Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in a patient with previous history of simultaneous orthotopic liver kidney transplantation.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Salimi J
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8382315 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Objective: To find a new predictor of endoleak (EL) and aneurysm sac expansion after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), we evaluated the platelet count recovery (PCR) process after EVAR. Materials and Methods: Two hundred five patients treated with elective EVAR from 2007 to 2015 were retrospectively analyzed. We compared the platelet count ratio until postoperative day (POD) 7 to the presurgical baseline between patients with and without persistent EL (≥ 6 months). Subsequently, we calculated the optimal platelet count ratio for distinguishing persistent EL using receiver-operating characteristics analysis. A platelet count ratio on POD7 ≥118% was defined as the PCR. We evaluated the PCR's influence on the cumulative aneurysm sac expansion rate. Results: The average platelet count ratio on POD7 rose above baseline (112%), and the ratio was attenuated by persistent EL (103%). Of 205 patients, 126 (61%) were assigned to the disturbed PCR group (PCR(-) group). Cumulative aneurysm sac expansion rate was higher in the PCR(-) group than the PCR(+) group (34.4% vs. 12.8% in 5 years, p=0.01). Conclusion: Disturbed PCR after EVAR may be associated with ELs and eventual aneurysm sac expansion.
| S-EPMC7991710 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has dramatically changed the management of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) as the number of open aneurysm repairs have declined over time. This report compares AAA-related demographics, operative data, complications, and mortality after treatment by open aneurysm repair or EVAR.We retrospectively reviewed 136 patients with AAAs who were treated over an 8-year time period with open aneurysm repair or EVAR.The mean age of the EVAR group was higher than that of the open repair group (p=0.001), and hospital mortality did not differ significantly between groups (p=0.360). However, overall survival was significantly lower in the EVAR group (p=0.033).Although EVAR is the primary treatment modality for elderly patients, it would be ideal to set slightly more stringent criteria within the anatomical guidelines contained in the instructions for use of the EVAR device when treating younger patients.
| S-EPMC5548202 | biostudies-other
Project description:BACKGROUND:Case series and a post hoc subgroup analysis of a large randomized trial have suggested a potential benefit in treating ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (rAAAs) using endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) with local anaesthesia (LA) rather than general anaesthesia (GA). The uptake and outcomes of LA in clinical practice remain unknown. METHODS:The UK National Vascular Registry was interrogated for patients presenting with rAAA managed with EVAR under different modes of anaesthesia between 1 January 2014 and 31 December 2016. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included: the number of centres performing EVAR under LA; the proportion of patients receiving this technique; duration of hospital stay; and postoperative complications. RESULTS:Some 3101 patients with rAAA were treated in 72 hospitals during the study: 2306 underwent on open procedure and 795 had EVAR (LA, 319; GA, 435; regional anaesthesia, 41). Overall, 56 of 72 hospitals (78 per cent) offered LA for EVAR of rAAA. Baseline characteristics and morphology were similar across the three EVAR subgroups. Patients who had surgery under LA had a lower in-hospital mortality rate than patients who received GA (59 of 319 (18·5 per cent) versus 122 of 435 (28·0 per cent)), and this was unchanged after adjustment for factors known to influence survival (adjusted hazard ratio 0·62, 95 per cent c.i. 0·45 to 0·85; P = 0·003). Median hospital stay and postoperative morbidity from other complications were similar. CONCLUSION:The use of LA for EVAR of rAAA has been adopted widely in the UK. Mortality rates appear lower than in patients undergoing EVAR with GA.
