Vascular surgeons not prescribing CVD risk-reducing drugs in PAD patients
August 8, 2006 | Shelley Wood

Toronto, ON - Despite playing a central role in the treatment of patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD), vascular surgeons may not be prescribing the drugs needed to reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in these patients, new research suggests [1].

Writing in the July 27, 2006 issue of the Annals of Vascular Surgery, Dr Mohammed Al-Omran (Toronto General Hospital, ON) and colleagues report that the rate at which surgeons recommended evidence-based medication in PAD patients varied considerably among surgeons and between drugs.

"If you have disease in your arterial tree, or PAD, you're at very high risk for CVD as well," senior author on the study, Dr Subodh Verma (St Michael's Hospital, Toronto, ON), told heartwire. "As a result, all of those standard risk-reduction therapies such as aspirin, clopidogrel, statins, and ACE inhibitors in people who have CAD also apply to those people who have PAD. In Canada, the main delivery of care for people who have PAD rests with the vascular surgeons—they are sort of the top of the pyramid when it comes to delivery of vascular care. And we found that there were significant knowledge and action gaps with respect to recommending and instituting risk-reduction therapy."


Bridging the gap

Al-Omran et al conducted a cross-sectional survey of 79 vascular surgeons at the 2004 annual meeting of the Canadian Society for Vascular Surgery; a total of 52 completed the survey. According to survey results, knowledge of LDL-cholesterol, blood-pressure, and blood glucose targets was low. While routine initiation of antiplatelet therapy was high, less than 50% of respondents knew that ACE inhibitors could be prescribed for PAD patients as an antiatherosclerotic therapy (regardless of blood-pressure level). Similarly, only 19% and 5.8% of surgeons surveyed said they would recommend statin and ACE-inhibitor therapy, respectively.

Strikingly, while surgeons overwhelmingly agreed that risk-reduction therapy should be recommended or initiated by vascular surgeons, less than two thirds of surgeons said they routinely counseled patients about LDL-cholesterol reduction and blood-pressure control, and the majority admitted that their self-assessment of risk reduction in PAD was average or below average.

"What we think is happening is that vascular surgeons may actually believe that this is not their mandate and that the mandate rests with other practitioners, be it general practitioners or an internist," Verma stated.

Part of the problem may be that, unlike in cardiovascular disease, where patients found to be at risk are typically referred by a family physician first to a cardiologist and then to a surgeon, patients with presumed or proven PAD are usually referred directly from the family doctor to the surgeon. "So there's no intermediate, cardiologist-type person who will actually catch these patients and make sure they receive the appropriate risk-reduction therapy."


Unfamiliarity breeds uncertainty

Also commenting on the results, coauthor and vascular surgeon Dr Thomas Lindsay (Toronto General Hospital) told heartwire that most surgeons have little experience prescribing the types of medications tracked in the study. "I think that most surgeons are uncomfortable with the side effects of risk-reduction medications and being responsible for these side effects."

He continued: "I believe that if [surgeons] were given guidelines plus information that they might give to patients about the side effects and how to manage them, they might be more willing to prescribe these drugs." Very few sales representatives from drug companies that make these agents actually visit surgeons to provide them with prescribing and monitoring information, he added. "I do believe most surgeons are aware of the latest cardiovascular guidelines, but since they rarely prescribe these medications, the unfamiliarity makes them uncomfortable."

Asked why surgeons appear to be more comfortable prescribing some drugs more than others, Lindsay responded that it is likely "a mix of the safety of the medications, the side-effect profiles, and what type of ongoing monitoring is necessary." In Canada, he points out, there are very few vascular internists who would be specialists in this sort of information.

"More education of the vascular surgeons is required regarding side effects, safety profiles, and monitoring guidelines," Lindsay stated. "If they were familiar and comfortable with these, I do believe it would increase the rates at which they prescribed these medications."

Source
  1. Al-Omran M, Lindsay TF, Major J, et al. Perceptions of Canadian vascular surgeons toward pharmacological risk reduction in patients with peripheral arterial disease. Ann Vasc Surg 2006; DOI: 10.1007/s10016-006-9110-3. Available at: http://www.springerlink.com.



Your comments
Vascular surgeons not prescribing CVD risk-reducing drugs in PAD patients
# 1 of 2
August 28, 2006 04:46 (EDT)
Ammar Qadan
Who owns PAD?
It is a fact that awareness about PAD is low in general. the most striking information here is that: Who owns PAD? If no specialist to own PAD, how would general practioners or internists own it, the majority of whom tend to follow recommendations? Go to the patient chat rooms on PAD on AHA website as an example, and you can see that patients were miss-diagnosed in the majority of cases leading them to loose a leg or even to suffer, perhaps a preventable MI or stroke
# 2 of 2
September 15, 2006 08:19 (EDT)
Melissa Walton-Shirley
Depends on who sees the patient
Ammar,
Sometimes the decision as to who owns something is determined by who decides to purchase it. Each of us must do our part each time we encounter a patient, no matter our subspecialty. As I've stated previously, the greatest tragedies occur when the patient with CAD is not recognized as someone who is at risk for PVD, but even more often when the PVD patient is not recognized as someone at risk for CAD.
The assessment for CAD is not a democracy. One must be guilty until proven innocent. When the patient presents first with PVD, they must be presumed guilty by associaion.
It's up to whom ever is treating the patient to be the judge. We should all own the process.
Melissa

You have to be logged in to add a comment to this article
Login
Username 
Password 
  Forgot your password?
 
Remember me on this computer
 
Join theheart.org community
Five reasons to become a member of the most trusted source of cardiology news:
1Be part of the conversation in our blogs and discussion forum
2Share your thoughts on our news or educational programs
3Receive exclusive newsletters related to your field of interest
4Access unique continuous medical education content
5See and read what leaders have to say about cardiology today
It is free and it only takes five minutes to join!
 
button
Previews
Featured CME