Vascular Specialist

Electing Secretary, Welcoming President, Presenting Awards

The SVS Annual Business Meeting serves a vital, mandated function, with members conducting important Society business. This year, not only will President Michel S. Makaroun, MD, hands his gavel over to President-Elect Kim Hodgson, MD, members also will elect a new secretary from among three candidates and will affirm the Nominating Committee’s selection of the candidate for vice president. 

The meeting is from 12 to 1:30 p.m. Saturday, in Potomac C. Members also will receive updates from officers and select committees and recognize outstanding achievements and awards from the Journal of Vascular Surgery, SVS Foundation, and SVS.

Only Active and Senior members may vote, which will be accomplished with Audience Response System devices. Staff will be on hand to double-check membership status for those unsure of their voting status.    

The following people will receive awards during the luncheon: 

SVS Presidential Citation Award: Marie Rossi, RN, BS, for her leadership of the Society for Vascular Nursing and tireless work in achieving a close relationship between the SVN and the SVS; Benjamin Pearce, MD, and Tej Singh, MD, for their dedication to improve and upgrade SVS patient education materials; Sean P. Roddy, MD and Matthew Sideman, MD, for their tireless work in advocating for and protecting the interests of our specialty; Michael S. Conte, MD, John White, MD, and Joe L. Mills, MD, for their dedicated effort to complete the Global Vascular Guidelines Project; and Dawn M. Coleman, MD, and Malachi G. Sheahan III, MD, for their dedication to improving the well-being of our members and all vascular surgeons.  

SVS Awards

Women’s Leadership Training Grants: Rachel Danczyk, MD, Lori Pounds, MD, and Jessica Simons, MD. 
SVS Vascular Surgery Trainee Advocacy Travel Scholarship: Ian Schlieder, MD.

SVS Foundation Awards

SVS Foundation and American College of Surgeons Mentored Clinical Scientist Research Career Development Award (K08): Jean Marie Ruddy, MD.
SVS Foundation and ACS Mentored Patient-Oriented Research Career Development Award (K23): Misty D. Humphries, MD.
Bridge Grant: Wei Zhou, MD. 
E.J. Wylie Traveling Fellowship: Douglas W. Jones, MD.  
Clinical Research Seed Grant: Sikandar Khan, MD, Shirling Tsai, MD; and Efthymios Avgerinos, MD (winner of the Seed Grant Challenge Wednesday at VAM).
Resident Research Award: Frank Davis, MD. 
Research Career Development Travel Award: Young Erben, MD, and Claire Griffin, MD.  
Vascular Cures/SVS Foundation Wylie Scholar Award: Andrea Obi, MD. 
Community Awareness and Prevention Project Practice Grant: Soma Brahmanandam MD, Leigh Ann O’Banion, MD, and Uwe Fisher, PhD.

Electing Secretary, Welcoming President, Presenting Awards

The SVS Annual Business Meeting serves a vital, mandated function, with members conducting important Society business. This year, not only will President Michel S. Makaroun, MD, hands his gavel over to President-Elect Kim Hodgson, MD, members also will elect a new secretary from among three candidates and will affirm the Nominating Committee’s selection of the candidate for vice president. 

The meeting is from 12 to 1:30 p.m. Saturday, in Potomac C. Members also will receive updates from officers and select committees and recognize outstanding achievements and awards from the Journal of Vascular Surgery, SVS Foundation, and SVS.

Only Active and Senior members may vote, which will be accomplished with Audience Response System devices. Staff will be on hand to double-check membership status for those unsure of their voting status.    

The following people will receive awards during the luncheon: 

SVS Presidential Citation Award: Marie Rossi, RN, BS, for her leadership of the Society for Vascular Nursing and tireless work in achieving a close relationship between the SVN and the SVS; Benjamin Pearce, MD, and Tej Singh, MD, for their dedication to improve and upgrade SVS patient education materials; Sean P. Roddy, MD and Matthew Sideman, MD, for their tireless work in advocating for and protecting the interests of our specialty; Michael S. Conte, MD, John White, MD, and Joe L. Mills, MD, for their dedicated effort to complete the Global Vascular Guidelines Project; and Dawn M. Coleman, MD, and Malachi G. Sheahan III, MD, for their dedication to improving the well-being of our members and all vascular surgeons.  

SVS Awards

Women’s Leadership Training Grants: Rachel Danczyk, MD, Lori Pounds, MD, and Jessica Simons, MD. 
SVS Vascular Surgery Trainee Advocacy Travel Scholarship: Ian Schlieder, MD.

SVS Foundation Awards

SVS Foundation and American College of Surgeons Mentored Clinical Scientist Research Career Development Award (K08): Jean Marie Ruddy, MD.
SVS Foundation and ACS Mentored Patient-Oriented Research Career Development Award (K23): Misty D. Humphries, MD.
Bridge Grant: Wei Zhou, MD. 
E.J. Wylie Traveling Fellowship: Douglas W. Jones, MD.  
Clinical Research Seed Grant: Sikandar Khan, MD, Shirling Tsai, MD; and Efthymios Avgerinos, MD (winner of the Seed Grant Challenge Wednesday at VAM).
Resident Research Award: Frank Davis, MD. 
Research Career Development Travel Award: Young Erben, MD, and Claire Griffin, MD.  
Vascular Cures/SVS Foundation Wylie Scholar Award: Andrea Obi, MD. 
Community Awareness and Prevention Project Practice Grant: Soma Brahmanandam MD, Leigh Ann O’Banion, MD, and Uwe Fisher, PhD.

Electing Secretary, Welcoming President, Presenting Awards

The SVS Annual Business Meeting serves a vital, mandated function, with members conducting important Society business. This year, not only will President Michel S. Makaroun, MD, hands his gavel over to President-Elect Kim Hodgson, MD, members also will elect a new secretary from among three candidates and will affirm the Nominating Committee’s selection of the candidate for vice president. 

The meeting is from 12 to 1:30 p.m. Saturday, in Potomac C. Members also will receive updates from officers and select committees and recognize outstanding achievements and awards from the Journal of Vascular Surgery, SVS Foundation, and SVS.

Only Active and Senior members may vote, which will be accomplished with Audience Response System devices. Staff will be on hand to double-check membership status for those unsure of their voting status.    

The following people will receive awards during the luncheon: 

SVS Presidential Citation Award: Marie Rossi, RN, BS, for her leadership of the Society for Vascular Nursing and tireless work in achieving a close relationship between the SVN and the SVS; Benjamin Pearce, MD, and Tej Singh, MD, for their dedication to improve and upgrade SVS patient education materials; Sean P. Roddy, MD and Matthew Sideman, MD, for their tireless work in advocating for and protecting the interests of our specialty; Michael S. Conte, MD, John White, MD, and Joe L. Mills, MD, for their dedicated effort to complete the Global Vascular Guidelines Project; and Dawn M. Coleman, MD, and Malachi G. Sheahan III, MD, for their dedication to improving the well-being of our members and all vascular surgeons.  

SVS Awards

Women’s Leadership Training Grants: Rachel Danczyk, MD, Lori Pounds, MD, and Jessica Simons, MD. 
SVS Vascular Surgery Trainee Advocacy Travel Scholarship: Ian Schlieder, MD.