| S-EPMC6519219 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAbdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair has been performed by various surgical specialties for many years. Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) may be a disruptive technology, having an impact on which specialties care for patients with AAA. Therefore, we examined the proportion of AAA repairs performed by various specialties over time in the United States and evaluated the impact of the introduction of EVAR.MethodsThe Nationwide Inpatient Sample (2001-2009) was queried for intact and ruptured AAA and for open repair and EVAR. Specific procedures were used to identify vascular surgeons (VSs), cardiac surgeons (CSs), and general surgeons (GSs) as well as interventional cardiologists and interventional radiologists for states that reported unique treating physician identifiers. Annual procedure volumes were subsequently calculated for each specialty.ResultsWe identified 108,587 EVARs and 85,080 open AAA repairs (3011 EVARs and 12,811 open repairs for ruptured AAA). VSs performed an increasing proportion of AAA repairs during the study period (52% in 2001 to 66% in 2009; P < .001). GSs and CSs performed fewer repairs during the same period (25% to 17% [P < .001] and 19% to 13% [P < .001], respectively). EVAR was increasingly used for intact (33% to 78% of annual cases; P < .001) as well as ruptured AAA repair (5% to 28%; P < .001). The proportion of intact open repairs performed by VSs increased from 52% to 65% (P < .001), whereas for EVAR, the proportion went from 60% to 67% (P < .001). The proportion performed by VSs increased for ruptured open repairs from 37% to 53% (P < .001) and for ruptured EVARs from 28% to 73% (P < .001). Compared with treatment by VSs, treatment by a CS (0.55 [0.53-0.56]) and GS (0.66 [0.64-0.68]) was associated with a decreased likelihood of undergoing endovascular rather than open AAA repair.ConclusionsVSs are performing an increasing majority of AAA repairs, in large part driven by the increased utilization of EVAR for both intact and ruptured AAA repair. However, GSs and CSs still perform AAA repair. Further studies should examine the implications of these national trends on the outcome of AAA repair.
| S-EPMC4550486 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Murine models have proved instrumental in studying various aspects of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), from identification of underlying pathophysiologic changes to the development of novel therapeutic strategies. In the current study, we describe a new model in which an elastase-treated donor aorta is transplanted to a recipient mouse and allowed to progress to aneurysm. We hypothesized that by transplanting an elastase-treated abdominal aorta of one genotype to a recipient mouse of a different genotype, one can differentiate pathophysiologic factors that are intrinsic to the aortic wall from those stemming from circulation and other organs.Elastase-treated aorta was transplanted to the infrarenal abdominal aorta of recipient mice by end-to-side microsurgical anastomosis. Heat-inactivated elastase-treated aorta was used as a control. Syngeneic transplants were performed with use of 12-week-old C57BL/6 littermates. Transplant grafts were harvested from recipient mice on day 7 or day 14 after surgery. The aneurysm outcome was measured by aortic expansion, elastin degradation, proinflammatory cytokine expression, and inflammatory cell infiltration and compared with that produced with the established, conventional elastase infusion model.The surgical technique success rate was 75.6%, and the 14-day survival rate was 51.1%. By day 14 after surgery, all of the elastase-treated transplanted abdominal aortas had dilated and progressed to AAAs, defined as 100% or more increase in the maximal external diameter compared with that measured before elastase perfusion, whereas none of the transplanted aortas pretreated with inactive elastase became aneurysmal (percentage increase in maximum aortic diameter: 159.36% ± 23.27%, transplanted elastase, vs 41.46% ± 9.34%, transplanted inactive elastase). Aneurysm parameters, including elastin degradation and infiltration of macrophages and T lymphocytes, were found to be identical to those observed in the conventional elastase model. Quantitative polymerase chain reaction analysis revealed similarly increased levels of proinflammatory cytokines (relative changes of mRNA in the conventional elastase model vs transplant model: tumor necrosis factor ?, 1.71 ± 0.27 vs 2.93 ± 0.86; monocyte chemoattractant protein 1, 2.36 ± 0.58 vs 2.87 ± 0.51; chemokine (C-C motif) ligand 5, 3.37 ± 0.92 vs 3.46 ± 0.83; and interferon ?, 3.09 ± 0.83 vs 5.30 ± 1.69). Using green fluorescent protein transgenic mice as donors or recipients, we demonstrated that a small quantity of mononuclear leukocytes in the transplant grafts bared the genotype of the donors.Transplanted elastase-treated abdominal aorta could develop to aneurysm in recipient mice. This AAA transplant model can be used to examine how the microenvironment of a transplanted aneurysmal aorta may be altered by the contributions of the "global" environment of the recipient.
