Dr. Lee Kirksey is a vascular surgeon at Cleveland Clinic’s Heart, Vascular & Thoracic Institute, where he serves as Vice Chair of the Department of Vascular Surgery. Board-certified in vascular surgery and a registered vascular technologist, he specializes in complex vascular procedures, including limb salvage, carotid artery interventions, and aortic surgery. A native of Ohio, Dr. Kirksey trained at The Ohio State University and the University of Pennsylvania before joining Cleveland Clinic in 2011. He has performed over 10,000 vascular procedures and publishes extensively on vascular surgery and health disparities.
Thinking about the fellows you train — whether currently or over the past few years — is there a topic or focus area that you think deserves more attention among vascular fellows today?
Absolutely. That’s a great question because, over time, we see a cycle in our training and practice. In medicine, and especially in vascular surgery, there is a clear loop between how we are trained, the care patients seek, and the treatments we provide.
When I think about my trajectory, I trained during the introduction of endovascular aortic devices — the Talent endograft with Dr. Michael L. Marin and Dr. Bruce Brener — and later saw FDA approval of the predicate endovascular aneurysm repair device AneuRx. I was part of that era of transition, where we had strong open skills but were also learning endovascular techniques. As my practice evolved, like many others, I shifted to a balance of 50-60% endovascular and 40-50% open procedures. Now, after 13 years at Cleveland Clinic, much of my work involves revisions — hybrid cases combining endovascular and open techniques.
The open skill set I developed early in my career has been really valuable to me. That’s why, as someone involved in training the next generation, I emphasize the importance of a broad skill set.
I believe our competitive advantage, our secret sauce as vascular surgeons — while we collaborate closely with cardiology and interventional colleagues — is our ability to determine the best therapy for each patient. The right treatment, for the right patient, at the right time. A broad armamentarium allows us to provide the most value to our practice partners, consultants, and healthcare systems.
That is my key message to anyone in this field, be they surgeons or proceduralists: develop a broad skill set. When you complete your training, you should be prepared to practice anywhere in the country, recognizing that vascular disease varies by region in both phenotype and morphology. If you have a broad skill set, you'll be able to do that.
Given your many publications in peer-reviewed journals and beyond, how would you guide early-career physicians who want to get more involved in clinical research?
The caliber of emerging medical professionals in vascular surgery, cardiology, and cardiac surgery never ceases to amaze my colleagues and me. When interviewing these candidates, we often find ourselves thinking, Oh my gosh, if I were coming out now, I don't know how well I would have fared. It’s like watching athletes and realizing how much better and more prepared each new generation is. Their performance and skill levels are so much better. They are very prepared.
A big part of that is how early they get involved in research. One of the biggest barriers, in my mind, is access — knowing how to reach out to someone. I always encourage students to be fearless when it comes to reaching out to mentors. Sometimes, everyone is competing for access to someone who's extremely well-published and well-known, but just approaching someone about an interesting case can lead to publishing a case report or a small series. You learn so much from reading, preparing, and doing the hard work to gain expertise in an area.
I tell my students that once they've written a review paper, they become a mini-expert in that field. They’ve taken a deep dive, and they’ll never forget that body of knowledge. That’s my first recommendation: be fearless. Put yourself out there, ask someone senior — whether it's a resident or a staff member — if you can publish something with them. Take their suggestions, work hard, and be disciplined.
The second thing is what one of my former partners at Cleveland Clinic called the "finishing gene". Entrepreneurs also understand this — many of us have ambitious ideas, but we have to see them through to completion. No matter how big or small, we have to develop the discipline to finish it. Research involves more than just having a great question. There’s the process of collecting data, writing the paper, revising through editorial reviews, and finally, getting it published. That last step — the persistence to push it across the finish line — is crucial.
Even now, there’s nothing more rewarding than receiving an email confirming that your academic work has been accepted for publication. That feeling never gets old, and I see that excitement even in colleagues who have been publishing for years.
When treating calcified plaque — acknowledging patient variability — if you're approaching it from an endovascular perspective, do you have a go-to algorithm or a default way to treat it?
I’ve thought long and hard about how to make this a nuanced answer, but the truth is, I think intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) is a generational therapy — a treatment that is truly changing the field. There’s nothing we vascular specialists lament more than calcified blood vessels, whether open or endovascular. I tell my trainees all the time that this is our Achilles’ heel. It makes open operations more difficult and sometimes less durable. And with our previous endovascular armamentarium, it created significant barriers to achieving optimal outcomes.
My threshold for treating calcium isn’t very nuanced. Very early on, I turn to IVL. For full disclosure, I’m not a big atherectomy user. If there had been a therapy that preceded IVL in my practice, it probably would have been atherectomy. But in this day and age, I default to IVL. If there’s been a shift in my algorithm, it’s in using IVL more for in-stent restenosis as well.
We’ve published a couple of cases on this. Last year, we reported on patients in my practice with failed endovascular interventions using covered stents for aortoiliac occlusive disease. These cases involved under-expanded stents due to extrinsic calcium compression, and they responded remarkably well to IVL. The secondary results were on par with primary treatment using IVL inside a covered stent. From the aortoiliac level down to the tibial vessels, I don’t think there’s anything comparable right now. That’s not just a pandering answer — I truly think IVL is a game-changer. The increase in the adoption of IVL took place over a short period of time, which shows how effective people find this therapy to be.