SVS Foundation Awards

SVS Foundation and American College of Surgeons Mentored Clinical Scientist Research Career Development Award (K08): Jean Marie Ruddy, MD.
SVS Foundation and ACS Mentored Patient-Oriented Research Career Development Award (K23): Misty D. Humphries, MD.
Bridge Grant: Wei Zhou, MD. 
E.J. Wylie Traveling Fellowship: Douglas W. Jones, MD.  
Clinical Research Seed Grant: Sikandar Khan, MD, Shirling Tsai, MD; and Efthymios Avgerinos, MD (winner of the Seed Grant Challenge Wednesday at VAM).
Resident Research Award: Frank Davis, MD. 
Research Career Development Travel Award: Young Erben, MD, and Claire Griffin, MD.  
Vascular Cures/SVS Foundation Wylie Scholar Award: Andrea Obi, MD. 
Community Awareness and Prevention Project Practice Grant: Soma Brahmanandam MD, Leigh Ann O’Banion, MD, and Uwe Fisher, PhD.

To determine the necessity of permanent monitoring of small aortic aneurysms in the elderly, Mark Rockley, MD, of the Ottawa Hospital  and his colleagues investigated the yield of ultrasound surveillance for small abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) in octogenarians, as compared with a younger population. Their goal was to detect the frequency of AAA growth reaching the threshold size for repair. Secondary objectives included analysis of the incidence of AAA repair, and the cost-effectiveness of surveillance.

In Saturday’s Scientific Session 8, Dr. Rockley will report on their retrospective cohort study performed on all patients undergoing AAA surveillance in Ottawa during 2007-2017. The patients were split into two groups by enrollment age (those younger and those equal to or older than 80 years of age) with cross-over to prevent lead-time bias, and stratification by enrollment AAA size. 
The two cohorts were cross-referenced with the Ottawa Surgical Database, leveraging the common health region to assure complete data capture, according to Dr. Rockley. 

The threshold size for repair was sex specific (women at 5.0cm, men at 5.5 cm) and the factors influencing AAA growth rate were assessed using multiple linear regression. Analyses with Cox proportional hazards and multiple regression models adjusted for sex and enrollment aneurysm size, and cost-effectiveness were analyzed by referencing Ontario billing codes.

The researchers found that 1,231 patients underwent serial ultrasound surveillance, of which 460 (37.4%) were octogenarians at the time of enrollment. Multiple linear regression demonstrated that old age, male sex, and smaller enrollment aneurysm size were significantly protective against AAA growth. 

Overall, 355 (28.8%) subjects reached the AAA size threshold for repair, and 313 (25.4%) underwent AAA repair. Octogenarians were half as likely to reach the AAA threshold size for repair when compared with their younger counterparts, and of the 355 subjects whose AAA reached the threshold size for repair, octogenarians were half as likely to undergo elective AAA repair). 

Repair of ruptured AAA was rare (0.94%) and age differences were insignificant. The cost of ultrasound surveillance alone to identify one patient who ultimately received elective AAA repair was more than four times more expensive for octogenarians with 3.0-3.9–cm enrollment aneurysms, when compared with the rest of the study sample ($12,080 vs. $2,915, in Canadian dollars, respectively), said Dr. Rockley.

“Our study showed that octogenarians are half as likely as their younger counterparts to experience aortic growth reaching th.e repair threshold size Furthermore, in the event of reaching the size threshold, octogenarians are half as likely to undergo repair, without a significantly increased risk of requiring repair for AAA rupture. In the context of patient-specific factors and wishes, surveillance of AAA less than 4cm in octogenarians is costly and unlikely to be beneficial.” Dr. Rockley concluded.

Saturday, June 15
8-9:30 a.m.
Gaylord National, Potomac A/B
S8: Scientific Session 8: SS29

To determine the necessity of permanent monitoring of small aortic aneurysms in the elderly, Mark Rockley, MD, of the Ottawa Hospital  and his colleagues investigated the yield of ultrasound surveillance for small abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) in octogenarians, as compared with a younger population. Their goal was to detect the frequency of AAA growth reaching the threshold size for repair. Secondary objectives included analysis of the incidence of AAA repair, and the cost-effectiveness of surveillance.

In Saturday’s Scientific Session 8, Dr. Rockley will report on their retrospective cohort study performed on all patients undergoing AAA surveillance in Ottawa during 2007-2017. The patients were split into two groups by enrollment age (those younger and those equal to or older than 80 years of age) with cross-over to prevent lead-time bias, and stratification by enrollment AAA size. 
The two cohorts were cross-referenced with the Ottawa Surgical Database, leveraging the common health region to assure complete data capture, according to Dr. Rockley. 

The threshold size for repair was sex specific (women at 5.0cm, men at 5.5 cm) and the factors influencing AAA growth rate were assessed using multiple linear regression. Analyses with Cox proportional hazards and multiple regression models adjusted for sex and enrollment aneurysm size, and cost-effectiveness were analyzed by referencing Ontario billing codes.

The researchers found that 1,231 patients underwent serial ultrasound surveillance, of which 460 (37.4%) were octogenarians at the time of enrollment. Multiple linear regression demonstrated that old age, male sex, and smaller enrollment aneurysm size were significantly protective against AAA growth. 

Overall, 355 (28.8%) subjects reached the AAA size threshold for repair, and 313 (25.4%) underwent AAA repair. Octogenarians were half as likely to reach the AAA threshold size for repair when compared with their younger counterparts, and of the 355 subjects whose AAA reached the threshold size for repair, octogenarians were half as likely to undergo elective AAA repair). 

Repair of ruptured AAA was rare (0.94%) and age differences were insignificant. The cost of ultrasound surveillance alone to identify one patient who ultimately received elective AAA repair was more than four times more expensive for octogenarians with 3.0-3.9–cm enrollment aneurysms, when compared with the rest of the study sample ($12,080 vs. $2,915, in Canadian dollars, respectively), said Dr. Rockley.

“Our study showed that octogenarians are half as likely as their younger counterparts to experience aortic growth reaching th.e repair threshold size Furthermore, in the event of reaching the size threshold, octogenarians are half as likely to undergo repair, without a significantly increased risk of requiring repair for AAA rupture. In the context of patient-specific factors and wishes, surveillance of AAA less than 4cm in octogenarians is costly and unlikely to be beneficial.” Dr. Rockley concluded.

Saturday, June 15
8-9:30 a.m.
Gaylord National, Potomac A/B
S8: Scientific Session 8: SS29

To determine the necessity of permanent monitoring of small aortic aneurysms in the elderly, Mark Rockley, MD, of the Ottawa Hospital  and his colleagues investigated the yield of ultrasound surveillance for small abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) in octogenarians, as compared with a younger population. Their goal was to detect the frequency of AAA growth reaching the threshold size for repair. Secondary objectives included analysis of the incidence of AAA repair, and the cost-effectiveness of surveillance.

