2 research outputs found

    How the First Year of the COVID-19 Pandemic Impacted Patients’ Hospital Admission and Care in the Vascular Surgery Divisions of the Southern Regions of the Italian Peninsula

    Get PDF
    Background: To investigate the effects of the COVID-19 lockdowns on the vasculopathic population. Methods: The Divisions of Vascular Surgery of the southern Italian peninsula joined this multicenter retrospective study. Each received a 13-point questionnaire investigating the hospitalization rate of vascular patients in the first 11 months of the COVID-19 pandemic and in the preceding 11 months. Results: 27 out of 29 Centers were enrolled. April-December 2020 (7092 patients) vs. 2019 (9161 patients): post-EVAR surveillance, hospitalization for Rutherford category 3 peripheral arterial disease, and asymptomatic carotid stenosis revascularization significantly decreased (1484 (16.2%) vs. 1014 (14.3%), p = 0.0009; 1401 (15.29%) vs. 959 (13.52%), p = 0.0006; and 1558 (17.01%) vs. 934 (13.17%), p < 0.0001, respectively), while admissions for revascularization or major amputations for chronic limb-threatening ischemia and urgent revascularization for symptomatic carotid stenosis significantly increased (1204 (16.98%) vs. 1245 (13.59%), p < 0.0001; 355 (5.01%) vs. 358 (3.91%), p = 0.0007; and 153 (2.16%) vs. 140 (1.53%), p = 0.0009, respectively). Conclusions: The suspension of elective procedures during the COVID-19 pandemic caused a significant reduction in post-EVAR surveillance, and in the hospitalization of asymptomatic carotid stenosis revascularization and Rutherford 3 peripheral arterial disease. Consequentially, we observed a significant increase in admissions for urgent revascularization for symptomatic carotid stenosis, as well as for revascularization or major amputations for chronic limb-threatening ischemia

    Insight from an Italian Delphi Consensus on EVAR feasibility outside the instruction for use: the SAFE EVAR Study

    No full text
    Background: The SAfety and FEasibility of standard EVAR outside the instruction for use (SAFE-EVAR) Study was designed to define the attitude of Italian vascular surgeons towards the use of standard endovascular repair (EVAR) for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) outside the instruction for use (IFU) through a Delphi consensus endorsed by the Italian Society of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery (Società Italiana di Chirurgia Vascolare ed Endovascolare - SICVE). Methods: A questionnaire consisting of 26 statements was developed, validated by an 18-member Advisory Board, and then sent to 600 Italian vascular surgeons. The Delphi process was structured in three subsequent rounds which took place between April and June 2023. In the first two rounds, respondents could indicate one of the following five degrees of agreement: 1) strongly agree; 2) partially agree; 3) neither agree nor disagree; 4) partially disagree; 5) strongly disagree; while in the third round only three different choices were proposed: 1) agree; 2) neither agree nor disagree; 3) disagree. We considered the consensus reached when ≥70% of respondents agreed on one of the options. After the conclusion of each round, a report describing the percentage distribution of the answers was sent to all the participants. Results: Two-hundred-forty-four (40.6%) Italian Vascular Surgeons agreed to participate the first round of the Delphi Consensus; the second and the third rounds of the Delphi collected 230 responders (94.3% of the first-round responders). Four statements (15.4%) reached a consensus in the first rounds. Among the 22 remaining statements, one more consensus (3.8%) was achieved in the second round. Finally, seven more statements (26.9%) reached a consensus in the simplified last round. Globally, a consensus was reached for almost half of the proposed statements (46.1%). Conclusions: The relatively low consensus rate obtained in this Delphi seems to confirm the discrepancy between Guideline recommendations and daily clinical practice. The data collected could represent the source for a possible guidelines' revision and the proposal of specific Good Practice Points in all those aspects with only little evidence available
    corecore