Noninvasive evaluation for congenital arteriovenous fistulas and malformations.

Although relatively rare, congenital arteriovenous fistulas and other vascular anomalies present a diagnostic challenge to the clinician. The same noninvasive tests that are used for diagnosing arterial occlusive disease in the extremities will also detect arteriovenous fistulas. These tests include segmental limb pressure measurements, segmental plethysmography, and arterial waveform analysis.

Open versus endovascular stent graft repair for abdominal aortic aneurysms: an historical view.

Development of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysms repair (EVAR), now in its 4th decade, has involved at least 16 different devices, not counting major modifications of some, only 4 of which have emerged from clinical trials and gained US Food and Drug Administration approval. The main impetus behind EVAR has been its potential for significantly reducing procedural mortality and morbidity, but it was also expected to speed recovery and reduce costs through decreased use of hospital resources. At the outset, EVAR was touted as a better alternative to OPEN in high-risk patients with large abdominal aortic aneurysms, and to "watchful waiting" (periodic ultrasound surveillance) for those with small abdominal aortic aneurysms.

Management of the infected aortoiliac aneurysms.

Purpose: We have reviewed ruptured and nonruptured infected aortoiliac aneurysms to study the clinical presentation, management and eventual outcome of patients managed with in situ prostheses, axillofemoral prostheses grafts and endovascular reconstruction.

Design: A retrospective chart review of 16 cases treated at a single institution.

Methods: From January 2007 to March 2008, a total of 93 patients with aortoiliac aneurysms underwent surgical repair at our institution.

Influence and critique of the PIVOTAL and the EVAR 2 Trials.

Management of a condition that has potentially life-threatening consequences may not lend itself effectively to the scrutiny of a randomized clinical trial when an observation or no treatment option is offered as part of the trial. This type of trial often experiences a significant rate of crossover of subjects from no treatment to treatment, and when results are analyzed on an intent-to-treat basis, they may fail to resolve the issue under study. These trials are frequently used as Level 1 medical evidence and the potential impact on clinical decision-making and reimbursement can be quite significant and long-lasting.

Revision of the venous clinical severity score: venous outcomes consensus statement: special communication of the American Venous Forum Ad Hoc Outcomes Working Group.

In response to the need for a disease severity measurement, the American Venous Forum committee on outcomes assessment developed the Venous Severity Scoring system in 2000. There are three components of this scoring system, the Venous Disability Score, the Venous Segmental Disease Score, and the Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS). The VCSS was developed from elements of the CEAP classification (clinical grade, etiology, anatomy, pathophysiology), which is the worldwide standard for describing the clinical features of chronic venous disease.

Inherent problems with randomized clinical trials with observational/no treatment arms.

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) offering an observation/no treatment (OBS/NoRx) arm as control and which are focused on the management of a condition with potentially life-threatening consequences, however small the risk, often experience a significant rate of crossover to treatment by those randomized to the OBS/NoRx arm. Results of these trials when analyzed on intent-to-treat basis often fail to resolve the issue at which they were directed. The authors have observed this in trials of abdominal aortic aneurysms with this design and use these to exemplify the dilemmas RCTs of such design create, with crossovers ranging from 27% to over 60% (EVAR II, UKSAT, ADAM, PIVOTAL).

Mycotic abdominal aortic aneurysm due to Streptococcus suis: a case report.

Background: Streptococcus suis is a common infection of pigs. Human infection is often related to accidental inoculation through skin injuries during occupational exposure to pigs and pork. The disease may present as meningitis, bacteremia, and less commonly endocarditis, arthritis, or bronchopneumonia.

Vascular pythiosis in a thalassemic patient.

Pythium insidiosum is a fungus that causes disease in both animals and humans. Human pythiosis is an emerging disease in the tropical, subtropical, and temperate regions of the world, occurring in localized and systemic or vascular forms. Most patients with arterial pythiosis have an underlying hemoglobinopathy, such as thalassemia.

Clinical staging of acute limb ischemia as the basis for choice of revascularization method: when and how to intervene.

In acute lower limb ischemia, there are basically three management options: (1) clot removal by catheter-directed thrombolysis with or without percutaneous mechanical thrombectomy, (2) surgical thromboembolectomy followed by correction of underlying arterial lesions, and (3) anticoagulation with continued observation. Arterial embolic occlusion presents more abruptly and with more severe ischemia than arterial thrombosis, which occurs in narrowed arterial segments that have generally developed some degree of collateral circulation. The appropriate choice of treatment for acute limb ischemia depends to a great extent on the severity of the ischemia.

Updated terminology of chronic venous disorders: the VEIN-TERM transatlantic interdisciplinary consensus document.