In Saturday’s Scientific Session 8, Dr. Rockley will report on their retrospective cohort study performed on all patients undergoing AAA surveillance in Ottawa during 2007-2017. The patients were split into two groups by enrollment age (those younger and those equal to or older than 80 years of age) with cross-over to prevent lead-time bias, and stratification by enrollment AAA size. 
The two cohorts were cross-referenced with the Ottawa Surgical Database, leveraging the common health region to assure complete data capture, according to Dr. Rockley. 

The threshold size for repair was sex specific (women at 5.0cm, men at 5.5 cm) and the factors influencing AAA growth rate were assessed using multiple linear regression. Analyses with Cox proportional hazards and multiple regression models adjusted for sex and enrollment aneurysm size, and cost-effectiveness were analyzed by referencing Ontario billing codes.

The researchers found that 1,231 patients underwent serial ultrasound surveillance, of which 460 (37.4%) were octogenarians at the time of enrollment. Multiple linear regression demonstrated that old age, male sex, and smaller enrollment aneurysm size were significantly protective against AAA growth. 

Overall, 355 (28.8%) subjects reached the AAA size threshold for repair, and 313 (25.4%) underwent AAA repair. Octogenarians were half as likely to reach the AAA threshold size for repair when compared with their younger counterparts, and of the 355 subjects whose AAA reached the threshold size for repair, octogenarians were half as likely to undergo elective AAA repair). 

Repair of ruptured AAA was rare (0.94%) and age differences were insignificant. The cost of ultrasound surveillance alone to identify one patient who ultimately received elective AAA repair was more than four times more expensive for octogenarians with 3.0-3.9–cm enrollment aneurysms, when compared with the rest of the study sample ($12,080 vs. $2,915, in Canadian dollars, respectively), said Dr. Rockley.

“Our study showed that octogenarians are half as likely as their younger counterparts to experience aortic growth reaching th.e repair threshold size Furthermore, in the event of reaching the size threshold, octogenarians are half as likely to undergo repair, without a significantly increased risk of requiring repair for AAA rupture. In the context of patient-specific factors and wishes, surveillance of AAA less than 4cm in octogenarians is costly and unlikely to be beneficial.” Dr. Rockley concluded.

Saturday, June 15
8-9:30 a.m.
Gaylord National, Potomac A/B
S8: Scientific Session 8: SS29

Vikram S. Kashyap, MD, of the University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, will present results from ROADSTER 2, a prospective, multicenter, postapproval registry for patients undergoing transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR). This  technique involves carotid artery stenting with cerebral protection via reversal of carotid arterial flow. The aim of the study was to evaluate the real- world safety and efficacy of TCAR.

Dr. Kashyap and his colleagues enrolled 623 patients who were considered at high risk for complications from carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and who had symptomatic stenosis equal to or greater than 50% or asymptomatic stenosis equal to or greater than 80%. The primary endpoint was procedural success, which encompassed technical success plus the absence of stroke, myocardial infarction, or death within the 30-day postoperative period. Secondary endpoints were acute device success (delivery of device, establishment of flow reversal, and retrieval), technical success (acute device success plus introduction of interventional tools), stroke, death, and the composite of stroke, death, or myocardial infarction (S/D/MI), according to Dr. Kashyap.

A total of 599 of the patients completed 30-day follow-up. The cohort included 67.0% men, 42% older than 75 years, and 26.8% with symptoms Overall, 68.2% of the patients had anatomic-related high-risk factors, 56.5% had physiologic high-risk factors, and 24.7% had both. The majority (81.2%) of the operators in this study were new to TCAR and did not participate in the ROADSTER 1 trial. 

The early postoperative outcomes included five patients (0.8%) suffering a stroke, one patient (0.2%) dying from a ruptured AAA two weeks post-procedure, and six (1.0%) having an MI. The composite stroke/death/MI rate was 1.9%.

“TCAR results in excellent early outcomes with a combined stroke/death rate of 1.0%. Broader, longer- term, comparative studies are needed in this area. But if these results can be confirmed, I believe TCAR may become a favorable alternative to transfemoral carotid artery stenting, and even rival carotid endarterectomy,” Dr. Kashyap concluded.

Saturday, June 15
1:30-2:30 p.m.
Gaylord National, Potomac 4-6
S10: Scientific Session 10/Late-Breaking: LB2

Vikram S. Kashyap, MD, of the University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, will present results from ROADSTER 2, a prospective, multicenter, postapproval registry for patients undergoing transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR). This  technique involves carotid artery stenting with cerebral protection via reversal of carotid arterial flow. The aim of the study was to evaluate the real- world safety and efficacy of TCAR.

Dr. Kashyap and his colleagues enrolled 623 patients who were considered at high risk for complications from carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and who had symptomatic stenosis equal to or greater than 50% or asymptomatic stenosis equal to or greater than 80%. The primary endpoint was procedural success, which encompassed technical success plus the absence of stroke, myocardial infarction, or death within the 30-day postoperative period. Secondary endpoints were acute device success (delivery of device, establishment of flow reversal, and retrieval), technical success (acute device success plus introduction of interventional tools), stroke, death, and the composite of stroke, death, or myocardial infarction (S/D/MI), according to Dr. Kashyap.

A total of 599 of the patients completed 30-day follow-up. The cohort included 67.0% men, 42% older than 75 years, and 26.8% with symptoms Overall, 68.2% of the patients had anatomic-related high-risk factors, 56.5% had physiologic high-risk factors, and 24.7% had both. The majority (81.2%) of the operators in this study were new to TCAR and did not participate in the ROADSTER 1 trial. 

The early postoperative outcomes included five patients (0.8%) suffering a stroke, one patient (0.2%) dying from a ruptured AAA two weeks post-procedure, and six (1.0%) having an MI. The composite stroke/death/MI rate was 1.9%.

“TCAR results in excellent early outcomes with a combined stroke/death rate of 1.0%. Broader, longer- term, comparative studies are needed in this area. But if these results can be confirmed, I believe TCAR may become a favorable alternative to transfemoral carotid artery stenting, and even rival carotid endarterectomy,” Dr. Kashyap concluded.

Saturday, June 15
1:30-2:30 p.m.
Gaylord National, Potomac 4-6
S10: Scientific Session 10/Late-Breaking: LB2

Vikram S. Kashyap, MD, of the University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, will present results from ROADSTER 2, a prospective, multicenter, postapproval registry for patients undergoing transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR). This  technique involves carotid artery stenting with cerebral protection via reversal of carotid arterial flow. The aim of the study was to evaluate the real- world safety and efficacy of TCAR.

Dr. Kashyap and his colleagues enrolled 623 patients who were considered at high risk for complications from carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and who had symptomatic stenosis equal to or greater than 50% or asymptomatic stenosis equal to or greater than 80%. The primary endpoint was procedural success, which encompassed technical success plus the absence of stroke, myocardial infarction, or death within the 30-day postoperative period. Secondary endpoints were acute device success (delivery of device, establishment of flow reversal, and retrieval), technical success (acute device success plus introduction of interventional tools), stroke, death, and the composite of stroke, death, or myocardial infarction (S/D/MI), according to Dr. Kashyap.

A total of 599 of the patients completed 30-day follow-up. The cohort included 67.0% men, 42% older than 75 years, and 26.8% with symptoms Overall, 68.2% of the patients had anatomic-related high-risk factors, 56.5% had physiologic high-risk factors, and 24.7% had both. The majority (81.2%) of the operators in this study were new to TCAR and did not participate in the ROADSTER 1 trial. 