| S-EPMC4277509 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Purpose:To evaluate the aortic neck anatomy in Korean patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). Materials and Methods:We examined computed tomography scans of 343 patients with AAAs (?5.5 cm for men or ?5 cm for women) between 2009 and 2018. Eligibility of neck anatomy for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) was assessed with the standard instructions for use (IFU) (length ?15 mm, suprarenal angulation (SRA) ?45°, infrarenal angulation (IRA) ?60°, and diameter 18-32 mm) and the extended IFU (length ?10 mm, SRA ?60°, IRA ?75°, and diameter 17-32 mm). Results:There were 71 women (20.7%), and 61 patients (17.8%) with rupture. Women had smaller neck diameters (21.3 vs. 23.4 mm, P<0.001 for proximal neck; 22.2 vs. 24.5 mm, P<0.001 for distal neck), and higher angulations (51.5° vs. 37.8°, P<0.001 for SRA; 77.7° vs. 57.0°, P<0.001 for IRA) than men. However, the neck length was not significantly different. Patients with ruptured AAAs had shorter neck lengths (21.0 vs. 26.8 mm, P=0.005) than those with intact AAAs. However, the neck diameters and angulations were not significantly different. EVAR eligibility for standard and extended IFUs was found in 37.5% and 55.1% of men, and 11.3% and 25.4% of women (P<0.001 for both IFUs); neck anatomy was eligible in 34.0% of intact AAAs and 23.0% of ruptured AAAs (P=0.098). Conclusion:A significant proportion of the Korean patients did not meet the IFU for EVAR, mainly due to the angulated neck. Women, and patients with ruptured AAAs, were less likely to meet the IFU criteria.
| S-EPMC7333089 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:Lifelong imaging follow-up is essential to the safe and appropriate management of patients who undergo endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). We sought to evaluate the rate of compliance with imaging follow-up after EVAR and to identify factors associated with being lost to imaging follow-up. METHODS:We identified a 20% sample of continuously enrolled Medicare beneficiaries who underwent EVAR between 2001 and 2008. Using data through 2010 from Medicare Inpatient, Outpatient, and Carrier files, we identified all abdominal imaging studies that may have been performed for EVAR follow-up. Patients were considered lost to annual imaging follow-up if they did not undergo any abdominal imaging study within their last 2 years of follow-up. Multivariable models were constructed to identify independent factors associated with being lost to annual imaging follow-up. RESULTS:Among 19,962 patients who underwent EVAR, the incidence of loss to annual imaging follow-up at 5 years after EVAR was 50%. Primary factors associated with being lost to annual imaging follow-up were advanced age (age 65-69 years, reference; age 75-79 years: hazard ratio [HR], 1.23; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.15-1.32; age 80-85 years: HR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.35-1.55; age >85 years: HR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.88-2.20) and presentation with an urgent/emergent intact aneurysm (HR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.20-1.35) or ruptured aneurysm (HR, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.63-2.08). Additional independent factors included several previously diagnosed chronic diseases and South and West regions of the United States. CONCLUSIONS:Annual imaging follow-up compliance after EVAR in the United States is significantly below recommended levels. Quality improvement efforts to encourage improved compliance with imaging follow-up, especially in older patients with multiple comorbidities and in those who underwent EVAR urgently or for rupture, are necessary.
| S-EPMC4276501 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVES:Emergency endovascular aneurysm repair (eEVAR) may improve outcomes for patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (RAAA). The study aim was to compare the outcomes for eEVAR with conventional open surgical repair for the treatment of RAAA. SETTING:A systematic review of relevant publications was performed. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing eEVAR with open surgical repair for RAAA were included. PARTICIPANTS:3 RCTs were included, with a total of 761 patients with RAAA. INTERVENTIONS:Meta-analysis was performed with fixed-effects models with ORs and 95% CIs for dichotomous data and mean differences with 95% CIs for continuous data. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES:Primary outcome was short-term mortality. Secondary outcome measures included aneurysm-specific and general complication rates, quality of life and economic analysis. RESULTS:Overall risk of bias was low. There was no difference between the 2 interventions on 30-day (or in-hospital) mortality, OR 0.91 (95% CI 0.67 to 1.22; p=0.52). 30-day complications included myocardial infarction, stroke, composite cardiac complications, renal complications, severe bowel ischaemia, spinal cord ischaemia, reoperation, amputation and respiratory failure. Reporting was incomplete, and no robust conclusion was drawn. For complication outcomes that did include at least 2 studies in the meta-analysis, there was no clear evidence to support a difference between eEVAR and open repair. Longer term outcomes and cost per patient were evaluated in only a single study, thus precluding definite conclusions. CONCLUSIONS:Outcomes between eEVAR and open repair, specifically 30-day mortality, are similar. However, further high-quality trials are required, as the paucity of data currently limits the conclusions.
