| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Djavani-Gidlund, Khatereh, 1967-, et al.
(author)
-
A comparative study of extra- and intraluminal sigmoid colonic tonometry to detect colonic hypoperfusion after operation for abdominal aortic aneurysm
- 2011
-
In: European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery. - : Elsevier BV. - 1078-5884 .- 1532-2165. ; 42:3, s. 302-308
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objectives: There is no ideal method to monitor colonic perfusion after abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. The aim was to evaluate extraluminal sigmoid colon tonometry, comparing with the established intraluminal method. Methods: Eighteen patients were monitored with both methods, 10 after elective and eight after ruptured AAA repair. One tonometric catheter was placed inside the sigmoid colon (intraluminal) and another extraluminally in close contact with the serosa of the sigmoid colon (extraluminal). Intra- and extraluminal partial pressure of carbon dioxide (pCO2) were measured every 10 min during 48 h postoperatively, 1536 simultaneous measurements. Intraluminal pH (pHi) and extraluminal pH (pHe) were calculated, and intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) was measured, every 4 h. Colonic ischaemia was defined as pHi ≤ 7.1. Results: Mean pHi was 7.18 ± 0.11 and mean pHe was 7.28 ± 0.09. With a pHe cut-off value of ≤7.2, the sensitivity and specificity to detect colonic ischaemia were 95% and 95%, respectively. Accuracy was 95% and the positive and negative predictive values 0.80 and 0.99, respectively. The positive likelihood ratio was 19 and the negative likelihood ratio 0.05. Conclusion: Extraluminal tonometry may serve as a screening test: A pHe-value <7.2 indicates suspected colonic ischaemia, meriting further investigation. It was not able to evaluate the severity of ischaemia.
|
|
| 3. |
- Djavani Gidlund, Khatereh, 1967-, et al.
(author)
-
Intra-abdominal Hypertension and Abdominal Compartment Syndrome after Endovascular Repair of Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm
- 2011
-
In: European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery. - : Elsevier BV. - 1078-5884 .- 1532-2165. ; 41:6, s. 742-747
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objectives: To investigate the frequency of intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH)and abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS) after endovascular repair (EVAR) of rupturedabdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA).Methods: This was a prospective clinical study. Patients with endovascular repair of rAAAbetween April 2004 and May 2010 were included. Intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) was measuredin the bladder every 4 h. IAH and ACS were defined according to the World Society of theAbdominal Compartment Syndrome consensus document. Early conservative treatments(diuretics, colloids and neuromuscular blockade) were given to patients with IAP > 12 mmHg.Results: Twenty-nine patients, who underwent endovascular repair of a rAAA, had their IAPmonitored. Twenty-five percent of them were in shock at arrival. Postoperatively, 10/29(34%) patients had an IAP > 15 mmHg and six (21%) had an IAP > 20 mmHg. Three (3/29,10%) patients developed ACS that necessitated abdominal decompression in two. Five out ofsix patients with IAP > 20 mmHg presented with preoperative shock. All patients except onewith preoperative shock developed some degree of IAH.Conclusion: IAH and ACS are common and potential serious complications after EVAR for rAAA.Successful outcome depends on early recognition, early conservative treatment to reduce IAHand decompression laparotomy if ACS develops.
|
|
| 4. |
- Djavani Gidlund, Khatereh
(author)
-
Intra-abdominal Hypertension and Colonic Hypoperfusion after Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair
- 2011
-
Doctoral thesis (other academic/artistic)abstract
- Colonic ischaemia (CI), Intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH) and abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS) are devastating complications after abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) surgery. The aims of this thesis were to study the incidence and clinical consequences of IAH/ACS and the association between CI and intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) among patients undergoing OR for ruptured AAA (rAAA), to compare extraluminal pHi monitoring, with standard intra-luminal monitoring among patients operated on for AAA, and to study the frequency and clinical consequences of IAH/ACS after endovascular repair (EVAR) for rAAA. The incidence of ACS was 26% in a retrospective study of 27 patients undergoing OR for rAAA. Consensus definitions on IAH/ACS were appropriate for patients after OR for rAAA: 78% (7/9) of patients with IAH grade III or IV developed organ failure and all patients who developed CI had some degree of IAH. Active fluid resuscitation treating hypovolaemia to avoid CI may partly cause IAH. The association between CI and IAP was investigated in a prospective study on 29 patients operated on for rAAA, 86% (25/29) were treated for hypovolaemia and ten (34%) had both IAH and CI. Since monitoring colonic perfusion is very important and there is no ideal method, a new technique, extraluminal colonic tonometry to detect colonic perfusion was compared with standard intraluminal tonometry. Although, this new method was not able to determine the severity of ischaemia it may serve as a screening test. EVAR of rAAA is feasible and patients may benefit from this less invasive procedure. Of 29 patients treated with this technique, 10% developed ACS, and all patients except one with preoperative shock developed some degree of IAH. In conclusion, IAP/ACS is common after both OR and EVAR for rAAA, and is associated with adverse outcome. Monitoring IAP and colonic perfusion with timely intervention may improve outcome.
|
|
| 5. |
- Ersryd, Samuel, et al.