The early postoperative outcomes included five patients (0.8%) suffering a stroke, one patient (0.2%) dying from a ruptured AAA two weeks post-procedure, and six (1.0%) having an MI. The composite stroke/death/MI rate was 1.9%.

“TCAR results in excellent early outcomes with a combined stroke/death rate of 1.0%. Broader, longer- term, comparative studies are needed in this area. But if these results can be confirmed, I believe TCAR may become a favorable alternative to transfemoral carotid artery stenting, and even rival carotid endarterectomy,” Dr. Kashyap concluded.

Saturday, June 15
1:30-2:30 p.m.
Gaylord National, Potomac 4-6
S10: Scientific Session 10/Late-Breaking: LB2

Three of the Vascular Annual Meeting’s signature events – celebrations along with distinguished lectures – occur on Saturday, VAM’s closing day. All conveniently occur in the morning, shortly before the start of the SVS Annual Business Meeting and luncheon and take place in Potomac A/B.

The John Homans Lecture, 9:30 to 10 a.m.: Jack Cronenwett, MD, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, N.H., will present the lecture, “Why Should I Join the Vascular Quality Initiative?” Dr. Cronenwett spearheaded a regional quality outcomes registry, the eventual model for VQI. He later helped launch the SVS-Patient Safety Organization, which operates VQI and served as medical director until 2016. Dr. Cronenwett will discuss the VQI’s benefits for vascular practitioners and examine the VQI’s research and quality improvement opportunities. 

The Roy Greenberg Distinguished Lecture, 10:15 to 10:45 a.m.: Michael Dake, MD, professor at Stanford (Calif.) University, will present “The Vision Beyond the Vision: Same as it Ever Was, but Different.” Dr. Dake is an internationally recognized pioneer of image-guided therapies whose contributions have changed the treatment of both common and complex vascular disease issues. His groundbreaking research with CT angiography, endovascular stents and stent-grafts has forever altered the interventional landscape and his publications have dramatically influenced several fields, including vascular imaging. 

Awards Ceremony, 10 to 10:15 a.m.: Who will win two of the SVS’s top honors? Attendees will find out at the Awards Ceremony, during which the Lifetime Achievement Award AND the Medal for Innovation in Vascular Surgery will be presented. 

The Lifetime Achievement Award recognizes an individual’s outstanding and sustained contributions to the profession and SVS, and his or her exemplary professional practice and leadership. The 2018 recipient was Gregorio Sicard, MD. 

The Medal for Innovation is not an annual award; it recognizes individual whose contributions have had a transforming impact on the practice or science of vascular surgery. Past recipients include Juan Parodi, MD (2006); Timothy Chuter, MD (2008); Thomas Fogarty, MD (2010); Roy Greenberg, MD (2012); and, most recently, Edward Diethrich, MD (2013).

The identities of these two recipients are a closely guarded secret until the presentation. Be part of the unveiling and celebration.

Three of the Vascular Annual Meeting’s signature events – celebrations along with distinguished lectures – occur on Saturday, VAM’s closing day. All conveniently occur in the morning, shortly before the start of the SVS Annual Business Meeting and luncheon and take place in Potomac A/B.

The John Homans Lecture, 9:30 to 10 a.m.: Jack Cronenwett, MD, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, N.H., will present the lecture, “Why Should I Join the Vascular Quality Initiative?” Dr. Cronenwett spearheaded a regional quality outcomes registry, the eventual model for VQI. He later helped launch the SVS-Patient Safety Organization, which operates VQI and served as medical director until 2016. Dr. Cronenwett will discuss the VQI’s benefits for vascular practitioners and examine the VQI’s research and quality improvement opportunities. 

The Roy Greenberg Distinguished Lecture, 10:15 to 10:45 a.m.: Michael Dake, MD, professor at Stanford (Calif.) University, will present “The Vision Beyond the Vision: Same as it Ever Was, but Different.” Dr. Dake is an internationally recognized pioneer of image-guided therapies whose contributions have changed the treatment of both common and complex vascular disease issues. His groundbreaking research with CT angiography, endovascular stents and stent-grafts has forever altered the interventional landscape and his publications have dramatically influenced several fields, including vascular imaging. 

Awards Ceremony, 10 to 10:15 a.m.: Who will win two of the SVS’s top honors? Attendees will find out at the Awards Ceremony, during which the Lifetime Achievement Award AND the Medal for Innovation in Vascular Surgery will be presented. 

The Lifetime Achievement Award recognizes an individual’s outstanding and sustained contributions to the profession and SVS, and his or her exemplary professional practice and leadership. The 2018 recipient was Gregorio Sicard, MD. 

The Medal for Innovation is not an annual award; it recognizes individual whose contributions have had a transforming impact on the practice or science of vascular surgery. Past recipients include Juan Parodi, MD (2006); Timothy Chuter, MD (2008); Thomas Fogarty, MD (2010); Roy Greenberg, MD (2012); and, most recently, Edward Diethrich, MD (2013).

The identities of these two recipients are a closely guarded secret until the presentation. Be part of the unveiling and celebration.

Three of the Vascular Annual Meeting’s signature events – celebrations along with distinguished lectures – occur on Saturday, VAM’s closing day. All conveniently occur in the morning, shortly before the start of the SVS Annual Business Meeting and luncheon and take place in Potomac A/B.

The John Homans Lecture, 9:30 to 10 a.m.: Jack Cronenwett, MD, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, N.H., will present the lecture, “Why Should I Join the Vascular Quality Initiative?” Dr. Cronenwett spearheaded a regional quality outcomes registry, the eventual model for VQI. He later helped launch the SVS-Patient Safety Organization, which operates VQI and served as medical director until 2016. Dr. Cronenwett will discuss the VQI’s benefits for vascular practitioners and examine the VQI’s research and quality improvement opportunities. 

The Roy Greenberg Distinguished Lecture, 10:15 to 10:45 a.m.: Michael Dake, MD, professor at Stanford (Calif.) University, will present “The Vision Beyond the Vision: Same as it Ever Was, but Different.” Dr. Dake is an internationally recognized pioneer of image-guided therapies whose contributions have changed the treatment of both common and complex vascular disease issues. His groundbreaking research with CT angiography, endovascular stents and stent-grafts has forever altered the interventional landscape and his publications have dramatically influenced several fields, including vascular imaging. 

Awards Ceremony, 10 to 10:15 a.m.: Who will win two of the SVS’s top honors? Attendees will find out at the Awards Ceremony, during which the Lifetime Achievement Award AND the Medal for Innovation in Vascular Surgery will be presented. 

The Lifetime Achievement Award recognizes an individual’s outstanding and sustained contributions to the profession and SVS, and his or her exemplary professional practice and leadership. The 2018 recipient was Gregorio Sicard, MD. 

The Medal for Innovation is not an annual award; it recognizes individual whose contributions have had a transforming impact on the practice or science of vascular surgery. Past recipients include Juan Parodi, MD (2006); Timothy Chuter, MD (2008); Thomas Fogarty, MD (2010); Roy Greenberg, MD (2012); and, most recently, Edward Diethrich, MD (2013).

