Background: The healing of foot wounds in patients with diabetes mellitus is frequently complicated by critical limb threatening ischemia (neuro-ischemic diabetic foot syndrome, DFS). In this situation, imminent arterial revascularization is imperative in order to avoid amputation. However, in many patients this is no longer possible (“too late”, “too sick”, “no technical option”). Besides conservative treatment or major amputation, many alternative methods supposed to decrease pain, promote wound healing, and avoid amputations are employed. We performed a narrative review in order to stress their efficiency and evidence. Methods: The literature research for the 2014 revision of the German evidenced-based S3-PAD-guidelines was extended to 2020. Results: If revascularization is impossible, there is not enough evidence for gene- and stem-cell therapy, hyperbaric oxygen, sympathectomy, spinal cord stimulation, prostanoids etc. to be able to recommend them. Risk factor management is recommended for all CLTI patients. With appropriate wound care and strict offloading, conservative treatment may be an effective alternative. Timely amputation can accelerate mobilization and improve the quality of life. Conclusions: Alternative treatments said to decrease the amputation rate by improving arterial perfusion and wound healing in case revascularization is impossible and lack both efficiency and evidence. Conservative therapy can yield acceptable results, but early amputation may be a beneficial alternative. Patients unfit for revascularization or major amputation should receive palliative wound care and pain therapy. New treatment strategies for no-option CLTI are urgently needed.

Background: In vascular medicine, peripheral arterial disease (PAD) and diabetic foot syndrome (DFS) are often considered synonymous with respect to the need for revascularization. In PAD patients, clinical symptoms reflect the degree of atherosclerotic disease, since peripheral innervation, including pain sensation, is not usually compromised. In DFS patients, however, symptoms of relevant foot ischemia are often absent and progression of ischemia goes unnoticed owing to diabetic polyneuropathy, the loss of nociception being the main trigger for foot ulcers. This review analyzes the fundamental differences between PAD and DFS against the background of polyneuropathy. Methods: The literature research for the 2014 revision of the German evidence-based S3-PAD-guidelines was extended to 2023. Results: Vascular examination is imperative for both, PAD and DFS. Stage-dependent revascularization is of utmost importance in PAD patients, especially those suffering from critical limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI). Successful therapy of DFS goes further, including infection and metabolic control, wound management, offloading the foot and lifelong prophylaxis in the course of a multidisciplinary treatment concept. Revascularization is not needed in all cases of DFS. Conclusions: There are fundamental differences between PAD and DFS with respect to pathophysiology, the anatomical distribution of arterial occlusive processes, the clinical symptoms, the value of diagnostic tools such as the ankle-brachial index, and classification. Also, therapeutic concepts differ substantially between the two patient populations.

The term ‘aortitis’ comprises a heterogeneous spectrum of diseases, with varied etiology and clinical presentations, whose common characteristic is the inflammation of the aortic wall. Since aortitis can mimic almost all common cardiovascular disorders, its clinical recognition remains a challenge. Some cases of aortitis remain undetected for a long time and may be diagnosed after severe life-threatening complications have already arisen. The diagnosis of aortitis is based on the presence of homogeneous circumferential thickening of the aortic wall detected on aortic imaging, or typical histological features in combination with clinical findings and laboratory parameters. Management of aortitis is usually conservative (immunosuppressive drugs in noninfectious aortitis; antimicrobial drugs in infectious). However, if vascular complications such as aortic aneurysm, rupture, or steno-occlusive events appear, aortic surgery or endovascular therapy may be required. This review article summarizes the current knowledge regarding the etiology, clinical presentation, diagnosis, and treatment of inflammatory diseases of the aorta to promote better clinical management of these entities.

Blue light regulates biological function in various cells, such as proliferation, oxidative stress, and cell death. We employed blue light illumination on human umbilical vein endothelial cells utilizing a LED device at 453 nm wavelength and revealed a novel biphasic response on human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs). The results showed that low fluence blue light irradiation promoted the fundamental cell activities, including cell viability, migration and angiogenesis by activating the angiogenic pathways such as the VEGF signaling pathway. In contrast, high fluence illumination caused the opposite effect on those activities by upregulating pro-apoptotic signaling cascades like ferroptosis, necroptosis and the p53 signaling pathways. Our results provide an underlying insight into photobiomodulation by blue light and may help to implement potential treatment strategies for treating angiogenesis-dependent diseases.

Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is a prevalent aortic disease that causes high mortality due to asymptomatic gradual expansion and sudden rupture. The underlying molecular mechanisms and effective pharmaceutical therapy for preventing AAA progression have not been fully identified. In this study, we identified the key modules and hub genes involved in AAA growth from the GSE17901 dataset in the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database through the weighted gene co-expression network analysis (WGCNA). Key genes were further selected and validated in the mouse dataset (GSE12591) and human datasets (GSE7084, GSE47472, and GSE57691). Finally, we predicted drug candidates targeting key genes using the Drug–Gene Interaction database. Overall, we identified key modules enriched in the mitotic cell cycle, GTPase activity, and several metabolic processes. Seven key genes (CCR5, ADCY5, ADCY3, ACACB, LPIN1, ACSL1, UCP3) related to AAA progression were identified. A total of 35 drugs/compounds targeting the key genes were predicted, which may have the potential to prevent AAA progression.

Background: Postthrombotic syndrome (PTS) has a major impact on the quality of life after deep venous thrombosis (DVT). From clinical practice and related trials, anticoagulants show potential for reducing the occurrence and alleviating the symptoms of PTS. Methods: A systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) were conducted by combing the literature from the databases of MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Libraries, and ClinicalTrials, through a variety of medical subject headings (Mesh) and PTS keywords. With regard to PTS prophylaxis, all anticoagulant-related randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies were assessed. The network model was conducted through the R software, and further comparisons were conducted using the Bayesian hierarchical random effects model. The odds ratio (OR) and the corresponding 95% CI were calculated for analysis. Results: Data from two RCTs and nine non-randomized studies meeting the selection criteria were included in the Bayesian analysis model, which incorporated seven anticoagulants. Edoxaban (OR: 0.42, 95% CI: 0.18–1.0) and rivaroxaban (OR: 0.54, 95% CI: 0.38–0.76) were significantly more effective than warfarin in the prevention of PTS (Villalta score ≥ 5). A subgroup analysis based on the severity of PTS showed that rivaroxaban was more effective than warfarin, with OR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.41–0.84 (Villalta score 5 to 14) and OR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.22–0.9 (Villalta score ≥ 15, ulceration), respectively. Edoxaban had the highest probability (80.1%) of providing preventive benefits for PTS. For mild/moderate and severe PTS, rivaroxaban provided the highest benefits in preventing PTS (89.3% and 85.6%, respectively). Conclusion: Edoxaban demonstrated a better prophylactic effect on PTS (Villalta score > 5), while rivaroxaban displayed a better effect against mild/moderate (Villalta score 5 to 14) and severe PTS (Villalta score ≥ 15, ulceration).