AI-Native Scoping Reviews & Evidence Mapping

FEVAR has matured into a first-line endovascular strategy for anatomically suitable complex aortic aneurysms, delivering high technical success and low early mortality — but its real cost is lifelong surveillance and a substantial late reintervention burden. This review maps where FEVAR clearly outperforms open repair, where durability remains uncertain, and how fusion imaging, CO₂ angiography, bridging-stent choice, spinal-cord protection, and patient selection shape modern outcomes.

This paper shows that fasting diets are not just weight-loss strategies, but biologically active interventions that may improve macrovascular health through better arterial function, lower vascular inflammation, and ketone-linked protective mechanisms. It is worth reading because it also reveals the key clinical tension behind the field: vascular benefits are promising, but microvascular responses may diverge, making patient selection and endpoint interpretation crucial.

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) wins early, especially in ruptured and high-risk Abdominal aortic aneurysm — but open repair still wins durability in younger, fitter patients. This review maps where the trade-off truly lies: early survival and faster recovery versus lifelong surveillance, reintervention burden, renal decline, endoleaks, and uncertain late risks.

EVAR saves lives early, especially in ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm, but it is not a “fit-and-forget” repair. This review maps where EVAR is strongest, where open surgery remains more durable, and why anatomy, frailty, sex-specific morphology, endoleaks, and lifelong surveillance decide the real long-term outcome.

This review shows that PAD diagnostics are shifting beyond resting ABI toward a multimodal future: post-exercise testing, advanced imaging, biomarkers, and AI repeatedly signal earlier and more precise detection, especially in patients where standard methods fail, such as those with diabetes. Read the full paper to see which emerging tools look truly promising, where the evidence is strongest, and which “innovations” still lack the validation needed for routine practice.

This review shows that AAA diagnosis is no longer just about measuring diameter: the strongest evidence now points to a multimodal pathway where ultrasound and CTA remain the clinical backbone, while CEUS, biomechanical modeling, and emerging biomarker panels begin to refine who truly carries higher rupture or surveillance risk. The full paper maps where these newer tools already add real diagnostic value, where they remain premature, and how AAA detection is shifting from simple imaging toward biologically and mechanically informed precision assessment.

Diabetic foot is not just a wound problem but a high-stakes collision of neuropathy, ischemia, infection, and delayed care, with a median major amputation rate of 10.3% across the mapped evidence. This review shows where the strongest signals truly are: why multidisciplinary care can cut major amputations by up to 80%, which risk factors matter most, and which emerging diagnostics and regenerative therapies may actually change outcomes.

This review shows where thrombolysis in DVT truly helps and where it does not: the clearest signal is in selected iliofemoral disease, where modern catheter-based clot removal may improve patency and reduce post-thrombotic syndrome, but only at the cost of real bleeding risk. Read the full paper to see which techniques look most promising, which patients benefit most, and where the evidence still breaks down.

Deep vein thrombosis is not one disease trigger, but a convergence of risk: genes, cancer, surgery, catheters, hormones, infection, inflammation, and immobility can all push the body toward clot formation. This review maps where the strongest danger signals appear — from COVID-19 and oral contraceptives to cancer care and inherited thrombophilia — and shows why modern DVT prevention must be personalized rather than one-size-fits-all.

This review shows that DVT is not just a problem of stasis — it is a biologically active inflammatory process driven by endothelial injury, platelet–leukocyte crosstalk, and NET-mediated immunothrombosis. Read the full paper to see which mechanisms are strongest, which patient phenotypes carry the clearest signals, and which emerging biomarkers and targets could reshape risk stratification and therapy.

This paper shows that DCB is not just a technical upgrade over POBA, but a consistently stronger strategy for restenosis-prone vascular disease, with better patency and fewer repeat interventions across coronary ISR, femoropopliteal lesions, BTK disease, and dialysis access. The full paper is worth reading because it reveals where that advantage is most convincing, where technique and vessel preparation change the outcome, and how much of DCB’s real-world value lies in selecting the right lesion, not just the device.

The paper tackles one of endovascular medicine’s most controversial questions: whether DCBs truly carry a late mortality risk. Mapping 170 original studies, it shows why the feared signal largely fades in broader evidence, where comorbidity and indication matter more than the device itself — and reveals the few settings where uncertainty still remains.