Current guidelines produce competent endovascular surgeons

Evaluation of tools to assess operative competence in endovascular procedures: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

With an increase in the use of endovascular interventions as an alternative to open surgery and the unique technical skills required, current methods for assessing the competence of vascular surgery trainees may not be optimal, suggesting a need for a shift in assessment modalities. We conducted this systematic review to explore current assessment methods used in vascular surgery training to assess competence specific to endovascular procedures.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was performed with a structured search strategy using terms focusing on endovascular procedures and assessment. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were used in order to screen for suitable articles.

RESULTS

We identified 54 articles that satisfied the inclusion criteria. These included a single randomized controlled trial, a single systematic review, a single narrative review and a single literature review, with the vast majority having level 2 evidence. Global rating scales, proficiency assessments and written/oral examinations were described as standard current assessment tools. These modalities lack reproducibility and objectivity, neglecting the needs of assessment of endovascular procedures requiring specialized decision making and finger dexterity. Novel methods such as high fidelity simulation and virtual reality promote reproducible and objective assessment methods in the context of endovascular surgery, and have a promising future.

CONCLUSION

While current assessment methods in vascular surgery are widely supported the changing skills required of a vascular surgery trainee warrants a shift in assessment modalities to better align to these requirements. High fidelity simulations show promise, although they require more extensive research to understand their relative merits.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of bivalirudin application in peripheral endovascular procedures

OBJECTIVE

The direct thrombin inhibitor bivalirudin (BIV) was shown to be superior to unfractionated heparin (UFH) in percutaneous coronary interventions for reducing procedural blood loss. The aim of this study was to compare outcome profiles of BIV and UFH in peripheral endovascular procedures (PEPs) by synthesizing the currently available data.

METHODS

Following the PRISMA statement, we conducted a comprehensive literature search using Medline, Cochrane CENTRAL, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL Google scholar, and clinicaltrials.gov. We recruited randomized, controlled trials and well-conducted observational studies that compared UFH and BIV in PEPs requiring anticoagulation, excluding endovascular cardiac procedures and coronary interventions. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted to compare the outcome profiles of these two agents.

RESULTS

Thirteen articles containing 14 studies involving a total of 21,057 patients were enrolled. Of these, 2 were randomized controlled trials, 2 were prospective cohort studies, and 10 were retrospective studies. There were no significant differences between BIV and UFH in terms of procedural success rates, major and minor perioperative bleeding, transfusion, perioperative transient ischemic attack, or hemorrhagic strokes. However, compared with UFH, BIV had significantly lower odds ratios (OR) of perioperative mortality (OR, 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.40-0.86), major adverse cardiovascular events (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.51-0.83), net adverse clinical events (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.63-0.88), perioperative myocardial infarction (OR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.55-0.98), major vascular complications (OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.39-0.91), and minor vascular complications (OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.40-0.84).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with UFH, PEPs using BIV had comparable procedural success rates and odds of perioperative transient ischemic attack and hemorrhagic stroke. However, procedures with BIV had a lower but nonsignificant odds of perioperative bleeding and transfusion. Depending on the procedures conducted, the patients who received BIV will have reduced or comparable odds of perioperative mortality, myocardial infarction, major adverse cardiovascular events, net adverse clinical events, and major and minor vascular complications. Therefore, BIV may be chosen solely as an alternative procedural anticoagulant to UFH for PEPs.

National trends in lower extremity bypass surgery, endovascular interventions, and major amputations

INTRODUCTION

Advances in endovascular interventions have expanded the options available for the invasive treatment of lower extremity peripheral arterial disease (PAD). Whether endovascular interventions substitute for conventional bypass surgery or are simply additive has not been investigated, and their effect on amputation rates is unknown.

METHODS

We sought to analyze trends in lower extremity endovascular interventions (angioplasty and atherectomy), lower extremity bypass surgery, and major amputation (above and below-knee) in Medicare beneficiaries between 1996 and 2006. We used 100% samples of Medicare Part B claims to calculate annual procedure rates of lower extremity bypass surgery, endovascular interventions (angioplasty and atherectomy), and major amputation between 1996 and 2006. Using physician specialty identifiers, we also examined trends in the specialty performing the primary procedure.

RESULTS

Between 1996 and 2006, the rate of major lower extremity amputation declined significantly (263 to 188 per 100,000; risk ratio [RR] 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.6-0.8). Endovascular interventions increased more than threefold (from 138 to 455 per 100,000; RR = 3.30; 95% CI: 2.9-3.7) while bypass surgery decreased by 42% (219 to 126 per 100,000; RR = 0.58; 95% CI: 0.5-0.7). The increase in endovascular interventions consisted both of a growth in peripheral angioplasty (from 135 to 337 procedures per 100,000; RR = 2.49; 95% CI: 2.2-2.8) and the advent of percutaneous atherectomy (from 3 to 118 per 100,000; RR = 43.12; 95% CI: 34.8-52.0). While radiologists performed the majority of endovascular interventions in 1996, more than 80% were performed by cardiologists and vascular surgeons by 2006. Overall, the total number of all lower extremity vascular procedures almost doubled over the decade (from 357 to 581 per 100,000; RR = 1.63; 95% CI: 1.5-1.8).

CONCLUSION

Endovascular interventions are now performed much more commonly than bypass surgery in the treatment of lower extremity PAD. These changes far exceed simple substitution, as more than three additional endovascular interventions were performed for every one procedure declined in lower extremity bypass surgery. During this same time period, major lower extremity amputation rates have fallen by more than 25%. However, further study is needed before any causal link can be established between lower extremity vascular procedures and improved rates of limb salvage in patients with PAD.

Future of vascular surgical training: the trainees' views

INTRODUCTION

In the UK, surgical training includes all aspects of general surgery. Vascular surgery is not an independent specialty. We wished to assess the views of vascular trainees in UK on the future of vascular surgery and training.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Trainees were surveyed in 2003, 2004 (after introduction of the European Working Time Directive) and 2005, concentrating on four areas - future practise of vascular surgery, role of endovascular training, vascular specialisation and future training.

RESULTS

The majority of trainees want to practise vascular surgery alone. In 2003, 80% thought training should include endovascular techniques. By 2005, all trainees regarded training as mandatory as endovascular techniques would represent a significant part of their future work. Opinion changed on training; from 4 years general then 2 years vascular surgery (qualification in general surgery) to 2 years general and 4 years vascular surgery (specialist qualification in vascular surgery; P < 0.0001). Opinion also changed, that vascular surgery should spilt from general surgery to form its own speciality (P < 0.0007).

CONCLUSIONS

Trainees now regard training in endovascular techniques and endovascular aneurysm repair as mandatory. The majority wish to specialise from general surgery and achieve a separate qualification in vascular surgery.