(author)
-
Editor's Choice - Abdominal Compartment Syndrome After Surgery for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm : A Nationwide Population Based Study
- 2016
-
In: European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery. - : Elsevier BV. - 1078-5884 .- 1532-2165. ; 52:2, s. 158-165
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objective/Background: The understanding of abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS), and its importance for outcome, has increased over time. The aim was to investigate the incidence and clinical consequences of ACS after open (OR) and endovascular repair (EVAR) for ruptured and intact infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA and iAAA, respectively). Methods: In 2008, ACS and decompression laparotomy (DL) were introduced as variables in the Swedish vascular registry (Swedvasc), offering an opportunity to study this complication in a prospective, population based design. Operations carried out in the period 2008-13 were analysed. Of 6,612 operations, 1,341 (20.3%) were for rAAA (72.0% OR) and 5,271 (79.7%) for iAAA (41.9% OR). In all, 3,171 (48.0%) were operated on by OR and 3,441 by EVAR. Prophylactic open abdomen (OA) treatment was validated through case records. Cross-matching with the national population registry secured valid mortality data. Results: After rAAA repair, ACS developed in 6.8% after OR versus 6.9% after EVAR (p = 1.0). All major complications were more common after ACS (p<.001). Prophylactic OA was performed in 10.7% of patients after OR. For ACS, DL was performed in 77.3% after OR and 84.6% after EVAR (p=.433). The 30 day mortality rate was 42.4% with ACS and 23.5% without ACS (p <.001); at 1 year it was 50.7% versus 31.8% (p <.001). After iAAA repair, ACS developed in 1.6% of patients after OR versus 0.5% after EVAR (p <.001). Among those with ACS, DL was performed in 68.6% after OR and in 25.0% after EVAR (p=.006). Thirty day mortality was 11.5% with ACS versus 1.8% without it (p <.001); at 1 year it was 27.5% versus 6.3% (p <.001). When ACS developed, renal failure, multiple organ failure, intestinal ischaemia, and prolonged intensive care were much more frequent (p <.001). Morbidity and mortality were similar, regardless of primary surgical technique (OR/EVAR/iAAA/rAAA). Conclusion: ACS and OA were common after treatment for rAAA. ACS is a devastating complication after surgery for rAAA and iAAA, irrespective of operative technique, emphasizing the importance of prevention.
|
|
| 6. |
- Ersryd, Samuel, et al.
(author)
-
Editor's Choice - Abdominal Compartment Syndrome after Surgery for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm : Subgroups, Risk Factors, and Outcome
- 2019
-
In: European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery. - : W B SAUNDERS CO LTD. - 1078-5884 .- 1532-2165. ; 58:5, s. 671-679
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objectives: Abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS) is a serious complication after abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. The aim was to investigate outcome among subgroups and factors associated with outcome, with emphasis on the duration of intra-abdominal hypertension before treatment.Methods: Since 2008, ACS and decompressive laparotomy (DL) after AAA repair are registered prospectively in the Swedish vascular registry (Swedvasc). Registry data and case records were reviewed. Subgroups were defined by main pathophysiological finding at DL, timing of DL after AAA repair, and treatment modality.Results: During 2008-2015, 120 of 8765 patients undergoing surgery for infrarenal AAA developed postoperative ACS (1.4%). Eighty-three followed ruptured AAA (rAAA); 45 open surgical repairs (OSR) and 38 endovascular (EVAR), and thirty-seven after intact AAA (iAAA); 30 OSR and seven EVAR. The main pathophysiological findings at DL were bowel ischaemia in 27 (23.3%), post-operative bleeding in 34 (29.3%), and general oedema in 55 (47.4%). DL was performed <24 hours after AAA repair in 56 (48.7%), 24-48 hours in 30 (26.1%), and >48 hours in 29 patients (25.2%). The overall 90 day mortality was 50.0%, neither different depending on main pathophysiological finding, nor on the timing of DL. In multivariable regression analysis, age was a predictor of mortality (p = .017), while duration of intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH) prior to DL predicted the need for renal replacement therapy (RRT) (p = .033). DL was performed earlier after EVAR compared with OSR in rAAA (p < .001).Conclusions: Mortality in ACS was high, irrespective of the main pathophysiological finding and timing of DL. The duration of IAH prior to DL predicted the need for RRT. DL was performed earlier after EVAR than after OSR for rAAA, underlining the importance of monitoring IAP after EVAR for rAAA.
|
|
| 7. |
- Ersryd, Samuel, et al.