In your career — whether early on or now with the fellows you train — are there business-related healthcare concepts that you either wish you had known about 10-15 years ago or would like fellows to have a better understanding of today?
I've been very involved with value-based care since arriving at Cleveland Clinic because our compensation and care delivery model are uniquely set up to excel in this space. I have some thoughts on what needs to evolve in how we train surgeons and vascular proceduralists.
First, historically, graduate medical education programs have done a poor job of preparing physicians in financial awareness — billing, documentation, reimbursement practices, and overall healthcare financial stewardship.
Plastic surgery, for example, has done a good job in this area. Many plastic surgeons enter private practice, which is predominantly a fee-for-service model and less insurance based. Because of that, their training programs require them to develop proficiency in billing, coding, and documentation. They learn how to describe procedures and how to bill properly because it directly impacts their livelihood.
In contrast, we don’t do a great job of that. No one can point to a granular-level requirement in GME curricula for training on billing and documentation. As a result, physicians enter practice, and the responsibility of teaching these skills falls on their practice. If they join a non-academic practice that needs to keep the lights on and manage finances, they often go through a year or two of intense indoctrination — learning what’s necessary to be a sustainable organization. We're improving, but there's still much work to do.
The second issue is value-based care. If we want to build sustainable departments, hospitals, and healthcare systems, we have to be good stewards of our resources. Physicians should understand device costs, value propositions, and clinical quality outcomes. We need to know how to achieve the best outcomes for our patients in the most economically responsible way.
At Cleveland Clinic, we’ve done a good job integrating fiscal responsibility into discussions. For instance, in a limb salvage case, we ask: What devices do we use? What are the alternatives? How did we escalate care? How do we achieve the best outcome cost-effectively without compromising patient care? These are the subjects we need to focus on to prepare the next generation of physicians.
Dr. Lee Kirksey is a vascular surgeon at Cleveland Clinic’s Heart, Vascular & Thoracic Institute, where he serves as Vice Chair of the Department of Vascular Surgery. Board-certified in vascular surgery and a registered vascular technologist, he specializes in complex vascular procedures, including limb salvage, carotid artery interventions, and aortic surgery. A native of Ohio, Dr. Kirksey trained at The Ohio State University and the University of Pennsylvania before joining Cleveland Clinic in 2011. He has performed over 10,000 vascular procedures and publishes extensively on vascular surgery and health disparities.
Thinking about the fellows you train — whether currently or over the past few years — is there a topic or focus area that you think deserves more attention among vascular fellows today?
Absolutely. That’s a great question because, over time, we see a cycle in our training and practice. In medicine, and especially in vascular surgery, there is a clear loop between how we are trained, the care patients seek, and the treatments we provide.
When I think about my trajectory, I trained during the introduction of endovascular aortic devices — the Talent endograft with Dr. Michael L. Marin and Dr. Bruce Brener — and later saw FDA approval of the predicate endovascular aneurysm repair device AneuRx. I was part of that era of transition, where we had strong open skills but were also learning endovascular techniques. As my practice evolved, like many others, I shifted to a balance of 50-60% endovascular and 40-50% open procedures. Now, after 13 years at Cleveland Clinic, much of my work involves revisions — hybrid cases combining endovascular and open techniques.
The open skill set I developed early in my career has been really valuable to me. That’s why, as someone involved in training the next generation, I emphasize the importance of a broad skill set.
I believe our competitive advantage, our secret sauce as vascular surgeons — while we collaborate closely with cardiology and interventional colleagues — is our ability to determine the best therapy for each patient. The right treatment, for the right patient, at the right time. A broad armamentarium allows us to provide the most value to our practice partners, consultants, and healthcare systems.
That is my key message to anyone in this field, be they surgeons or proceduralists: develop a broad skill set. When you complete your training, you should be prepared to practice anywhere in the country, recognizing that vascular disease varies by region in both phenotype and morphology. If you have a broad skill set, you'll be able to do that.
Given your many publications in peer-reviewed journals and beyond, how would you guide early-career physicians who want to get more involved in clinical research?
The caliber of emerging medical professionals in vascular surgery, cardiology, and cardiac surgery never ceases to amaze my colleagues and me. When interviewing these candidates, we often find ourselves thinking, Oh my gosh, if I were coming out now, I don't know how well I would have fared. It’s like watching athletes and realizing how much better and more prepared each new generation is. Their performance and skill levels are so much better. They are very prepared.
A big part of that is how early they get involved in research. One of the biggest barriers, in my mind, is access — knowing how to reach out to someone. I always encourage students to be fearless when it comes to reaching out to mentors. Sometimes, everyone is competing for access to someone who's extremely well-published and well-known, but just approaching someone about an interesting case can lead to publishing a case report or a small series. You learn so much from reading, preparing, and doing the hard work to gain expertise in an area.
I tell my students that once they've written a review paper, they become a mini-expert in that field. They’ve taken a deep dive, and they’ll never forget that body of knowledge. That’s my first recommendation: be fearless. Put yourself out there, ask someone senior — whether it's a resident or a staff member — if you can publish something with them. Take their suggestions, work hard, and be disciplined.
The second thing is what one of my former partners at Cleveland Clinic called the "finishing gene". Entrepreneurs also understand this — many of us have ambitious ideas, but we have to see them through to completion. No matter how big or small, we have to develop the discipline to finish it. Research involves more than just having a great question. There’s the process of collecting data, writing the paper, revising through editorial reviews, and finally, getting it published. That last step — the persistence to push it across the finish line — is crucial.