| S-EPMC4762122 | biostudies-other
Project description:Concomitant procedures during endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) of an abdominal aortic aneurysm are performed to facilitate endograft delivery, to simultaneously treat unrelated conditions, or to resolve intraoperative pitfalls. The frequency and perioperative impact of these procedures are not well described. This study aimed to assess the frequency and perioperative impact of various concomitant procedures performed at the time of EVAR.We included all elective EVARs in the Vascular Study Group of New England between January 2003 and November 2014 and identified those with and those without concomitant procedures. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to establish the independent association between concomitant procedures and perioperative outcomes.The study included 4033 patients, with 1168 (29.0%) patients undergoing one or more additional procedures. Independent risk factors for 30-day mortality were concomitant femoral endarterectomy (odds ratio [OR], 4.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.1-11.2) and renal angioplasty or stenting (OR, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.2-8.3). Postoperative bowel ischemia was associated with hypogastric embolization (OR, 3.8; 95% CI, 1.1-13.4) and iliac angioplasty or stenting (OR, 3.5; 95% CI, 1.3-9.6). Leg ischemia was associated with unplanned graft extension (OR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.02-5.0), other artery reconstruction (OR, 5.2; 95% CI, 1.8-15.1), thromboembolectomy (OR, 5.2; 95% CI, 1.3-20.8), and repair of arterial injury (OR, 4.6; 95% CI, 1.2-18.3). Risk factors for deterioration of renal function were iliofemoral bypass (OR, 3.9; 95% CI, 1.3-12.2), other artery reconstruction (OR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.3-5.8), renal angioplasty or stenting (OR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.3-4.6), and repair of arterial injury (OR, 4.5; 95% CI, 1.6-12.2). Myocardial infarction was associated with femorofemoral bypass (OR, 3.9; 95% CI, 1.7-8.7), other artery reconstruction (OR, 3.9; 95% CI, 1.6-9.2), and repair of arterial injury (OR, 6.1; 95% CI, 1.8-21.0). Wound complications were predicted by femorofemoral bypass (OR, 13.4; 95% CI, 5.8-31.1).Concomitant procedures during EVAR are associated with increased postoperative morbidity and mortality. The need for performing concomitant procedures should be carefully considered. The morbidity associated with intraoperative complications highlights the importance of avoidance of arterial injury and thromboembolic events where possible.
| S-EPMC4884140 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Clinical and imaging surveillance practices following endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for intact abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) vary considerably and compliance with recommended lifelong surveillance is poor. The aim of this study was to develop a dynamic prognostic model to enable stratification of patients at risk of future secondary aortic rupture or the need for intervention to prevent rupture (rupture-preventing reintervention) to enable the development of personalized surveillance intervals. METHODS:Baseline data and repeat measurements of postoperative aneurysm sac diameter from the EVAR-1 and EVAR-2 trials were used to develop the model, with external validation in a cohort from a single-centre vascular database. Longitudinal mixed-effects models were fitted to trajectories of sac diameter, and model-predicted sac diameter and rate of growth were used in prognostic Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS:Some 785 patients from the EVAR trials were included, of whom 155 (19·7 per cent) experienced at least one rupture or required a rupture-preventing reintervention during follow-up. An increased risk was associated with preoperative AAA size, rate of sac growth and the number of previously detected complications. A prognostic model using predicted sac growth alone had good discrimination at 2?years (C-index 0·68), 3?years (C-index 0·72) and 5?years (C-index 0·75) after operation and had excellent external validation (C-index 0·76-0·79). More than 5?years after operation, growth rates above 1?mm/year had a sensitivity of over 80 per cent and specificity over 50 per cent in identifying events occurring within 2?years. CONCLUSION:Secondary sac growth is an important predictor of rupture or rupture-preventing reintervention to enable the development of personalized surveillance intervals. A dynamic prognostic model has the potential to tailor surveillance by identifying a large proportion of patients who may require less intensive follow-up.
| S-EPMC6175165 | biostudies-literature