Patient and Healthcare Professional Priorities for a Mobile Phone Application for Patients With Peripheral Arterial Disease

Introduction Supervised exercise therapy (SET) is the first-line treatment for the peripheral arterial disease (PAD), however, access and compliance are low. An alternative method of delivering this therapy is through mobile health applications, which can be more accessible and convenient for patients. The aim of this study is to evaluate patient, public and healthcare professional (HCP) priorities with regard to a dedicated mobile phone application to deliver remote SET. Methods Bespoke questionnaires were designed for patients and HCPs to assess app functionality and prioritisations for development. These were distributed through social media and the Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital. Results Functionality questionnaires were completed by 62 patients and 44 HCPs. Eighty-four per cent of patients wanted their therapy to be monitored by their vascular team with the majority (78%) interested in measuring walking distances. Most patients (76%) were interested in watching exercise videos. These views were shared by HCPs. A communication platform was prioritised for messaging and pictures by the patient (74% and 68% respectively), but not so by HCPs (40%). Documenting other forms of physical activity and the use of wearable technology was less valuable to patients but favoured by HCPs (50%). The ability to interact with other users was not prioritised by either group. Conclusion Delivery of a mobile phone application to deliver health programmes for SET in patients with PAD is an acceptable method for patients and HCPs. This data will enable the next stages of mobile phone application development to be appropriately prioritised, focusing on building exercise videos, a communication platform and further walking tests

Ligation alone versus immediate revascularization for femoral artery pseudoaneurysms secondary to intravascular drug use: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Femoral artery pseudoaneurysms (FA-PSAs) remain a common vascular aneurysmal pathology associated with intravascular drug use (IVDU). To date no internationally agreed consensus regarding optimal surgical management of FA-PSAs exists. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the optimal surgical treatment of FA-PSAs associated with IVDU. Methods: A systematic search was undertaken following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines identifying original studies reporting outcomes of ligation-debridement and/or excision-revascularization of FA-PSAs secondary to IVDU. Outcomes of interest were 30-day mortality, incidence of amputation at 12 months, chronic limb threatening ischemia (CLTI) at any follow-up appointment, reintervention, and bleeding. Results: A total of 39 cohort studies describing 1,217 FA-PSA operative outcomes met inclusion criteria, 993 (81.6%) treated by ligation-debridement and 224 (18.4%) by excision-revascularization. The incidence of 30-day mortality was 0.8% (n = 8) and 1.3% (n = 3) in the ligation-debridement and excision-revascularization groups, respectively, with only one study reporting mortality in both groups. This meta-analysis found no difference in amputation (8.89% vs. 8.03%, odds ratio (OR) 0.74 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.35–1.56, P = 0.42, 11 studies) or CLTI (21.5% vs. 12.4%, OR 1.24 95% CI 0.35–4.38, P = 0.74, 9 studies) after ligation and debridement compared with excision and revascularization. There was a higher incidence of reintervention (24.7% vs. 10.6%, OR 0.31 [95% CI 0.16, 0.62], P = 0.0009, 13 studies) and rebleeding (7.1% vs. 1.6%, OR 0.61 [95% CI 0.16, 2.38], P = 0.48, 5 studies) after excision and revascularization compared with ligation alone. Conclusions: For treatments of IVDU-related FA-PSAs, this study suggests no significant difference in association of mortality, incidence of amputation, or CLTI with ligation-debridement or excision-revascularization, but a significantly higher reintervention rate and greater rebleeding rate for revascularized patients

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the use of the Omniflow II biosynthetic graft for aortic reconstruction