Even now, there’s nothing more rewarding than receiving an email confirming that your academic work has been accepted for publication. That feeling never gets old, and I see that excitement even in colleagues who have been publishing for years.
When treating calcified plaque — acknowledging patient variability — if you're approaching it from an endovascular perspective, do you have a go-to algorithm or a default way to treat it?
I’ve thought long and hard about how to make this a nuanced answer, but the truth is, I think intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) is a generational therapy — a treatment that is truly changing the field. There’s nothing we vascular specialists lament more than calcified blood vessels, whether open or endovascular. I tell my trainees all the time that this is our Achilles’ heel. It makes open operations more difficult and sometimes less durable. And with our previous endovascular armamentarium, it created significant barriers to achieving optimal outcomes.
My threshold for treating calcium isn’t very nuanced. Very early on, I turn to IVL. For full disclosure, I’m not a big atherectomy user. If there had been a therapy that preceded IVL in my practice, it probably would have been atherectomy. But in this day and age, I default to IVL. If there’s been a shift in my algorithm, it’s in using IVL more for in-stent restenosis as well.
We’ve published a couple of cases on this. Last year, we reported on patients in my practice with failed endovascular interventions using covered stents for aortoiliac occlusive disease. These cases involved under-expanded stents due to extrinsic calcium compression, and they responded remarkably well to IVL. The secondary results were on par with primary treatment using IVL inside a covered stent. From the aortoiliac level down to the tibial vessels, I don’t think there’s anything comparable right now. That’s not just a pandering answer — I truly think IVL is a game-changer. The increase in the adoption of IVL took place over a short period of time, which shows how effective people find this therapy to be.
In your career — whether early on or now with the fellows you train — are there business-related healthcare concepts that you either wish you had known about 10-15 years ago or would like fellows to have a better understanding of today?
I've been very involved with value-based care since arriving at Cleveland Clinic because our compensation and care delivery model are uniquely set up to excel in this space. I have some thoughts on what needs to evolve in how we train surgeons and vascular proceduralists.
First, historically, graduate medical education programs have done a poor job of preparing physicians in financial awareness — billing, documentation, reimbursement practices, and overall healthcare financial stewardship.
Plastic surgery, for example, has done a good job in this area. Many plastic surgeons enter private practice, which is predominantly a fee-for-service model and less insurance based. Because of that, their training programs require them to develop proficiency in billing, coding, and documentation. They learn how to describe procedures and how to bill properly because it directly impacts their livelihood.
In contrast, we don’t do a great job of that. No one can point to a granular-level requirement in GME curricula for training on billing and documentation. As a result, physicians enter practice, and the responsibility of teaching these skills falls on their practice. If they join a non-academic practice that needs to keep the lights on and manage finances, they often go through a year or two of intense indoctrination — learning what’s necessary to be a sustainable organization. We're improving, but there's still much work to do.
The second issue is value-based care. If we want to build sustainable departments, hospitals, and healthcare systems, we have to be good stewards of our resources. Physicians should understand device costs, value propositions, and clinical quality outcomes. We need to know how to achieve the best outcomes for our patients in the most economically responsible way.
At Cleveland Clinic, we’ve done a good job integrating fiscal responsibility into discussions. For instance, in a limb salvage case, we ask: What devices do we use? What are the alternatives? How did we escalate care? How do we achieve the best outcome cost-effectively without compromising patient care? These are the subjects we need to focus on to prepare the next generation of physicians.
Dr. Lee Kirksey is a vascular surgeon at Cleveland Clinic’s Heart, Vascular & Thoracic Institute, where he serves as Vice Chair of the Department of Vascular Surgery. Board-certified in vascular surgery and a registered vascular technologist, he specializes in complex vascular procedures, including limb salvage, carotid artery interventions, and aortic surgery. A native of Ohio, Dr. Kirksey trained at The Ohio State University and the University of Pennsylvania before joining Cleveland Clinic in 2011. He has performed over 10,000 vascular procedures and publishes extensively on vascular surgery and health disparities.
Thinking about the fellows you train — whether currently or over the past few years — is there a topic or focus area that you think deserves more attention among vascular fellows today?
Absolutely. That’s a great question because, over time, we see a cycle in our training and practice. In medicine, and especially in vascular surgery, there is a clear loop between how we are trained, the care patients seek, and the treatments we provide.
When I think about my trajectory, I trained during the introduction of endovascular aortic devices — the Talent endograft with Dr. Michael L. Marin and Dr. Bruce Brener — and later saw FDA approval of the predicate endovascular aneurysm repair device AneuRx. I was part of that era of transition, where we had strong open skills but were also learning endovascular techniques. As my practice evolved, like many others, I shifted to a balance of 50-60% endovascular and 40-50% open procedures. Now, after 13 years at Cleveland Clinic, much of my work involves revisions — hybrid cases combining endovascular and open techniques.
The open skill set I developed early in my career has been really valuable to me. That’s why, as someone involved in training the next generation, I emphasize the importance of a broad skill set.
I believe our competitive advantage, our secret sauce as vascular surgeons — while we collaborate closely with cardiology and interventional colleagues — is our ability to determine the best therapy for each patient. The right treatment, for the right patient, at the right time. A broad armamentarium allows us to provide the most value to our practice partners, consultants, and healthcare systems.