(author)
-
Risk Factors for Abdominal Compartment Syndrome After Endovascular Repair for Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm : A Case Control Study
- 2021
-
In: European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery. - : Elsevier. - 1078-5884 .- 1532-2165. ; 62:3, s. 400-407
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objective: Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (rAAA) are treated by endovascular aneurysm repair (rEVAR) increasingly often. Despite rEVAR being a minimally invasive method, abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS) remains a significant post-operative threat. The aim of this study was to investigate risk factors for ACS after rEVAR, including aortic morphological features. Methods: The Swedish vascular registry (Swedvasc) was assessed for ACS after rEVAR in the period 2008 - 2015. All patients identified were compared with controls (i.e., patients who did not develop ACS after rEVAR), matched by centre and repair date. Case records were reviewed, and radiology images analysed in a core laboratory. Comparisons were performed with respect to physiological and radiological risk factors. Results: The study population consisted of 40 patients with ACS and 68 controls. Pre-operatively, patients with ACS had a lower blood pressure (BP) than controls (median 70 mmHg vs. 97 mmHg; p <.001). Intra-operatively, they had aortic balloon occlusion more often (55.0% vs. 10.3%; p <.001) and received more transfusions than controls (median nine units of packed red blood cells [pRBC] vs. two units; p <.001). Ninety-seven per cent of those who developed ACS had a pre-operative BP < 70 mmHg, aortic balloon occlusion, or received more than five pRBC unit transfusions. Treatment outside the instructions for use did not differ between patients and controls (57.5% vs. 54.4%; p=.84), and neither did the pre-operative patency of the inferior mesenteric artery (57.1% vs. 63.9%; p=.52) nor the number of visible lumbar arteries on pre-operative imaging (2 vs. 4; p=.014). In multivariable logistic regression, the number of intra-operative transfusions were predictive of ACS (p <.001), while pre-operative hypotension (p=.32) and aortic balloon occlusion (p=.018) were not. Conclusion: ACS after rEVAR is mainly associated with physiological factors and is unlikely to develop without the presence of a pre-operative BP < 70 mmHg, the need for an aortic occlusion balloon, or more than five intraoperative pRBC unit transfusions. Treatment outside the IFU or any other morphological factor were not associated with a risk of ACS.
|
|
| 8. |
- Gavali, Hamid, et al.
(author)
-
Semi-Conservative Treatment Versus Radical Surgery in Abdominal Aortic Graft and Endograft Infections
- 2023
-
In: European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery. - : Elsevier. - 1078-5884 .- 1532-2165. ; 66:3, s. 397-406
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objective: Abdominal aortic graft and endograft infections (AGIs) are rare complications following aortic surgery. Radical surgery (RS) with resection of the infected graft and reconstruction with extra-anatomical bypass or in situ reconstruction is the preferred therapy. For patients unfit for RS, a semi-conservative (SC), graft preserving strategy is possible. This paper aimed to compare survival and infection outcomes between RS and SC treatment for AGI in a nationwide cohort.Methods: Patients with abdominal AGI related surgery in Sweden between January 1995 and May 2017 were identified. The Management of Aortic Graft Infection Collaboration (MAGIC) criteria were used for the definition of AGI. Multivariable regression was performed to identify factors associated with mortality.Results: One hundred and sixty-nine patients with surgically treated abdominal AGI were identified, comprising 43 SC (14 endografts; 53% with a graft enteric fistula [GEF] in total) and 126 RS (26 endografts; 50% with a GEF in total). The SC cohort was older and had a higher frequency of cardiac comorbidities. There was a non-significant trend towards lower Kaplan -Meier estimated five year survival for SC vs. RS (30.2% vs. 48.4%; p = .066). A non-significant trend was identified towards worse Kaplan -Meier estimated five year survival for SC patients with a GEF vs. without a GEF (21.7% vs. 40.1%; p = .097). There were significantly more recurrent graft infections comparing SC with RS (45.4% vs. 19.3%; p < .001). In a Cox regression model adjusting for confounders, there was no difference in five year survival comparing SC vs. RS (HR 1.0, 95% CI 0.6 -1.5).Conclusion: In this national AGI cohort, there was no mortality difference comparing SC and RS for AGI when adjusting for comorbidities. Presence of GEF probably negatively impacts survival outcomes of SC patients. Rates of recurrent infection remain high for SC treated patients.
|
|
| 9. |
- Gavali, Hamid, et al.
