Explantation of infected thoracic endovascular aortic repair

Prosthetic graft infection is a rare and serious complication of thoracic endovascular aortic repair associated with high mortality and posing unique challenges for treatment. The prosthetic graft infection is often identified late as patients present with mild nonspecific symptoms. We describe the successful medical management and surgical explantation of an infected thoracic endograft with an aorta-bronchial fistula, using an inline reconstruction with an antibiotic-soaked synthetic graft. In this report, we provide an example of a patient with an infected thoracic endograft and how inline reconstruction combined with appropriate medical management is an acceptable treatment strategy

Carotid body tumor resection utilizing a covered stent graft to enable resection of the tumor en bloc with the internal carotid artery

Surgical excision is the primary treatment for carotid body tumors (CBT) and infrequently involves carotid vessels reconstruction. A CBT that extends distally to the level of the skull base makes surgical reconstruction very challenging. We report a case of a 30-year-old man who presented with a CBT (Shamblin III) extending to the base of the skull. A covered stent graft was placed in the internal carotid artery. Subsequently, a successful resection of the tumor with the arterial wall en bloc was performed, leaving the stent graft exposed as a bridge between the two ends of ICA

Development of a Surgical Workforce Access Team (SWAT) in the Battle Against COVID-19

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, our vascular surgery division has implemented a 24/7 vascular access team to provide line placement services throughout our medical center. We believe this model allows us to maximize our skillset while providing an important service for the hospital during this crisis. Additionally, this model allows us to control our own workforce and preserve workforce availability in the likely event that some of our providers contract the disease

Routine use of completion imaging after infrainguinal bypass is not associated with higher bypass graft patency

BackgroundSignificant variability exists in completion imaging (CIM) after infrainguinal lower extremity bypass (LEB). We evaluated the use of CIM and compared graft patency in patients treated by surgeons who performed routine CIM vs those who performed selective CIM.MethodsWe reviewed the Vascular Study Group of New England database (2003-2010) and assessed the use of CIM (angiography or duplex ultrasound) among patients undergoing LEB. The surgeon-specific CIM strategy was categorized as routine (≥80% of LEBs) vs selective (<80% of LEBs). Exclusion criteria included acute limb ischemia, bilateral procedures, and surgeon volume <10 cases per study period. Primary graft patency at discharge and at 1 year was analyzed on the basis of CIM use and surgeon-specific CIM strategy. Multivariable analyses were performed using Poisson regression.ResultsAmong 2032 LEB procedures performed by 48 surgeons, CIM was used in 1368 cases (67.3%). CIM was performed in 72% of autogenous LEBs and 52% of prosthetic grafts. Dialysis (odds ratio [OR], 1.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-2.6; P = .01), elective LEB (OR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.4-4.8; P = .002), great saphenous vein conduit (OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.6-2.5; P < .001), and tibial or pedal target artery (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.4-2.3; P < .001) were associated with CIM use. In multivariate models, CIM was not associated with improved primary graft patency at discharge (OR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.7-1.7; P = .64) or at 1 year (OR, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.7-1.2; P = .47). Sixteen surgeons (33%) were routine users and 32 (67%) were selective users of CIM. Among patients of routine vs selective CIM users, primary graft patency at discharge and at 1 year was 96% vs 94% (P = .21) and 68% vs 72% (P = .09), respectively. In multivariate analysis, routine or selective CIM strategy was not associated with improved discharge (rate ratio, 0.8; 95% CI, 0.6-1.1; P = .31) or 1-year (rate ratio, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.9-1.2; P = .56) graft patency.ConclusionsIn our observational cohort, CIM does not improve short-term and 1-year bypass graft patency in infrainguinal LEB. The surgeon-specific strategy of selective CIM after LEB has outcomes comparable to those of routine CIM

Immediate reexploration for the perioperative neurologic event after carotid endarterectomy: Is it worthwhile?

AbstractPurpose: When managing a new neurologic deficit after carotid endarterectomy (CEA), the surgeon is often preoccupied with determining the cause of the problem, requesting diagnostics tests, and deciding whether the patient should be surgically reexplored. The goal of this study was to analyze a series of perioperative neurologic events and to determine if careful analysis of their timing and mechanisms can predict which cases are likely to improve with reoperation. Methods: A review of 2024 CEAs performed from 1985 to 1997 revealed 38 patients who manifested a neurologic deficit in the perioperative period (1.9%). These cases form the focus of this analysis. Results: The causes of the events included intraoperative clamping ischemia in 5 patients (13.2%); thromboembolic events in 24 (63.2%); intracerebral hemorrhage in 5 (13.2%); and deficits unrelated to the operated artery in 4 (10.5%). Neurologic events manifesting in the first 24 hours after surgery were significantly more likely to be caused by thromboembolic events than by other causes of stroke (88.0% vs 12.0%, P <.002); deficits manifesting after the first 24 hours were significantly more likely to be related to other causes. Of 25 deficits manifesting in the first 24 hours after surgery, 18 underwent immediate surgical reexploration. Intraluminal thrombus was noted in 15 of the 18 reexplorations (83.3%); any technical defects were corrected. After the 18 reexplorations, in 12 cases there was either complete resolution of or significant improvement in the neurologic deficit that had been present (66.7%). Conclusions: Careful analysis of the timing and presentation of perioperative neurologic events after CEA can predict which cases are likely to improve with reoperation. Neurologic deficits that present during the first 24 hours after CEA are likely to be related to intraluminal thrombus formation and embolization. Unless another etiology for stroke has clearly been established, we think immediate reexploration of the artery without other confirmatory tests is mandatory to remove the embolic source and correct any technical problems. This will likely improve the neurologic outcome in these patients, because an uncorrected situation would lead to continued embolization and compromise. (J Vasc Surg 2000;32:1062-70.

Growing impact of restenosis on the surgical treatment of peripheral arterial disease

BACKGROUND: Patients with peripheral arterial disease often experience treatment failure from restenosis at the site of a prior peripheral endovascular intervention (PVI) or lower extremity bypass (LEB). The impact of these treatment failures on the utilization and outcomes of secondary interventions is poorly understood. METHODS AND RESULTS: In our regional vascular quality improvement collaborative, we compared 2350 patients undergoing primary infrainguinal LEB with 1154 patients undergoing secondary infrainguinal LEB (LEB performed after previous revascularization in the index limb) between 2003 and 2011. The proportion of patients undergoing secondary LEB increased by 72% during the study period (22% of all LEBs in 2003 to 38% in 2011, P\u3c0.001). In-hospital outcomes, such as myocardial infarction, death, and amputation, were similar between primary and secondary LEB groups. However, in both crude and propensity-weighted analyses, secondary LEB was associated with significantly inferior 1-year outcomes, including major adverse limb event-free survival (composite of death, new bypass graft, surgical bypass graft revision, thrombectomy/thrombolysis, or above-ankle amputation; Secondary LEB MALE-free survival = 61.6% vs primary LEB MALE-free survival = 67.5%, P=0.002) and reintervention or amputation-free survival (composite of death, reintervention, or above-ankle amputation; Secondary LEB RAO-free survival = 58.9% vs Primary LEB RAO-free survival 64.1%, P=0.003). Inferior outcomes for secondary LEB were observed regardless of the prior failed treatment type (PVI or LEB). CONCLUSIONS: In an era of increasing utilization of PVI, a growing proportion of patients undergo LEB in the setting of a prior failed PVI or surgical bypass. When caring for patients with peripheral arterial disease, physicians should recognize that first treatment failure (PVI or LEB) affects the success of subsequent revascularizations