That is my key message to anyone in this field, be they surgeons or proceduralists: develop a broad skill set. When you complete your training, you should be prepared to practice anywhere in the country, recognizing that vascular disease varies by region in both phenotype and morphology. If you have a broad skill set, you'll be able to do that.
Given your many publications in peer-reviewed journals and beyond, how would you guide early-career physicians who want to get more involved in clinical research?
The caliber of emerging medical professionals in vascular surgery, cardiology, and cardiac surgery never ceases to amaze my colleagues and me. When interviewing these candidates, we often find ourselves thinking, Oh my gosh, if I were coming out now, I don't know how well I would have fared. It’s like watching athletes and realizing how much better and more prepared each new generation is. Their performance and skill levels are so much better. They are very prepared.
A big part of that is how early they get involved in research. One of the biggest barriers, in my mind, is access — knowing how to reach out to someone. I always encourage students to be fearless when it comes to reaching out to mentors. Sometimes, everyone is competing for access to someone who's extremely well-published and well-known, but just approaching someone about an interesting case can lead to publishing a case report or a small series. You learn so much from reading, preparing, and doing the hard work to gain expertise in an area.
I tell my students that once they've written a review paper, they become a mini-expert in that field. They’ve taken a deep dive, and they’ll never forget that body of knowledge. That’s my first recommendation: be fearless. Put yourself out there, ask someone senior — whether it's a resident or a staff member — if you can publish something with them. Take their suggestions, work hard, and be disciplined.
The second thing is what one of my former partners at Cleveland Clinic called the "finishing gene". Entrepreneurs also understand this — many of us have ambitious ideas, but we have to see them through to completion. No matter how big or small, we have to develop the discipline to finish it. Research involves more than just having a great question. There’s the process of collecting data, writing the paper, revising through editorial reviews, and finally, getting it published. That last step — the persistence to push it across the finish line — is crucial.
Even now, there’s nothing more rewarding than receiving an email confirming that your academic work has been accepted for publication. That feeling never gets old, and I see that excitement even in colleagues who have been publishing for years.
When treating calcified plaque — acknowledging patient variability — if you're approaching it from an endovascular perspective, do you have a go-to algorithm or a default way to treat it?
I’ve thought long and hard about how to make this a nuanced answer, but the truth is, I think intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) is a generational therapy — a treatment that is truly changing the field. There’s nothing we vascular specialists lament more than calcified blood vessels, whether open or endovascular. I tell my trainees all the time that this is our Achilles’ heel. It makes open operations more difficult and sometimes less durable. And with our previous endovascular armamentarium, it created significant barriers to achieving optimal outcomes.
My threshold for treating calcium isn’t very nuanced. Very early on, I turn to IVL. For full disclosure, I’m not a big atherectomy user. If there had been a therapy that preceded IVL in my practice, it probably would have been atherectomy. But in this day and age, I default to IVL. If there’s been a shift in my algorithm, it’s in using IVL more for in-stent restenosis as well.
We’ve published a couple of cases on this. Last year, we reported on patients in my practice with failed endovascular interventions using covered stents for aortoiliac occlusive disease. These cases involved under-expanded stents due to extrinsic calcium compression, and they responded remarkably well to IVL. The secondary results were on par with primary treatment using IVL inside a covered stent. From the aortoiliac level down to the tibial vessels, I don’t think there’s anything comparable right now. That’s not just a pandering answer — I truly think IVL is a game-changer. The increase in the adoption of IVL took place over a short period of time, which shows how effective people find this therapy to be.
In your career — whether early on or now with the fellows you train — are there business-related healthcare concepts that you either wish you had known about 10-15 years ago or would like fellows to have a better understanding of today?
I've been very involved with value-based care since arriving at Cleveland Clinic because our compensation and care delivery model are uniquely set up to excel in this space. I have some thoughts on what needs to evolve in how we train surgeons and vascular proceduralists.
First, historically, graduate medical education programs have done a poor job of preparing physicians in financial awareness — billing, documentation, reimbursement practices, and overall healthcare financial stewardship.
Plastic surgery, for example, has done a good job in this area. Many plastic surgeons enter private practice, which is predominantly a fee-for-service model and less insurance based. Because of that, their training programs require them to develop proficiency in billing, coding, and documentation. They learn how to describe procedures and how to bill properly because it directly impacts their livelihood.
In contrast, we don’t do a great job of that. No one can point to a granular-level requirement in GME curricula for training on billing and documentation. As a result, physicians enter practice, and the responsibility of teaching these skills falls on their practice. If they join a non-academic practice that needs to keep the lights on and manage finances, they often go through a year or two of intense indoctrination — learning what’s necessary to be a sustainable organization. We're improving, but there's still much work to do.
The second issue is value-based care. If we want to build sustainable departments, hospitals, and healthcare systems, we have to be good stewards of our resources. Physicians should understand device costs, value propositions, and clinical quality outcomes. We need to know how to achieve the best outcomes for our patients in the most economically responsible way.
At Cleveland Clinic, we’ve done a good job integrating fiscal responsibility into discussions. For instance, in a limb salvage case, we ask: What devices do we use? What are the alternatives? How did we escalate care? How do we achieve the best outcome cost-effectively without compromising patient care? These are the subjects we need to focus on to prepare the next generation of physicians.
