continues to carry high morbidity and mortality. Endovascular strategies have been increasingly used in the management of AMI. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of endovascular therapy on outcomes of patients with AMI. The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was queried to identify all patients requiring emergency surgical intervention for AMI. Demographics, clinical data, interventions, and outcomes were extracted. Patients were compared according to treatment (endovascular versus hybrid versus open revascularization). Over the six-year study period, a total of 439 patients were found to have AMI [27 (6.2%) endovascular, 23 (5.2%) hybrid, and 389 (88.6%) open revascularization]. A total of 16 (59.3%) patients in the endovascular group avoided laparotomy. There was a trend toward lower transfusion requirements (intraoperative transfusion: 3.7% for endovascular vs 17.4% for hybrid vs 19.3% for open, adjusted. P = 0.127) and complications in particular pneumonia (22.2% vs 39.1% vs 27.8%, respectively, Adj. P = 0.392) and sepsis (25.9% vs 21.7% vs 35.5%, adjusted P = 0.260). Endovascular therapy was associated with a 2.5-fold decrease in the risk of death [odds ratio, 95% confidence interval: 0.4 (0.2, 0.9), adjusted P = 0.018]. In this analysis of morbidity and mortality, endovascular therapy was associated with decreased need for laparotomy and a trend toward lower transfusion requirements and complications, in particular pneumonia and sepsis. Endovascular first therapy was associated with a 2.5-fold decrease in the risk of death. Further prospective evaluation of these results is warranted.
Critical limb ischemia (CLI), defined as ischemic rest pain or nonhealing ulceration due to arterial insufficiency, represents the most severe and limb-threatening manifestation of peripheral artery disease. A major challenge in the optimal treatment of CLI is that multiple specialties participate in the care of this complex patient population. As a result, the care of patients with CLI is often fragmented, and multidisciplinary societal guidelines have not focused specifically on the care of patients with CLI. Furthermore, multidisciplinary care has the potential to improve patient outcomes, as no single medical specialty addresses all the facets of care necessary to reduce cardiovascular and limb-related morbidity in this complex patient population. This review identifies current gaps in the multidisciplinary care of patients with CLI, with a goal toward increasing disease recognition and timely referral, defining important components of CLI treatment teams, establishing options for revascularization strategies, and identifying best practices for wound care post-revascularization.
IMPORTANCE Physical frailty is a key risk factor associated with higher rates of major adverse events (MAEs) after surgery. Assessing physical frailty is often challenging among patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) who are often unable to perform gait-based assessments because of the presence of plantar wounds. OBJECTIVE To test a frailty meter (FM) that does not rely on gait to determine the risk of occurrence of MAEs after revascularization for patients with CLTI. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This cohort study included 184 consecutively recruited patients with CLTI at 2 tertiary care centers. After 32 individuals were excluded, 152 participants were included in the study. Data collection was conducted between May 2018 and June 2019. EXPOSURES Physical frailty measurement within 1 week before limb revascularization and incidence of MAEs for as long as 1 month after surgery. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The FM works by quantifying weakness, slowness, rigidity, and exhaustion during a 20-second repetitive elbow flexion-extension exercise using a wrist-worn sensor. The FM generates a frailty index (FI) ranging from 0 to 1; higher values indicate progressively greater severity of physical frailty. RESULTS Of 152 eligible participants (mean [SD] age, 67.0 [11.8] years; 59 [38.8%] women), 119 (78.2%) were unable to perform the gait test, while all could perform the FM test. Overall, 53 (34.9%), 58 (38.1%), and 41 (27.0%) were classified as robust (FI <0.20), prefrail (FI Ն0.20 to <0.35), or frail (FI Ն0.35), respectively. Within 30 days after surgery, 24 (15.7%) developed MAEs, either major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE; 8 [5.2%]) or major adverse limb events (MALE; 16 [10.5%]). Baseline demographic characteristics were not significantly different between frailty groups. In contrast, the FI was approximately 30% higher in the group that developed MAEs (mean [SD] score, 0.36 [0.14]) than those who were MAE free (mean [SD] score, 0.26 [0.13]; P = .001), with observed MAE rates of 4 patients (7.5%), 7 patients (12.1%), and 13 patients (31.7%) in the robust, prefrail and frail groups, respectively (P = .004). The FI distinguished individuals who developed MACE and MALE from those who were MAE free (MACE: mean [SD] FI score, 0.38 [0.16]; P = .03; MALE: mean [SD] FI score, 0.35 [0.13]; P = .004) after adjusting by body mass index. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this cohort study, measuring physical frailty using a wrist-worn sensor during a short upper extremity test was a practical method for stratifying the risk of MAEs following revascularization for CLTI when the administration of gait-based tests is often challenging.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.