No abstract

BackgroundAbdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair aims to prevent premature death from AAA rupture. Elective repair is currently recommended when AAA diameter reaches 5.5 cm (men) and 5.0 cm (women). Applying population-based indications may not be appropriate for individual patient decisions, as the optimal indication is likely to differ between patients based on age and comorbidities.ObjectiveTo develop an Aneurysm Repair Decision Aid (ARDA) to indicate when elective AAA repair optimises survival for individual patients and to assess the cost-effectiveness and associated uncertainty of elective repair at the aneurysm diameter recommended by the ARDA compared with current practice.Data sourcesThe UK Vascular Governance North West and National Vascular Database provided individual patient data to develop predictive models for perioperative mortality and survival. Data from published literature were used to model AAA growth and risk of rupture. The cost-effectiveness analysis used data from published literature and from local and national databases.MethodsA combination of systematic review methods and clinical registries were used to provide data to populate models and inform the structure of the ARDA. Discrete event simulation (DES) was used to model the patient journey from diagnosis to death and synthesised data were used to estimate patient outcomes and costs for elective repair at alternative aneurysm diameters. Eight patient clinical scenarios (vignettes) were used as exemplars. The DES structure was validated by clinical and statistical experts. The economic evaluation estimated costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) from the NHS, social care provider and patient perspective over a lifetime horizon. Cost-effectiveness acceptability analyses and probabilistic sensitivity analyses explored uncertainty in the data and the value for money of ARDA-based decisions. The ARDA outcome measures include perioperative mortality risk, annual risk of rupture, 1-, 5- and 10-year survival, postoperative long-term survival, median life expectancy and predicted time to current threshold for aneurysm repair. The primary economic measure was the ICER using the QALY as the measure of health benefit.ResultsThe analysis demonstrated it is feasible to build and run a complex clinical decision aid using DES. The model results support current guidelines for most vignettes but suggest that earlier repair may be effective in younger, fitter patients and ongoing surveillance may be effective in elderly patients with comorbidities. The model adds information to support decisions for patients with aneurysms outside current indications. The economic evaluation suggests that using the ARDA compared with current guidelines could be cost-effective but there is a high level of uncertainty.LimitationsLack of high-quality long-term data to populate all sections of the model meant that there is high uncertainty about the long-term clinical and economic consequences of repair. Modelling assumptions were necessary and the developed survival models require external validation.ConclusionsThe ARDA provides detailed information on the potential consequences of AAA repair or a decision not to repair that may be helpful to vascular surgeons and their patients in reaching informed decisions. Further research is required to reduce uncertainty about key data, including reintervention following AAA repair, and assess the acceptability and feasibility of the ARDA for use in routine clinical practice.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Surgical site infections (SSIs) of groin wounds are a common and potentially preventable cause of morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs in vascular surgery. Our aim was to define the contemporaneous rate of groin SSIs, determine clinical sequelae, and identify risk factors for SSI. An international multicentre prospective observational cohort study of consecutive patients undergoing groin incision for femoral vessel access in vascular surgery was undertaken over 3 months, follow-up was 90 days. The primary outcome was the incidence of groin wound SSI. 1337 groin incisions (1039 patients) from 37 centres were included. 115 groin incisions (8.6%) developed SSI, of which 62 (4.6%) were superficial. Patients who developed an SSI had a significantly longer length of hospital stay (6 versus 5 days, P = .005), a significantly higher rate of post-operative acute kidney injury (19.6% versus 11.7%, P = .018), with no significant difference in 90-day mortality. Female sex, Body mass index≥30 kg/m 2 , ischaemic heart disease, aqueous betadine skin preparation, bypass/patch use (vein, xenograft, or prosthetic), and increased operative time were independent predictors of SSI. Groin infections, which are clinically apparent to the treating vascular unit, are frequent and their development carries significant clinical sequelae. Risk factors include modifiable and non-modifiable variables.

INTRODUCTION There is evidence of effectiveness for a range of different treatment modalities for varicose veins but limited information about factors that influence treatment choice for individual patients. METHODS A postal survey was sent to 438 UK members of the Vascular Society of Great Britain and Ireland. RESULTS Overall, 251 responses were received (response rate 57%). A total of 222 respondents treated varicose veins using conventional surgery (84%), endothermal ablation (82%) and foam sclerotherapy (68%). The clinical pattern of veins appeared to have the greatest influence on treatment choice. This was followed by guidance from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, patient expectations, facilities, cost and whether treatment was carried out in the public or private sector. Respondents were asked to indicate whether each of 13 clinical 'scenarios' (eg very extensive varicose veins in both legs) would influence them towards or against using specified treatment modalities. 'Consensus' was defined as ≥80% of responses either towards or against any treatment modality; and disagreement as 41-59% both towards and against any modality (i.e. ∼50:50 split). There was consensus towards using endothermal ablation for truncal reflux, towards UGFS for localised varicose veins and towards conventional surgery for large, extensive, bilateral veins. There was consensus against UGFS for large truncal veins, and against surgery for obese patients and those with a history of venous thromboembolism. There were important disagreements about the influence of large or extensive veins, about whether patients were obese or slim and about a prior history of venous thromboembolism. CONCLUSIONS Conventional surgery is still widely available in the UK. Disagreements about treatment choice in different clinical scenarios suggest substantial variation in the treatments patients are offered. Attention to identifying subgroups in trials would help to guide treatment choice for individual patients.