Fun, Insightful Interviews with the
World's Brightest Physicians
Delivered straight to your inbox. Completely free. No spam.
Fun, Insightful Interviews with the
World's Brightest Physicians
Delivered straight to your inbox. Completely free. No spam.
Fun, Insightful Interviews with the
World's Brightest Physicians
Delivered straight to your inbox. Completely free. No spam.
Let's talk about healthcare disparities. You've spoken quite a bit about this and have published work on the topic. What are a few actionable steps that physicians, hospital administrators, and even industry professionals can take to improve in this area?
Since this interview is geared toward early-career professionals and trainees, I’d say there’s been a generational shift in understanding social drivers of health — factors such as the communities people come from and the availability, or lack, of resources that affect their health outcomes. Medical students today have a much stronger awareness of these issues than I did during my own training. I developed this understanding over time, but today’s students come in with it. When we interview them, they’re already socially conscious — not in a political sense, but in a mission-driven way. These are super smart people who could succeed in any field, but they choose medicine because they genuinely want to help people and improve their communities.
When they come into the clinic to shadow, they ask insightful questions about how we address social determinants of health. They are aware that a patient’s inability to get transportation, whether they live locally or in a rural area, can directly impact their outcome.
One of the key things we can do is leverage technology. In our electronic medical record system, we have pop-ups that remind us of social factors affecting our patients, whether it's food insecurity or transportation barriers contributing to their higher or no-show rates. Having these reminders keeps us aware and helps us adapt care plans. For example, if a patient struggles with transportation, offering a telehealth follow-up can prevent lapses in care.
Another important point is recognizing that these issues extend beyond urban areas. I practice in northeast Ohio, a region historically tied to the automobile and steel industries. When those jobs disappeared, entire communities across various racial and demographic groups were left struggling. It’s a mistake to think of healthcare disparities as only an urban issue. We see patients from the hinterlands of West Virginia, Southeastern Pennsylvania, or Southeastern Ohio who struggle just to make it to an appointment. In vascular surgery, especially with atherosclerosis and cardiometabolic disorders, we know that lower-income, under-resourced communities are disproportionately affected. We need to be proactive, and sometimes that means developing satellite models to bring care to these communities rather than expecting them to come to us. Even something as simple as ensuring follow-up for chronic conditions can make a big difference.
Lastly, there’s a growing awareness among physicians — especially in the younger generation — that we should be involved upstream in policy discussions that shape healthcare delivery. Take atherosclerotic disease and smoking rates, for example. In Cleveland, the smoking rate is around 35%, compared to a national average of 11%. That disparity is rooted in historically targeted advertising by the tobacco industry. These are policy issues where physicians need to be at the table. We have a unique clinical perspective and credibility in patient advocacy that no one else can bring to these discussions. Being actively involved in policy efforts can drive meaningful change in health outcomes.
For younger physicians or colleagues looking to expand their role — whether through device-related discussions, presenting data at conferences, or refining their communication skills — what has helped you evolve in training and effectively conveying clinical data and concepts as you've progressed throughout your career?
I've learned a lot from the people I’ve trained and worked alongside. A good friend, mentor, and role model of mine is Dr. Dan Clair — an excellent physician who has a talent for building industry relationships in a way that benefits his patients, nurtures his intellectual and clinical curiosity, and supports industry collaboration. We've had long conversations about identifying patient needs and engaging with industry in a way that’s mutually beneficial — not exploitative, but a win-win.
Part of this comes down to being open to conversations — genuine, free-flowing discussions and not quid pro quo — talking openly about clinical challenges, brainstorming solutions [with industry professionals], and thinking beyond the usual approaches. Conversations that don’t necessarily lead to immediate results but plant seeds for future ideas. So, my first takeaway is to be open to free-thinking conversations with industry and build those partnerships.
The second is recognizing that our patients benefit the most when we share knowledge with our peers. Dan once told me that some physicians hesitate to share insights, fearing they might give their competitors an edge. But when we all contribute, we elevate the entire vascular care community. We challenge each other, refine our approaches, and ultimately improve patient care.
Whether with local or national peers, these discussions always lead to valuable learning. Approaching them with humility and understanding that we all have something to learn, ensures that everyone benefits.
Let’s transition to some fun, rapid-fire questions. Do you listen to music in the OR? If so, what are the top songs on your playlist?
Yeah, that’s a tough one because I’m not really a “favorites” type of guy. But I can tell you about certain settings where particular songs come to mind. If you’ve ever watched Grey’s Anatomy, you know how they have those closing songs. For me, it’s about the middle-of-the-night cases — when I’m in a long, tough surgery, exhausted, the Beastie Boys’ No Sleep Till Brooklyn comes to mind. It’s got a rock-and-roll beat, high energy — perfect for when you’re tired but still giving your best for the patient. There’s nothing like that chorus line kicking in at the end of a long case.
More recently, my team has adopted a kind of service mantra. There’s a song by Lupe Fiasco and Matthew Santos called Superstar. It’s become our victory song, our end-zone celebration when we see daylight at the end of a case. The residents seem to love it too.
How about movies? Do you have a few all-time favorites?
I’m kind of boring — not a big movie guy. But I do have two movie situations. My two boys and wife love sci-fi, and although I’m not a huge sci-fi fan myself, watching Star Wars or any contemporary sci-fi movie gives me a chance to be the cool dad and husband. Earns me points with my family!