The identities of these two recipients are a closely guarded secret until the presentation. Be part of the unveiling and celebration.

SAN FRANCISCO – Significant and rapid weight loss, fueled by a low-calorie diet, seemed to boost long-term diabetes prevention in patients who were prediabetic, a new study finds. And to the surprise of researchers, the results were the same regardless of dietary and exercise interventions more than 3 years after the initial weight loss.

There’s a big limitation, though: About half of the participants who initially lost weight dropped out during the 3-year study, and data about them are not yet available. Still, only 4% of those who completed the study converted to diabetes, compared with expected rates of as much as 16%.

This is a “fantastic success,” co-lead investigator and physiologist, Ian Macdonald, PhD, of the University of Nottingham (England), said in a presentation of the PREVIEW study at the annual scientific sessions of the American Diabetes Association.

The randomized, controlled, multicenter trial recruited 2,223 participants with prediabetes in several European countries and Australia and New Zealand. The participants, of whom about two-thirds were women, were aged 25-70 years (average, 52 years) and had an average body mass index of 35 kg/m².

They were assigned to a 2-month, rapid weight-loss program in which they were limited to no more than 800 calories per day. “The participants were fully briefed on the risks to health associated with prediabetes and on the problems of diabetes itself, and they were highly motivated to take part in the study,” Dr. Macdonald said in an interview after the presentation.

A total of 1,857 participants achieved the required weight loss of at least 8% and were then assigned to one of four interventions: a high-protein, low-glycemic diet (either with moderate- or high-intensity physical activity) or a moderate-protein, moderate-glycemic diet (either with moderate- or high-intensity physical activity).

A total of 962 participants remained in the study for another 34 months until completion, with roughly the same number (235-244) in each of the four intervention groups.

The researchers expected that 16% of those in the moderate-diet group would convert to type 2 diabetes, as would 11% of those in the high-protein, low-glycemic group, Dr. Macdonald said in the presentation.

The researchers, who offered limited statistical detail about the study, did not disclose how many participants in each group actually developed diabetes by 36 months (January 2019). Dr. Macdonald said in the interview that those numbers would not be available until the study has been accepted for publication. He noted, however, that the numbers in the two groups were nearly identical, and the researchers disclosed that the overall number was just 4% (n = 62).

That number is “substantially less than would be predicted,” Dr. Macdonald noted in the presentation, adding that “there is no difference” between the interventions.

He said protein consumption in the high-protein diet was not sustained, probably because of lack of adherence. In contrast, the physical activity in the groups increased significantly at the beginning of the study, he said, and “it did not fall off too badly.”

According to Dr. Macdonald, the prevention of progression to diabetes “was almost certainly because of this large, initial weight loss, which was at least partially and impressively sustained. A high-protein, low-glycemic diet was not superior to a moderate-protein, moderate-glycemic diet in relation to prevention of type 2 diabetes.”

The study was funded by the European Union and various other sources, including national funds, in the participating countries. Dr. Macdonald reported advisory board service with Nestlé Research, European Juice Manufacturers, and Mars.

SAN FRANCISCO – Significant and rapid weight loss, fueled by a low-calorie diet, seemed to boost long-term diabetes prevention in patients who were prediabetic, a new study finds. And to the surprise of researchers, the results were the same regardless of dietary and exercise interventions more than 3 years after the initial weight loss.

There’s a big limitation, though: About half of the participants who initially lost weight dropped out during the 3-year study, and data about them are not yet available. Still, only 4% of those who completed the study converted to diabetes, compared with expected rates of as much as 16%.

This is a “fantastic success,” co-lead investigator and physiologist, Ian Macdonald, PhD, of the University of Nottingham (England), said in a presentation of the PREVIEW study at the annual scientific sessions of the American Diabetes Association.

The randomized, controlled, multicenter trial recruited 2,223 participants with prediabetes in several European countries and Australia and New Zealand. The participants, of whom about two-thirds were women, were aged 25-70 years (average, 52 years) and had an average body mass index of 35 kg/m².

They were assigned to a 2-month, rapid weight-loss program in which they were limited to no more than 800 calories per day. “The participants were fully briefed on the risks to health associated with prediabetes and on the problems of diabetes itself, and they were highly motivated to take part in the study,” Dr. Macdonald said in an interview after the presentation.

A total of 1,857 participants achieved the required weight loss of at least 8% and were then assigned to one of four interventions: a high-protein, low-glycemic diet (either with moderate- or high-intensity physical activity) or a moderate-protein, moderate-glycemic diet (either with moderate- or high-intensity physical activity).

A total of 962 participants remained in the study for another 34 months until completion, with roughly the same number (235-244) in each of the four intervention groups.

The researchers expected that 16% of those in the moderate-diet group would convert to type 2 diabetes, as would 11% of those in the high-protein, low-glycemic group, Dr. Macdonald said in the presentation.

The researchers, who offered limited statistical detail about the study, did not disclose how many participants in each group actually developed diabetes by 36 months (January 2019). Dr. Macdonald said in the interview that those numbers would not be available until the study has been accepted for publication. He noted, however, that the numbers in the two groups were nearly identical, and the researchers disclosed that the overall number was just 4% (n = 62).

That number is “substantially less than would be predicted,” Dr. Macdonald noted in the presentation, adding that “there is no difference” between the interventions.

He said protein consumption in the high-protein diet was not sustained, probably because of lack of adherence. In contrast, the physical activity in the groups increased significantly at the beginning of the study, he said, and “it did not fall off too badly.”

According to Dr. Macdonald, the prevention of progression to diabetes “was almost certainly because of this large, initial weight loss, which was at least partially and impressively sustained. A high-protein, low-glycemic diet was not superior to a moderate-protein, moderate-glycemic diet in relation to prevention of type 2 diabetes.”

The study was funded by the European Union and various other sources, including national funds, in the participating countries. Dr. Macdonald reported advisory board service with Nestlé Research, European Juice Manufacturers, and Mars.

SAN FRANCISCO – Significant and rapid weight loss, fueled by a low-calorie diet, seemed to boost long-term diabetes prevention in patients who were prediabetic, a new study finds. And to the surprise of researchers, the results were the same regardless of dietary and exercise interventions more than 3 years after the initial weight loss.

There’s a big limitation, though: About half of the participants who initially lost weight dropped out during the 3-year study, and data about them are not yet available. Still, only 4% of those who completed the study converted to diabetes, compared with expected rates of as much as 16%.

This is a “fantastic success,” co-lead investigator and physiologist, Ian Macdonald, PhD, of the University of Nottingham (England), said in a presentation of the PREVIEW study at the annual scientific sessions of the American Diabetes Association.

The randomized, controlled, multicenter trial recruited 2,223 participants with prediabetes in several European countries and Australia and New Zealand. The participants, of whom about two-thirds were women, were aged 25-70 years (average, 52 years) and had an average body mass index of 35 kg/m².

They were assigned to a 2-month, rapid weight-loss program in which they were limited to no more than 800 calories per day. “The participants were fully briefed on the risks to health associated with prediabetes and on the problems of diabetes itself, and they were highly motivated to take part in the study,” Dr. Macdonald said in an interview after the presentation.

