A Quantitative Analysis of Publication Trends in Vascular Surgery and a Comparative Analysis with Interventional Radiology

Abstract

Background: Since its recognition as an independent surgical subspecialty, vascular surgery has experienced rapid growth in both surgical volume and research productivity. Trends in vascular surgery research have not been well characterized. Understanding how research in the field has evolved in comparison to interventional radiology can offer insights into evolving interests and discrepancies between the specialties.

Methods: Primary and secondary research publications indexed in the MEDLINE database from 1992 to 2023 were analyzed using a novel text mining algorithm. Eight high-impact vascular surgery journals and 6 interventional radiology journals were included. Articles were categorized based on treatment modalities, pathologies, and other subgroup analyses. Temporal trends were assessed using linear regression and correlation analysis. A comparative analysis was performed assessing publication trends by broad pathology groups between vascular surgery and interventional radiology journals. A further subgroup analysis was conducted comparing publication trends by endovascular treatment modality for peripheral arterial disease (PAD).

Results: 28,931 vascular surgery publications and 13,094 interventional radiology publications met the inclusion criteria. Publication volume grew exponentially, with over 50% emerging in the last decade. Publications exploring endovascular interventions have increasingly exceeded those focused on exclusively open interventions in research volume since 2006. Aortic pathology, carotid disease, PAD, and venous pathology represented the vast majority of vascular surgery research output, with PAD exhibiting the fastest growth. Comparative analysis revealed a number of key differences in research focus and treatment modalities between vascular surgery and interventional radiology, including a greater emphasis on venous pathology in interventional radiology journals and fewer relative publications on carotid artery pathology (P < 0.001). When comparing endovascular treatments for PAD, interventional radiology journals published more frequently on endovascular brachytherapy (8.73% vs 1.02%, P < 0.001) and less frequently on atherectomy (4.29% vs 6.50%, P = 0.035) as compared to the vascular surgery journals.

Conclusions: Our findings demonstrate increasing emphasis on endovascular interventions and specific pathologies in vascular surgery research. Despite some key differences, there is notable overlap in interests between vascular surgery and interventional radiology, which may represent promising opportunities for collaboration in advancing endovascular procedures. Differences in research focus may stem from specialty perspectives and be perpetuated by differences in training.