Then, for my wife, if we get a moment together, I’ll put on a rom-com. Now, I’ve got to admit, I’m not really a rom-com guy, but if I had to pick one, I’d go with Hitch with Will Smith. It has enough humor to get me through the movie and it keeps my wife happy. So yeah, Hitch is probably my go-to.
Take us back to your late 20s. You're done with medical school, your career is starting to take off. Is there anything you’d tell yourself? What would you whisper into the ears of young Dr. Kirksey?
This one’s easy because it’s something I would definitely tell my younger self — and now I have the chance to share it with our trainees. Early in our careers, coming out of undergrad and medical school, we’re so hyper-focused on academic success that we sometimes neglect personal, social, and family priorities. In my case, I was extremely disciplined, and I missed birthdays, even my own. I thought those things were just sentimental, but with time, I’ve gained perspective.
Now, I understand that time isn’t promised. I want our trainees and young professionals to work hard, and I expect my practice partners to do the same, but we also have to remember what truly matters. Our families, our friends, and personal relationships are irreplaceable. We can’t relive time or experiences.
I really try to encourage the people around me, especially the younger ones, to respect time and prioritize their loved ones. Because often, the people we neglect the most when we’re highly focused are the ones who matter the most.
Are there any congresses, podium presentations, or clinical research projects you'd like to highlight?
Yes, absolutely. I'd like to highlight one effort that took a good two or three years under the leadership of Dr. Heather Gornik from University Hospitals. I was fortunate to participate in the AHA, ACC, and multiple society writing statements for peripheral artery disease (PAD) guidelines, including contributions from the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) and the Association of Black Cardiologists (ABC). These guidelines were published in 2024, and I think they are a tremendous accomplishment.
They’re very well written from a multidisciplinary perspective, incorporating input from cardiology, interventional radiology, vascular surgery, and vascular medicine. I’m incredibly proud of the work our team did. As you can imagine, distributing and socializing new guidelines is challenging, but I strongly encourage your audience to take the time to read through them. They bring a wealth of guidance on the contemporary management of PAD patients.
Let's talk about healthcare disparities. You've spoken quite a bit about this and have published work on the topic. What are a few actionable steps that physicians, hospital administrators, and even industry professionals can take to improve in this area?
Since this interview is geared toward early-career professionals and trainees, I’d say there’s been a generational shift in understanding social drivers of health — factors such as the communities people come from and the availability, or lack, of resources that affect their health outcomes. Medical students today have a much stronger awareness of these issues than I did during my own training. I developed this understanding over time, but today’s students come in with it. When we interview them, they’re already socially conscious — not in a political sense, but in a mission-driven way. These are super smart people who could succeed in any field, but they choose medicine because they genuinely want to help people and improve their communities.
When they come into the clinic to shadow, they ask insightful questions about how we address social determinants of health. They are aware that a patient’s inability to get transportation, whether they live locally or in a rural area, can directly impact their outcome.
One of the key things we can do is leverage technology. In our electronic medical record system, we have pop-ups that remind us of social factors affecting our patients, whether it's food insecurity or transportation barriers contributing to their higher or no-show rates. Having these reminders keeps us aware and helps us adapt care plans. For example, if a patient struggles with transportation, offering a telehealth follow-up can prevent lapses in care.
Another important point is recognizing that these issues extend beyond urban areas. I practice in northeast Ohio, a region historically tied to the automobile and steel industries. When those jobs disappeared, entire communities across various racial and demographic groups were left struggling. It’s a mistake to think of healthcare disparities as only an urban issue. We see patients from the hinterlands of West Virginia, Southeastern Pennsylvania, or Southeastern Ohio who struggle just to make it to an appointment. In vascular surgery, especially with atherosclerosis and cardiometabolic disorders, we know that lower-income, under-resourced communities are disproportionately affected. We need to be proactive, and sometimes that means developing satellite models to bring care to these communities rather than expecting them to come to us. Even something as simple as ensuring follow-up for chronic conditions can make a big difference.
Lastly, there’s a growing awareness among physicians — especially in the younger generation — that we should be involved upstream in policy discussions that shape healthcare delivery. Take atherosclerotic disease and smoking rates, for example. In Cleveland, the smoking rate is around 35%, compared to a national average of 11%. That disparity is rooted in historically targeted advertising by the tobacco industry. These are policy issues where physicians need to be at the table. We have a unique clinical perspective and credibility in patient advocacy that no one else can bring to these discussions. Being actively involved in policy efforts can drive meaningful change in health outcomes.
For younger physicians or colleagues looking to expand their role — whether through device-related discussions, presenting data at conferences, or refining their communication skills — what has helped you evolve in training and effectively conveying clinical data and concepts as you've progressed throughout your career?
I've learned a lot from the people I’ve trained and worked alongside. A good friend, mentor, and role model of mine is Dr. Dan Clair — an excellent physician who has a talent for building industry relationships in a way that benefits his patients, nurtures his intellectual and clinical curiosity, and supports industry collaboration. We've had long conversations about identifying patient needs and engaging with industry in a way that’s mutually beneficial — not exploitative, but a win-win.
Part of this comes down to being open to conversations — genuine, free-flowing discussions and not quid pro quo — talking openly about clinical challenges, brainstorming solutions [with industry professionals], and thinking beyond the usual approaches. Conversations that don’t necessarily lead to immediate results but plant seeds for future ideas. So, my first takeaway is to be open to free-thinking conversations with industry and build those partnerships.