A total of 1,857 participants achieved the required weight loss of at least 8% and were then assigned to one of four interventions: a high-protein, low-glycemic diet (either with moderate- or high-intensity physical activity) or a moderate-protein, moderate-glycemic diet (either with moderate- or high-intensity physical activity).

A total of 962 participants remained in the study for another 34 months until completion, with roughly the same number (235-244) in each of the four intervention groups.

The researchers expected that 16% of those in the moderate-diet group would convert to type 2 diabetes, as would 11% of those in the high-protein, low-glycemic group, Dr. Macdonald said in the presentation.

The researchers, who offered limited statistical detail about the study, did not disclose how many participants in each group actually developed diabetes by 36 months (January 2019). Dr. Macdonald said in the interview that those numbers would not be available until the study has been accepted for publication. He noted, however, that the numbers in the two groups were nearly identical, and the researchers disclosed that the overall number was just 4% (n = 62).

That number is “substantially less than would be predicted,” Dr. Macdonald noted in the presentation, adding that “there is no difference” between the interventions.

He said protein consumption in the high-protein diet was not sustained, probably because of lack of adherence. In contrast, the physical activity in the groups increased significantly at the beginning of the study, he said, and “it did not fall off too badly.”

According to Dr. Macdonald, the prevention of progression to diabetes “was almost certainly because of this large, initial weight loss, which was at least partially and impressively sustained. A high-protein, low-glycemic diet was not superior to a moderate-protein, moderate-glycemic diet in relation to prevention of type 2 diabetes.”

The study was funded by the European Union and various other sources, including national funds, in the participating countries. Dr. Macdonald reported advisory board service with Nestlé Research, European Juice Manufacturers, and Mars.

Using daily aspirin treatment for the primary prevention of cardiovascular events remains an individualized decision that needs to balance a person’s risks for ischemic events and bleeding, according to results from a new systematic review of 15 randomized, aspirin-prevention trials, including results from 3 major trials that researchers reported during 2018.

“The findings suggest that the decision to use aspirin for primary prevention should be tailored to the individual patients based on estimated atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk and perceived bleeding risk, as well as patient preferences regarding the types of event prevented versus potential bleeding caused,” Jawahar L. Mehta, MD, and his associates wrote in an article published on June 10 in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

The authors also concluded that if a person decides to use aspirin for primary prevention, then a low dose of 100 mg/day or less is recommended.


This new systematic review follows two reviews published earlier in 2019 that reached roughly similar conclusions after analyzing largely the same randomized trial data, including the same three major trials from 2018. One of these prior reviews included data from 13 trials and a total of 164,225 people (JAMA. 2019 Jan 22;321[3]:277-87). The second review had data from 11 trials with 157,248 people (Eur Heart J. 2019 Feb 14;40[7]:607-17). The newly published review used data collected by 15 trials from 165,502 people.

The three 2018 trials that triggered the updated data assessments were the ARRIVE trial, with 12,546 people randomized (Lancet. 2018 Sep 22;392[10152]:1036-46), the ASPREE trial, with 19,114 people randomized (New Engl J Med. 2018 Oct 18;379[16]:1509-18), and the ASCEND trial, with 15,480 people randomized (New Engl J Med. 2018 Oct 18;379[16]:1529-39).

As stated in the new report from Dr. Mehta, a professor of medicine at the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences in Little Rock, and his associates, the recent trial results from 2018 added new data from more than 45,000 additional subjects, a development that warranted a reappraisal of the evidence for aspirin’s efficacy and safety for primary prevention in contemporary practice.

The major findings from the analysis by Dr. Mehta and his associates were that in adults without a history of cardiovascular disease, daily aspirin use reduced the incidence of MIs, with a number needed to treat (NNT) of 357; reduced ischemic stroke (NNT, 500), reduced transient ischemic attack (NNT, 370), and reduced the overall, combined rate of all major adverse cardiovascular events (NNT, 263). But on the safety side, daily aspirin led to an increased rate of major bleeding episodes, with a number needed to harm (NNH) of 222, increased intracranial bleeds (NNH, 1,000), and an increase in gastrointestinal bleeds (NNH, 385).

The analysis “demonstrates a potential reduction of net benefit with aspirin in the contemporary era,” the authors concluded. They also noted that the benefits from aspirin prevention were, as expected, “more pronounced” among people with a higher estimated risk from atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

The systematic review findings came against the backdrop of a recently released primary prevention guideline from the American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association (J Am Coll Card. 2019 Mar. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2019.03.010). The guideline said that aspirin prophylaxis for primary prevention “might be considered” for adults aged 40-70 years, but should not be used for people who are older than 70, and also should not be given to people with an increased risk for bleeding. In general, the experts who produced this guideline said that aspirin prophylaxis should be infrequent.

The new analysis also found no reduction in the incidence of cancer or cancer-related death linked with aspirin use for primary prevention. The systematic review published earlier in 2019 in JAMA also found no link between aspirin use and cancer incidence or mortality. The review from the European Heart Journal did not report on the link between aspirin use and cancer incidence or mortality.

Dr. Mehta has been a consultant to AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Medimmune, and Pfizer, and has received grant support from AstraZeneca, Bayer, and Boehringer Ingelheim.

[email protected]

On Twitter @mitchelzoler

SOURCE: Abdelaziz HK et al. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019 Jun 10. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2019.03.501.




 

Using daily aspirin treatment for the primary prevention of cardiovascular events remains an individualized decision that needs to balance a person’s risks for ischemic events and bleeding, according to results from a new systematic review of 15 randomized, aspirin-prevention trials, including results from 3 major trials that researchers reported during 2018.

“The findings suggest that the decision to use aspirin for primary prevention should be tailored to the individual patients based on estimated atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk and perceived bleeding risk, as well as patient preferences regarding the types of event prevented versus potential bleeding caused,” Jawahar L. Mehta, MD, and his associates wrote in an article published on June 10 in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

The authors also concluded that if a person decides to use aspirin for primary prevention, then a low dose of 100 mg/day or less is recommended.


This new systematic review follows two reviews published earlier in 2019 that reached roughly similar conclusions after analyzing largely the same randomized trial data, including the same three major trials from 2018. One of these prior reviews included data from 13 trials and a total of 164,225 people (JAMA. 2019 Jan 22;321[3]:277-87). The second review had data from 11 trials with 157,248 people (Eur Heart J. 2019 Feb 14;40[7]:607-17). The newly published review used data collected by 15 trials from 165,502 people.

The three 2018 trials that triggered the updated data assessments were the ARRIVE trial, with 12,546 people randomized (Lancet. 2018 Sep 22;392[10152]:1036-46), the ASPREE trial, with 19,114 people randomized (New Engl J Med. 2018 Oct 18;379[16]:1509-18), and the ASCEND trial, with 15,480 people randomized (New Engl J Med. 2018 Oct 18;379[16]:1529-39).

As stated in the new report from Dr. Mehta, a professor of medicine at the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences in Little Rock, and his associates, the recent trial results from 2018 added new data from more than 45,000 additional subjects, a development that warranted a reappraisal of the evidence for aspirin’s efficacy and safety for primary prevention in contemporary practice.