(author)
-
Semi-Conservative Treatment Versus Surgery in Abdominal Aortic Graft and Endograft Infections
- 2023
-
In: European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery. - : Elsevier. - 1078-5884 .- 1532-2165. ; 66:3, s. 397-406
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- OBJECTIVE: Abdominal aortic graft and endograft infections (AGIs) are rare complications following aortic surgery. Radical surgery (RS) with resection of the infected graft and reconstruction with extra-anatomical bypass or in situ reconstruction is the preferred therapy. For patients unfit for RS, a semi-conservative (SC), graft-preserving strategy is possible. This paper aimed to compare survival and infection outcomes between RS and SC treatment for AGI in a nationwide cohort.METHODS: Patients with abdominal AGI-related surgery in Sweden between January 1995 and May 2017 were identified. The Management of Aortic Graft Infection Collaboration (MAGIC) criteria were used for definition of AGI. Multivariable regression was performed to identify factors associated with mortality.RESULTS: A total of 169 patients with surgically treated abdominal AGI were identified, comprising 43 SC [14 endografts; 53% with a graft-enteric fistula (GEF) in total] and 126 RS [26 endografts; 50% with a GEF in total]. The SC cohort was older and had a higher frequency of cardiac comorbidities. There was a non-significant trend towards lower Kaplan-Meier estimated 5-year survival for SC versus RS (30.2% vs. 48.4%; p = .066). A non-significant trend was identified towards worse Kaplan-Meier estimated 5-year survival for SC patients with a GEF versus without a GEF (21.7% vs. 40.1%; p = .097). There were significantly more recurrent graft infections comparing SC versus RS (45.4% vs. 19.3%; p < .001). In a Cox regression model adjusting for confounders, there was no difference in 5-year survival comparing SC versus RS (HR 1.0, 95% CI 0.6 - 1.5).CONCLUSION: In this national AGI cohort, we could not identify any mortality difference comparing SC versus RS for AGI when adjusting for comorbidities. Presence of GEF likely negatively impacts survival outcomes of SC patients. Rates of recurrent infection remain high for SC-treated patients.
|
|
| 10. |
- Gunnarsson, Kim, et al.
(author)
-
Endovascular Versus Open Repair as Primary Strategy for Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm : A National Population-based Study
- 2016
-
In: European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery. - : Elsevier BV. - 1078-5884 .- 1532-2165. ; 51:1, s. 22-28
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- OBJECTIVE/BACKGROUND: In randomized trials, no peri-operative survival benefit has been shown for endovascular (EVAR) repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) when compared with open repair. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of primary repair strategy on early and midterm survival in a non-selected population based study.METHODS: The Swedish Vascular Registry was consulted to identify all rAAA repairs performed in Sweden in the period 2008-12. Centers with a primary EVAR strategy (treating > 50% of rAAA with EVAR) were compared with centers with a primary open repair strategy. Peri-operative outcome, midterm survival, and incidence of rAAA repair/100,000 inhabitants aged > 50 years were assessed.RESULTS: In total, 1,304 patients were identified. Three primary EVAR centers (pEVARc) operated on 236 patients (74.6% EVAR). Twenty-six primary open repair centers (pORc) operated 1,068 patients (15.6% EVAR). Patients treated at pEVARc were more often referrals (28.0% vs. 5.3%; p < .01), had a higher rate of respiratory comorbidity (36.5% vs. 21.9%; p < .01), and higher pre-operative systolic blood pressure (84.3 vs. 72.3 mmHg; p < .01). There was no difference in mortality based on primary treatment strategy at 30 days (pEVARc 28.0%, n = 66; pORc 27.4%, n = 296 [p = .87]), 1 year (pEVARc 39.9%, n = 93; pORc 34.7%, n = 366 [p = .19]), or 2 years (42.1%, n = 94; 38.3%, n = 394 [p = .28]), either overall or in subgroups based on age or referral status. Overall, patients treated with EVAR were older (mean age 76.4 vs. 74.0 years; p < .01), and had a lower 30 day mortality (EVAR 21.6%, n = 74; odds ratio 29.6%, n = 288 [p = < .01]). Incidence of rAAA repair was lower in pEVARc regions (6.07, 95% confidence interval [CI] 5.01-7.13) when compared with pORc regions (8.15, 95% CI 7.64-8.66).CONCLUSION: There was no difference in mortality after rAAA repair among centers with a primary EVAR approach when compared with a primary open repair strategy, either peri-operatively or in the midterm. The study supports the early findings of the randomized controlled trials in a national population based setting.
|
|