Objective: Despite the improvements in xenogeneic grafts and surgical techniques, management of aortic graft infection has remained challenging. The optimal graft material has remained controversial, with high rates of reinfection using prosthetic grafts and a limited time for venous harvest in an emergent setting. Recent studies have highlighted an increase in the use of Omniflow II biosynthetic vascular grafts (LeMaitre Vascular, Burlington, MA) for aortic reconstruction. The primary aim of the present study was to review the key outcomes for the Omniflow II graft in terms of reinfection and complications. Methods: The National Healthcare Service healthcare databases advanced search function was used to search nine databases for the search term “Omniflow.” The present study complied with the PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis) statement. Eligible studies related to aortic graft infection or in situ aortic reconstruction were selected in accordance with prespecified eligibility criteria and included for review. Data on the surgical technique, comorbidities, graft reinfection, mortality, and complications were combined. The data were analyzed using Stata/MP, version 17 (StataCorp, College Station, TX), and the probabilities were pooled using a DerSimonian and Laird random effects model with Freeman-Tukey arcsine transformation. Results: Six studies with 60 patients (44 men; age range, 29-89 years) were included. Of the 60 patients, 25 had undergone surgical reconstruction because of early graft infection (<4 months after the index procedure), 24 for late graft infection, and 3 because of mycotic aneurysms. Eight high-risk patients had undergone surgical reconstruction for prevention of an initial graft infection. Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli, and S. epidermis were the most common organisms. Early mortality was 8.83% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12%-20.53%), and late mortality was 18.49% (95% CI, 5.51%-35.34%). Follow-up varied from 9 months to 2 years. No graft rupture or graft degeneration had occurred during follow-up. However, 6.2% (95% CI, 0.39%-15.81%) had experienced early graft occlusion, and 3.83% (95% CI, 0.00%-16.34%) had developed early graft stenosis. Two cases of postoperative reinfection were reported. The freedom from reinfection was 97.71% (95% CI, 87.94%-100.00%). Conclusions: Use of the Omniflow II graft for aortic reconstruction is a feasible alternative with acceptable mortality and low reinfection rates. However, there is a risk of limb occlusion. Although these studies were of low quality, the Omniflow II graft shows promise in this difficult patient cohort, especially when bifurcated reconstruction is required

Predicting features of visceral stent failure in fenestrated endovascular aortic aneurysm repair

Purpose: Visceral stents in fenestrated endovascular aortic repair (FEVAR) have a significant risk of complications and carry a considerable burden of reinterventions. The aim of this study is to identify preoperative and intraoperative predictors of visceral stent failure. Materials: A retrospective review of 75 consecutive FEVARs in a single center from 2013 to 2021 was undertaken. Data on mortality, stent failure, and reintervention pertaining to 226 visceral stents were collected. Methods: Anatomical features including aortic neck angulation, aneurysm diameter, and angulation of target viscerals were obtained from preoperative computed tomography (CT) scans. Stent oversizing and intraprocedural complications were recorded. Postoperative CT scans were analyzed to determine the length of cover of target vessels. Results: Only bridging stents through fenestrations to visceral vessels were considered; 28 (37%) cases had 4 visceral stents, 24 (32%) had 3, 19 (25%) had 2, 4 (5%) had 1. Thirty day mortality was 8%, a third of which was related to visceral stent complications. Intraprocedural complexity was documented during the cannulation of 8 (3.5%) target vessels, with a technical success rate of 98.7%. A significant endoleak or visceral stent failure was identified in 22 stents (9.8%) postoperatively, of which 7 (3%) had in-patient reintervention within 30 days. Further reinterventions at 1, 2, and 3 years were 12 (5.4%), 2 (1%), and 1 (0.4%), respectively. Most reinterventions were for renal stents (n=19, 86%). A smaller stent diameter and a shorter length of visceral stent were significant predictors of failure. No other anatomical feature or stent choice was found to be a significant predictor of failure. Conclusions: The modality of visceral stent failures varies, but renal stents with a smaller diameter and/or shorter length are more likely to fail over time. Their complications and reinterventions are common and carry a significant burden; therefore, close surveillance must be continued long term. Clinical impact: With this work we share the methodology adopted at our centre to treat juxtarenal aneurysm with FEVAR. Thanks to this detailed review of anatomical and technical features we provide guidance for endovascular surgeons to face hostile aneurysm with peculiar visceral vessels anatomy. With our findings will also motivate industries in their attempt to produce improved technologies able to overcome issues identified in this paper

Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Abstract Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries

Review of adjustable velcro wrap devices for venous ulceration

Compression therapy is the mainstay of treatment for patients with venous leg ulcers. Current gold standard is 4 layer bandaging, which has a significant impact on patients comfort, ability to wear their own shoes, and quality of life, as well as taking significant time to apply, and losing compression over time. This systematic review aims to evaluate the use of Velcro wrap devices for the treatment of venous ulceration. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were used to identify articles reporting the use of Velcro wrap devices in patients with venous ulceration. Sixteen articles were identified (14 case series, 1 randomised trial, and 1 audit) reporting on 192 patients. There were reports of improved time to healing, reduced cost by >50%, reduced number and duration of nursing appointments, and improved quality of life in patients in Velcro wrap devices. Although the evidence remains poor, Velcro devices have potential to improve outcomes for patients with venous ulceration and further good quality studies should be undertaken to evaluate these further