The major findings from the analysis by Dr. Mehta and his associates were that in adults without a history of cardiovascular disease, daily aspirin use reduced the incidence of MIs, with a number needed to treat (NNT) of 357; reduced ischemic stroke (NNT, 500), reduced transient ischemic attack (NNT, 370), and reduced the overall, combined rate of all major adverse cardiovascular events (NNT, 263). But on the safety side, daily aspirin led to an increased rate of major bleeding episodes, with a number needed to harm (NNH) of 222, increased intracranial bleeds (NNH, 1,000), and an increase in gastrointestinal bleeds (NNH, 385).

The analysis “demonstrates a potential reduction of net benefit with aspirin in the contemporary era,” the authors concluded. They also noted that the benefits from aspirin prevention were, as expected, “more pronounced” among people with a higher estimated risk from atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

The systematic review findings came against the backdrop of a recently released primary prevention guideline from the American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association (J Am Coll Card. 2019 Mar. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2019.03.010). The guideline said that aspirin prophylaxis for primary prevention “might be considered” for adults aged 40-70 years, but should not be used for people who are older than 70, and also should not be given to people with an increased risk for bleeding. In general, the experts who produced this guideline said that aspirin prophylaxis should be infrequent.

The new analysis also found no reduction in the incidence of cancer or cancer-related death linked with aspirin use for primary prevention. The systematic review published earlier in 2019 in JAMA also found no link between aspirin use and cancer incidence or mortality. The review from the European Heart Journal did not report on the link between aspirin use and cancer incidence or mortality.

Dr. Mehta has been a consultant to AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Medimmune, and Pfizer, and has received grant support from AstraZeneca, Bayer, and Boehringer Ingelheim.

[email protected]

On Twitter @mitchelzoler

SOURCE: Abdelaziz HK et al. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019 Jun 10. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2019.03.501.




 

Using daily aspirin treatment for the primary prevention of cardiovascular events remains an individualized decision that needs to balance a person’s risks for ischemic events and bleeding, according to results from a new systematic review of 15 randomized, aspirin-prevention trials, including results from 3 major trials that researchers reported during 2018.

“The findings suggest that the decision to use aspirin for primary prevention should be tailored to the individual patients based on estimated atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk and perceived bleeding risk, as well as patient preferences regarding the types of event prevented versus potential bleeding caused,” Jawahar L. Mehta, MD, and his associates wrote in an article published on June 10 in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

The authors also concluded that if a person decides to use aspirin for primary prevention, then a low dose of 100 mg/day or less is recommended.


This new systematic review follows two reviews published earlier in 2019 that reached roughly similar conclusions after analyzing largely the same randomized trial data, including the same three major trials from 2018. One of these prior reviews included data from 13 trials and a total of 164,225 people (JAMA. 2019 Jan 22;321[3]:277-87). The second review had data from 11 trials with 157,248 people (Eur Heart J. 2019 Feb 14;40[7]:607-17). The newly published review used data collected by 15 trials from 165,502 people.

The three 2018 trials that triggered the updated data assessments were the ARRIVE trial, with 12,546 people randomized (Lancet. 2018 Sep 22;392[10152]:1036-46), the ASPREE trial, with 19,114 people randomized (New Engl J Med. 2018 Oct 18;379[16]:1509-18), and the ASCEND trial, with 15,480 people randomized (New Engl J Med. 2018 Oct 18;379[16]:1529-39).

As stated in the new report from Dr. Mehta, a professor of medicine at the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences in Little Rock, and his associates, the recent trial results from 2018 added new data from more than 45,000 additional subjects, a development that warranted a reappraisal of the evidence for aspirin’s efficacy and safety for primary prevention in contemporary practice.

The major findings from the analysis by Dr. Mehta and his associates were that in adults without a history of cardiovascular disease, daily aspirin use reduced the incidence of MIs, with a number needed to treat (NNT) of 357; reduced ischemic stroke (NNT, 500), reduced transient ischemic attack (NNT, 370), and reduced the overall, combined rate of all major adverse cardiovascular events (NNT, 263). But on the safety side, daily aspirin led to an increased rate of major bleeding episodes, with a number needed to harm (NNH) of 222, increased intracranial bleeds (NNH, 1,000), and an increase in gastrointestinal bleeds (NNH, 385).

The analysis “demonstrates a potential reduction of net benefit with aspirin in the contemporary era,” the authors concluded. They also noted that the benefits from aspirin prevention were, as expected, “more pronounced” among people with a higher estimated risk from atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

The systematic review findings came against the backdrop of a recently released primary prevention guideline from the American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association (J Am Coll Card. 2019 Mar. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2019.03.010). The guideline said that aspirin prophylaxis for primary prevention “might be considered” for adults aged 40-70 years, but should not be used for people who are older than 70, and also should not be given to people with an increased risk for bleeding. In general, the experts who produced this guideline said that aspirin prophylaxis should be infrequent.

The new analysis also found no reduction in the incidence of cancer or cancer-related death linked with aspirin use for primary prevention. The systematic review published earlier in 2019 in JAMA also found no link between aspirin use and cancer incidence or mortality. The review from the European Heart Journal did not report on the link between aspirin use and cancer incidence or mortality.

Dr. Mehta has been a consultant to AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Medimmune, and Pfizer, and has received grant support from AstraZeneca, Bayer, and Boehringer Ingelheim.

[email protected]

On Twitter @mitchelzoler

SOURCE: Abdelaziz HK et al. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019 Jun 10. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2019.03.501.




 

In its inaugural year, the Excellence in Community service award will be presented this Friday at VAM during the ‘Vascular Spectacular’ Gala. This year’s winners are Drs. Richard Lynn, Carlo Dall’Olmo and Joseph Anain. These members have all exhibited outstanding leadership within their community as practicing vascular surgeons and are recognized for their sustained contributions to patients and their communities. Read more about the Excellence in Community Service award here.

In its inaugural year, the Excellence in Community service award will be presented this Friday at VAM during the ‘Vascular Spectacular’ Gala. This year’s winners are Drs. Richard Lynn, Carlo Dall’Olmo and Joseph Anain. These members have all exhibited outstanding leadership within their community as practicing vascular surgeons and are recognized for their sustained contributions to patients and their communities. Read more about the Excellence in Community Service award here.

In its inaugural year, the Excellence in Community service award will be presented this Friday at VAM during the ‘Vascular Spectacular’ Gala. This year’s winners are Drs. Richard Lynn, Carlo Dall’Olmo and Joseph Anain. These members have all exhibited outstanding leadership within their community as practicing vascular surgeons and are recognized for their sustained contributions to patients and their communities. Read more about the Excellence in Community Service award here.

Join others in placing bids on items available in the ‘Vascular Spectacular’ gala’s silent auction. Items include, but are not limited to, artwork, fine wines, travel experiences and sports memorabilia. Bidding will be open until this Friday, June 14, so be sure to bid early and often. The Gala will take place at the Vascular Annual Meeting and all proceeds benefit the work of the SVS Foundation. Sign up to participate here.

