Hoitz N, Kraima A, Fioole B, Mees B, de Borst GJ, Ünlü Ç. Surveillance After Surgical and Endovascular Treatment for Peripheral Artery Disease: a Dutch Survey.
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2023:S1078-5884(23)01051-1. [PMID:
38159674 DOI:
10.1016/j.ejvs.2023.12.029]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/19/2023] [Revised: 10/18/2023] [Accepted: 12/27/2023] [Indexed: 01/03/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE
At present, there is no clear, optimal approach to surveillance after invasive treatment of peripheral artery disease (PAD) in terms of modality, duration, clinical benefit, and cost effectiveness. The ongoing debate on the clinical benefit and cost effectiveness of standard surveillance creates a clear knowledge gap and may result in overtreatment or undertreatment. In this study, a survey was conducted among vascular surgeons in the Netherlands to assess the currently applied surveillance programmes.
METHODS
All vascular surgeons from the Dutch Society for Vascular Surgery received an online survey on follow up after open and endovascular revascularisation in patients with PAD. Surveillance was defined as at least one follow up visit after intervention with or without additional imaging or ankle brachial index (ABI) measurement. Ten types of PAD interventions were surveyed.
RESULTS
Surveys were returned by 97 (46.2%) of 210 vascular surgeons, and 76% reported using a routine follow up protocol after an invasive intervention. Clinical follow up only is most commonly performed after femoral endarterectomy (53%). After peripheral bypass surgery, clinical follow up only is applied rarely (4 - 8%). In 6 of the 10 interventions surveyed, duplex ultrasound (DUS) is the most used imaging modality for follow up. After bypass surgery, 76 - 86% of vascular surgeons perform DUS with or without ABI measurement. After endovascular interventions, 21 - 60% perform DUS surveillance. Lifelong surveillance is most applied after aortobifemoral bypass (57%). Surveillance frequency and duration vary greatly within the same intervention. Frequencies range from every 3 months or 6 months to annually. Duration ranges from one time surveillance to lifelong follow up.
CONCLUSION
There is significant practice variation in surveillance after surgical and endovascular treatment of patients with PAD in the Netherlands. We recommend the initiation of prospective studies to evaluate treatment outcomes and to define the clinical need and cost effectiveness of standardised surveillance programmes for patients with PAD.
Collapse