The second is recognizing that our patients benefit the most when we share knowledge with our peers. Dan once told me that some physicians hesitate to share insights, fearing they might give their competitors an edge. But when we all contribute, we elevate the entire vascular care community. We challenge each other, refine our approaches, and ultimately improve patient care.
Whether with local or national peers, these discussions always lead to valuable learning. Approaching them with humility and understanding that we all have something to learn, ensures that everyone benefits.
Let’s transition to some fun, rapid-fire questions. Do you listen to music in the OR? If so, what are the top songs on your playlist?
Yeah, that’s a tough one because I’m not really a “favorites” type of guy. But I can tell you about certain settings where particular songs come to mind. If you’ve ever watched Grey’s Anatomy, you know how they have those closing songs. For me, it’s about the middle-of-the-night cases — when I’m in a long, tough surgery, exhausted, the Beastie Boys’ No Sleep Till Brooklyn comes to mind. It’s got a rock-and-roll beat, high energy — perfect for when you’re tired but still giving your best for the patient. There’s nothing like that chorus line kicking in at the end of a long case.
More recently, my team has adopted a kind of service mantra. There’s a song by Lupe Fiasco and Matthew Santos called Superstar. It’s become our victory song, our end-zone celebration when we see daylight at the end of a case. The residents seem to love it too.
How about movies? Do you have a few all-time favorites?
I’m kind of boring — not a big movie guy. But I do have two movie situations. My two boys and wife love sci-fi, and although I’m not a huge sci-fi fan myself, watching Star Wars or any contemporary sci-fi movie gives me a chance to be the cool dad and husband. Earns me points with my family!
Then, for my wife, if we get a moment together, I’ll put on a rom-com. Now, I’ve got to admit, I’m not really a rom-com guy, but if I had to pick one, I’d go with Hitch with Will Smith. It has enough humor to get me through the movie and it keeps my wife happy. So yeah, Hitch is probably my go-to.
Take us back to your late 20s. You're done with medical school, your career is starting to take off. Is there anything you’d tell yourself? What would you whisper into the ears of young Dr. Kirksey?
This one’s easy because it’s something I would definitely tell my younger self — and now I have the chance to share it with our trainees. Early in our careers, coming out of undergrad and medical school, we’re so hyper-focused on academic success that we sometimes neglect personal, social, and family priorities. In my case, I was extremely disciplined, and I missed birthdays, even my own. I thought those things were just sentimental, but with time, I’ve gained perspective.
Now, I understand that time isn’t promised. I want our trainees and young professionals to work hard, and I expect my practice partners to do the same, but we also have to remember what truly matters. Our families, our friends, and personal relationships are irreplaceable. We can’t relive time or experiences.
I really try to encourage the people around me, especially the younger ones, to respect time and prioritize their loved ones. Because often, the people we neglect the most when we’re highly focused are the ones who matter the most.
Are there any congresses, podium presentations, or clinical research projects you'd like to highlight?
Yes, absolutely. I'd like to highlight one effort that took a good two or three years under the leadership of Dr. Heather Gornik from University Hospitals. I was fortunate to participate in the AHA, ACC, and multiple society writing statements for peripheral artery disease (PAD) guidelines, including contributions from the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) and the Association of Black Cardiologists (ABC). These guidelines were published in 2024, and I think they are a tremendous accomplishment.
They’re very well written from a multidisciplinary perspective, incorporating input from cardiology, interventional radiology, vascular surgery, and vascular medicine. I’m incredibly proud of the work our team did. As you can imagine, distributing and socializing new guidelines is challenging, but I strongly encourage your audience to take the time to read through them. They bring a wealth of guidance on the contemporary management of PAD patients.
Let's talk about healthcare disparities. You've spoken quite a bit about this and have published work on the topic. What are a few actionable steps that physicians, hospital administrators, and even industry professionals can take to improve in this area?
Since this interview is geared toward early-career professionals and trainees, I’d say there’s been a generational shift in understanding social drivers of health — factors such as the communities people come from and the availability, or lack, of resources that affect their health outcomes. Medical students today have a much stronger awareness of these issues than I did during my own training. I developed this understanding over time, but today’s students come in with it. When we interview them, they’re already socially conscious — not in a political sense, but in a mission-driven way. These are super smart people who could succeed in any field, but they choose medicine because they genuinely want to help people and improve their communities.
When they come into the clinic to shadow, they ask insightful questions about how we address social determinants of health. They are aware that a patient’s inability to get transportation, whether they live locally or in a rural area, can directly impact their outcome.
One of the key things we can do is leverage technology. In our electronic medical record system, we have pop-ups that remind us of social factors affecting our patients, whether it's food insecurity or transportation barriers contributing to their higher or no-show rates. Having these reminders keeps us aware and helps us adapt care plans. For example, if a patient struggles with transportation, offering a telehealth follow-up can prevent lapses in care.
Another important point is recognizing that these issues extend beyond urban areas. I practice in northeast Ohio, a region historically tied to the automobile and steel industries. When those jobs disappeared, entire communities across various racial and demographic groups were left struggling. It’s a mistake to think of healthcare disparities as only an urban issue. We see patients from the hinterlands of West Virginia, Southeastern Pennsylvania, or Southeastern Ohio who struggle just to make it to an appointment. In vascular surgery, especially with atherosclerosis and cardiometabolic disorders, we know that lower-income, under-resourced communities are disproportionately affected. We need to be proactive, and sometimes that means developing satellite models to bring care to these communities rather than expecting them to come to us. Even something as simple as ensuring follow-up for chronic conditions can make a big difference.