Join others in placing bids on items available in the ‘Vascular Spectacular’ gala’s silent auction. Items include, but are not limited to, artwork, fine wines, travel experiences and sports memorabilia. Bidding will be open until this Friday, June 14, so be sure to bid early and often. The Gala will take place at the Vascular Annual Meeting and all proceeds benefit the work of the SVS Foundation. Sign up to participate here.

Join others in placing bids on items available in the ‘Vascular Spectacular’ gala’s silent auction. Items include, but are not limited to, artwork, fine wines, travel experiences and sports memorabilia. Bidding will be open until this Friday, June 14, so be sure to bid early and often. The Gala will take place at the Vascular Annual Meeting and all proceeds benefit the work of the SVS Foundation. Sign up to participate here.

On May 31, new global guidelines on the best ways to treat Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia were co-published in the Journal of Vascular Surgery and the European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery. This comes after four years of collaboration between vascular experts from around the world. According to the SVS’ own Dr. Conte, a co-editor, the group created a unique practice guideline that reflects the spectrum of the diseases and the approaches seen worldwide. Read the guidelines in the JVS here.

On May 31, new global guidelines on the best ways to treat Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia were co-published in the Journal of Vascular Surgery and the European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery. This comes after four years of collaboration between vascular experts from around the world. According to the SVS’ own Dr. Conte, a co-editor, the group created a unique practice guideline that reflects the spectrum of the diseases and the approaches seen worldwide. Read the guidelines in the JVS here.

On May 31, new global guidelines on the best ways to treat Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia were co-published in the Journal of Vascular Surgery and the European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery. This comes after four years of collaboration between vascular experts from around the world. According to the SVS’ own Dr. Conte, a co-editor, the group created a unique practice guideline that reflects the spectrum of the diseases and the approaches seen worldwide. Read the guidelines in the JVS here.

SAN FRANCISCO – Seventy-percent of type 2 diabetes patients who lost more than 33 pounds on a liquid diet over a few months, and kept it off, were free of the disease at 2 years, according to United Kingdom investigators.

M. Alexander Otto/MDedge News

The odds of remission – meaning a hemoglobin A1c below 6.5% on repeat testing, off all medications – were directly related to the amount of weight patients lost; 60% of subjects who lost 22-33 pounds were free of type 2 disease at 2 years, versus 29% who lost 11-21 pounds, and 5% who lost less than 11 pounds.

“If people lose” around 30 pounds “and keep it off for 2 years, there’s a two-thirds chance of them escaping type 2 [diabetes]. People want to understand their options, and this is an option. This is very good news for people with diabetes,” said senior investigator Roy Taylor, MD, a professor of medicine and metabolism at the University of Newcastle, Newcastle upon Tyne, England, who presented the findings of the Diabetes Remission Clinical Trial (DiRECT) at the annual scientific sessions of the American Diabetes Association (Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2019 May;7(5):344-355).

A subgroup analysis he also presented found that beta cell function rebounds rapidly after weight loss and is pretty much normal at 2 years, so long as people keep the weight off.


The study is rooted in previous work by Dr. Taylor and his colleagues that found that very low-calorie diets normalized fasting plasma glucose in just 7 days in patients with type 2 diabetes due to a rapid fall in liver fat content and subsequent restoration of insulin sensitivity. That and other findings suggested that fast weight loss – instead of the traditional gradual approach – might help.

He and his team randomized 149 volunteers from primary care practices in the United Kingdom to standard care, and 149 others to rapid weight loss; more than a quarter of the patients who were asked agreed to participate.

[email protected]
 

SOURCE: Zhyzhneuskaya SV et al., ADA 2019 abstract 66-OR

SAN FRANCISCO – Seventy-percent of type 2 diabetes patients who lost more than 33 pounds on a liquid diet over a few months, and kept it off, were free of the disease at 2 years, according to United Kingdom investigators.

M. Alexander Otto/MDedge News

The odds of remission – meaning a hemoglobin A1c below 6.5% on repeat testing, off all medications – were directly related to the amount of weight patients lost; 60% of subjects who lost 22-33 pounds were free of type 2 disease at 2 years, versus 29% who lost 11-21 pounds, and 5% who lost less than 11 pounds.

“If people lose” around 30 pounds “and keep it off for 2 years, there’s a two-thirds chance of them escaping type 2 [diabetes]. People want to understand their options, and this is an option. This is very good news for people with diabetes,” said senior investigator Roy Taylor, MD, a professor of medicine and metabolism at the University of Newcastle, Newcastle upon Tyne, England, who presented the findings of the Diabetes Remission Clinical Trial (DiRECT) at the annual scientific sessions of the American Diabetes Association (Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2019 May;7(5):344-355).

A subgroup analysis he also presented found that beta cell function rebounds rapidly after weight loss and is pretty much normal at 2 years, so long as people keep the weight off.


The study is rooted in previous work by Dr. Taylor and his colleagues that found that very low-calorie diets normalized fasting plasma glucose in just 7 days in patients with type 2 diabetes due to a rapid fall in liver fat content and subsequent restoration of insulin sensitivity. That and other findings suggested that fast weight loss – instead of the traditional gradual approach – might help.

He and his team randomized 149 volunteers from primary care practices in the United Kingdom to standard care, and 149 others to rapid weight loss; more than a quarter of the patients who were asked agreed to participate.

[email protected]
 

SOURCE: Zhyzhneuskaya SV et al., ADA 2019 abstract 66-OR

SAN FRANCISCO – Seventy-percent of type 2 diabetes patients who lost more than 33 pounds on a liquid diet over a few months, and kept it off, were free of the disease at 2 years, according to United Kingdom investigators.

M. Alexander Otto/MDedge News

The odds of remission – meaning a hemoglobin A1c below 6.5% on repeat testing, off all medications – were directly related to the amount of weight patients lost; 60% of subjects who lost 22-33 pounds were free of type 2 disease at 2 years, versus 29% who lost 11-21 pounds, and 5% who lost less than 11 pounds.

“If people lose” around 30 pounds “and keep it off for 2 years, there’s a two-thirds chance of them escaping type 2 [diabetes]. People want to understand their options, and this is an option. This is very good news for people with diabetes,” said senior investigator Roy Taylor, MD, a professor of medicine and metabolism at the University of Newcastle, Newcastle upon Tyne, England, who presented the findings of the Diabetes Remission Clinical Trial (DiRECT) at the annual scientific sessions of the American Diabetes Association (Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2019 May;7(5):344-355).

A subgroup analysis he also presented found that beta cell function rebounds rapidly after weight loss and is pretty much normal at 2 years, so long as people keep the weight off.


The study is rooted in previous work by Dr. Taylor and his colleagues that found that very low-calorie diets normalized fasting plasma glucose in just 7 days in patients with type 2 diabetes due to a rapid fall in liver fat content and subsequent restoration of insulin sensitivity. That and other findings suggested that fast weight loss – instead of the traditional gradual approach – might help.

He and his team randomized 149 volunteers from primary care practices in the United Kingdom to standard care, and 149 others to rapid weight loss; more than a quarter of the patients who were asked agreed to participate.

[email protected]
 

SOURCE: Zhyzhneuskaya SV et al., ADA 2019 abstract 66-OR