Non-uniform terminology in the world's venous literature has continued to pose a significant hindrance to the dissemination of knowledge regarding the management of chronic venous disorders. This VEIN-TERM consensus document was developed by a transatlantic interdisciplinary faculty of experts under the auspices of the American Venous Forum (AVF), the European Venous Forum (EVF), the International Union of Phlebology (IUP), the American College of Phlebology (ACP), and the International Union of Angiology (IUA). It provides recommendations for fundamental venous terminology, focusing on terms that were identified as creating interpretive problems, with the intent of promoting the use of a common scientific language in the investigation and management of chronic venous disorders.

Management of abdominal aortic aneurysms: which risk factors play a role in decision-making?

There are three choices for management of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA), ie, endovascular repair (EVAR), open repair (OR), and continuing surveillance (OBS). The treating physician must weigh the risk of no intervention, in terms of ultimate death from rupture, against the more immediate risk associated with either form of repair, considering in the process those risk factors that directly or indirectly relate to outcome. These risk factors include AAA size and the patient's comorbidities, age, gender, and AAA anatomy, as well as the skills and experience of the treating physicians and the health care environment in which the patient is treated.

The hemodynamics and diagnosis of venous disease.

The venous system is, in many respects, more complex than the arterial system and a thorough understanding of venous anatomy, pathophysiology, and available diagnostic tests is required in the management of acute and chronic venous disorders. The venous system develops through several stages, which may be associated with a number of development anomalies. A thorough knowledge of lower extremity venous anatomy, anatomic variants, and the recently updated nomenclature is required of all venous practitioners.

The impact of recent European trials on abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: is a paradigm shift warranted?

Recent reports, following upon the reported outcomes of European randomized prospective trials of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR), have brought into question the appropriateness of some of the trials' main conclusions, particularly in patients deemed at high-risk for surgical intervention. Based on the data of these trials, specifically EVAR 2, it has been suggested that EVAR should not be performed in high-risk individuals due to the likelihood of poor outcomes and the lack of improved survival, both associated with higher costs. In addition, certain aspects of the trials involving those deemed fit for open repair (the EVAR 1 and Dutch Randomized Endovascular Aneurysm Management trials) deserve qualified reservations.

Chronic subcritical limb ischemia: a poorly recognized stage of critical limb ischemia.

It is well-known that critical limb ischemia is associated with high mortality and amputation risk. Chronic subcritical limb ischemia, however, represents a subgroup of patients with critical limb ischemia in whom severely reduced circulation to the foot does not manifest as rest pain, ischemic ulceration, or ischemic gangrene. Admittedly, there is a paucity of data describing the fate of this patient subset, and little evidence to support appropriate treatment.

Randomized EVAR trials and advent of level i evidence: a paradigm shift in management of large abdominal aortic aneurysms?

The recent endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) 1 and 2 and Dutch Randomized Endovascular Aneurysm Management (DREAM) trials addressed management of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) larger than 5.5 cm in diameter. The DREAM and EVAR 1 trials randomized patients appropriate for open repair between endovascular repair (EVAR) and open repair (OR), and the EVAR 2 trial randomized patients unfit for OR between EVAR and conservative nonoperative management (No Rx).

Prophylactic indications for vena cava filters: critical appraisal.

Vena caval filters (VCFs) were developed and initially used for therapeutic indications, primarily to prevent recurrence of pulmonary embolism (PE) or its occurrence in selected cases of deep venous thrombosis (DVT), where risk of PE was very high and anticoagulant therapy (AC Rx) was deemed ineffective, contraindicated by concurrent disease, or had to be discontinued because of complications. Prophylactic indications-where there was no DVT or PE but the risk of them was considered very high and AC Rx was contraindicated or considered ineffective-were invoked relatively infrequently at first, but when percutaneous placement became routine in the late 1980s, this indication increased steadily. The categories of patients considered at high-enough risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), albeit temporary, to justify VCF have also expanded steadily, most with little objective basis for choosing VCFs over other methods of prophylaxis.

Revision of the CEAP classification for chronic venous disorders: consensus statement.

The CEAP classification for chronic venous disorders (CVD) was developed in 1994 by an international ad hoc committee of the American Venous Forum, endorsed by the Society for Vascular Surgery, and incorporated into "Reporting Standards in Venous Disease" in 1995. Today most published clinical papers on CVD use all or portions of CEAP. Rather than have it stand as a static classification system, an ad hoc committee of the American Venous Forum, working with an international liaison committee, has recommended a number of practical changes, detailed in this consensus report.

Structural failures in abdominal aortic aneurysm stentgrafts: Threat to durability and challenge to technology.

A variety of structural defects or failures have appeared in the majority of commercially developed stentgrafts for endoluminal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. Some have resulted in device withdrawal; others have been dealt with by device modification. Newer devices have been designed to avoid some of these failure modes but, because many have not become apparent until as late as 2 years, these corrective measures will require long-term follow-up to establish device durability.