No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Hybrid TAAA repair is technically feasible in selected cases. Perioperative morbidity and mortality were considerable in our subset of high-risk patients with prior aortic surgery, but no aneurysm-related or procedure-related complications were reported at mid-term follow-up. Hybrid TAAA repair did not lead to a significant improvement in outcomes compared with open TAAA repair in a similar group of patients. Larger series are required for valid statistical comparisons and longer follow-ups are necessary to evaluate the durability of hybrid repairs.

Background Among asymptomatic patients with severe carotid artery stenosis but no recent stroke or transient cerebral ischaemia, either carotid artery stenting (CAS) or carotid endarterectomy (CEA) can restore patency and reduce long-term stroke risks. However, from recent national registry data, each option causes about 1% procedural risk of disabling stroke or death. Comparison of their long-term protective effects requires large-scale randomised evidence.Methods ACST-2 is an international multicentre randomised trial of CAS versus CEA among asymptomatic patients with severe stenosis thought to require intervention, interpreted with all other relevant trials. Patients were eligible if they had severe unilateral or bilateral carotid artery stenosis and both doctor and patient agreed that a carotid procedure should be undertaken, but they were substantially uncertain which one to choose. Patients were randomly allocated to CAS or CEA and followed up at 1 month and then annually, for a mean 5 years. Procedural events were those within 30 days of the intervention. Intention-to-treat analyses are provided. Analyses including procedural hazards use tabular methods. Analyses and meta-analyses of non-procedural strokes use Kaplan-Meier and log-rank methods. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN21144362.

Abdominal aortic aneurysm tissue and peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) of 41 consecutive subjects undergoing abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery were analyzed by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for the presence of Chlamydia pneumoniae, Mycoplasma pneumoniae, and Helicobacter pylori DNA. Twenty patients (49%) were positive for C. pneumoniae DNA-16 (39%) in both PBMC and aneurysm tissue, 3 (7.3%) in PBMC only, and 1 (2.4%) in the artery specimen only. Previous exposure to C. pneumoniae was confirmed in 19 (95%) of the 20 PCR positive subjects by C. pneumoniae-specific serology, using the microimmunofluorescence test. None was positive for H. pylori or M. pneumoniae DNA, either in the PBMC or in the artery specimens. In conclusion, carriage of C. pneumoniae DNA is common both in PBMC and in abdominal aortic tissue from patients undergoing abdominal aneurysm surgery. Blood PCR may be a useful tool for identifying subjects carrying C. pneumoniae in the vascular wall.

These data provide insight into potential therapeutic benefit of the PETTICOAT technique. A significant immediate increase in TL could be achieved with resolution of all cases of dynamic malperfusion and TL collapse. A different behavior of volumes in the thoracic and abdominal segments was observed.

Late AEFs rarely occur during EVAR follow-up, but the risk is significantly increased when EVAR is performed for PSA after previous aortic surgery and EVAR is performed as an emergency. Conservative and surgical treatment of post-EVAR AEF are both associated with high mortality. However, beyond the perioperative period, surgical correction of AEFs appears to be durable at midterm follow-up.