Lastly, there’s a growing awareness among physicians — especially in the younger generation — that we should be involved upstream in policy discussions that shape healthcare delivery. Take atherosclerotic disease and smoking rates, for example. In Cleveland, the smoking rate is around 35%, compared to a national average of 11%. That disparity is rooted in historically targeted advertising by the tobacco industry. These are policy issues where physicians need to be at the table. We have a unique clinical perspective and credibility in patient advocacy that no one else can bring to these discussions. Being actively involved in policy efforts can drive meaningful change in health outcomes.
For younger physicians or colleagues looking to expand their role — whether through device-related discussions, presenting data at conferences, or refining their communication skills — what has helped you evolve in training and effectively conveying clinical data and concepts as you've progressed throughout your career?
I've learned a lot from the people I’ve trained and worked alongside. A good friend, mentor, and role model of mine is Dr. Dan Clair — an excellent physician who has a talent for building industry relationships in a way that benefits his patients, nurtures his intellectual and clinical curiosity, and supports industry collaboration. We've had long conversations about identifying patient needs and engaging with industry in a way that’s mutually beneficial — not exploitative, but a win-win.
Part of this comes down to being open to conversations — genuine, free-flowing discussions and not quid pro quo — talking openly about clinical challenges, brainstorming solutions [with industry professionals], and thinking beyond the usual approaches. Conversations that don’t necessarily lead to immediate results but plant seeds for future ideas. So, my first takeaway is to be open to free-thinking conversations with industry and build those partnerships.
The second is recognizing that our patients benefit the most when we share knowledge with our peers. Dan once told me that some physicians hesitate to share insights, fearing they might give their competitors an edge. But when we all contribute, we elevate the entire vascular care community. We challenge each other, refine our approaches, and ultimately improve patient care.
Whether with local or national peers, these discussions always lead to valuable learning. Approaching them with humility and understanding that we all have something to learn, ensures that everyone benefits.
Let’s transition to some fun, rapid-fire questions. Do you listen to music in the OR? If so, what are the top songs on your playlist?
Yeah, that’s a tough one because I’m not really a “favorites” type of guy. But I can tell you about certain settings where particular songs come to mind. If you’ve ever watched Grey’s Anatomy, you know how they have those closing songs. For me, it’s about the middle-of-the-night cases — when I’m in a long, tough surgery, exhausted, the Beastie Boys’ No Sleep Till Brooklyn comes to mind. It’s got a rock-and-roll beat, high energy — perfect for when you’re tired but still giving your best for the patient. There’s nothing like that chorus line kicking in at the end of a long case.
More recently, my team has adopted a kind of service mantra. There’s a song by Lupe Fiasco and Matthew Santos called Superstar. It’s become our victory song, our end-zone celebration when we see daylight at the end of a case. The residents seem to love it too.
How about movies? Do you have a few all-time favorites?
I’m kind of boring — not a big movie guy. But I do have two movie situations. My two boys and wife love sci-fi, and although I’m not a huge sci-fi fan myself, watching Star Wars or any contemporary sci-fi movie gives me a chance to be the cool dad and husband. Earns me points with my family!
Then, for my wife, if we get a moment together, I’ll put on a rom-com. Now, I’ve got to admit, I’m not really a rom-com guy, but if I had to pick one, I’d go with Hitch with Will Smith. It has enough humor to get me through the movie and it keeps my wife happy. So yeah, Hitch is probably my go-to.
Take us back to your late 20s. You're done with medical school, your career is starting to take off. Is there anything you’d tell yourself? What would you whisper into the ears of young Dr. Kirksey?
This one’s easy because it’s something I would definitely tell my younger self — and now I have the chance to share it with our trainees. Early in our careers, coming out of undergrad and medical school, we’re so hyper-focused on academic success that we sometimes neglect personal, social, and family priorities. In my case, I was extremely disciplined, and I missed birthdays, even my own. I thought those things were just sentimental, but with time, I’ve gained perspective.
Now, I understand that time isn’t promised. I want our trainees and young professionals to work hard, and I expect my practice partners to do the same, but we also have to remember what truly matters. Our families, our friends, and personal relationships are irreplaceable. We can’t relive time or experiences.
I really try to encourage the people around me, especially the younger ones, to respect time and prioritize their loved ones. Because often, the people we neglect the most when we’re highly focused are the ones who matter the most.
Are there any congresses, podium presentations, or clinical research projects you'd like to highlight?
Yes, absolutely. I'd like to highlight one effort that took a good two or three years under the leadership of Dr. Heather Gornik from University Hospitals. I was fortunate to participate in the AHA, ACC, and multiple society writing statements for peripheral artery disease (PAD) guidelines, including contributions from the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) and the Association of Black Cardiologists (ABC). These guidelines were published in 2024, and I think they are a tremendous accomplishment.
They’re very well written from a multidisciplinary perspective, incorporating input from cardiology, interventional radiology, vascular surgery, and vascular medicine. I’m incredibly proud of the work our team did. As you can imagine, distributing and socializing new guidelines is challenging, but I strongly encourage your audience to take the time to read through them. They bring a wealth of guidance on the contemporary management of PAD patients.
