| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Kubica, Jacek, et al.
(författare)
-
Prolonged antithrombotic therapy in patients after acute coronary syndrome : A critical appraisal of current European Society of Cardiology guidelines
- 2020
-
Ingår i: CARDIOLOGY JOURNAL. - : VM Media SP. zo.o VM Group SK. - 1897-5593 .- 1898-018X. ; 27:6, s. 661-676
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The increased risk of non-cardiovascular death in patients receiving clopidogrel or prasugrel in comparison with the placebo group in the Dual Antiplatelet Therapy (DAPT) trial in contrast to the decreased risk of cardiovascular death and all-cause death seen in patients treated with low-dose ticagrelor in the EU label population of the PEGASUS-TIMI 54 trial, resulted in inclusion in the 2020 ESC NSTE-ACS guidelines the recommendation for use of clopidogrel or prasugrel only if the patient is not eligible for treatment with ticagrelor. The prevalence of the primary outcome composed of cardiovascular death, stroke, or myocardial infarction was lower in the low-dose rivaroxaban and acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) group than in the ASA-alone group in the COMPASS trial. Moreover, all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality rates were lower in the rivaroxaban-plus-ASA group. Comparison of the PEGASUS-TIMI 54 and COMPASS trial patient characteristics clearly shows that each of these treatment strategies should be addressed at different groups of patients. A greater benefit in post-acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients with a high risk of ischemic events and without high bleeding risk may be expected with ASA and ticagrelor 60 mg b.i.d. when the therapy is continued without interruption or with short interruption only after ACS. On the other hand, ASA and rivaroxaban 2.5 mg b.i.d. seems to be a better option when indications for dual antithrombotic therapy (DATT) appear after a longer time from ACS (more than 2 years) and/or from cessation of DAPT (more than 1 year) and in patients with multiple vascular bed atherosclerosis. Thus, both options of DATTs complement each other rather than compete, as can be presumed from the recommendations. However, a direct comparison between these strategies should be tested in future clinical trials.
|
|
| 3. |
- Kopp, Reinhard, et al.
(författare)
-
Multicenter Analysis of Endovascular Aortic Arch In Situ Stent-Graft Fenestrations for Aortic Arch Pathologies
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Annals of Vascular Surgery. - : Elsevier BV. - 0890-5096. ; 59, s. 36-47
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: In situ fenestration of aortic stent grafts for treatment of aortic arch aneurysms is a new option for endovascular aortic arch repair. So far, only few reports have shown perioperative and short-term results of in situ fenestrations for aortic arch diseases. We present the multicenter experience with the aortic arch in situ fenestration technique documented in the AARCHIF registry for treatment of aortic arch aneurysms or localized type A aortic dissections and analyzed perioperative outcome and midterm follow-up. Methods: Patients with aortic arch pathologies treated by aortic arch in situ fenestration with proximal stent graft landing in aortic arch Ishimura zones 0 and 1 were included in the registry. Stent-graft in situ fenestrations were created using needles or radiofrequency or laser catheters and completed by implantation of covered connecting stent grafts. Single in situ fenestrations for the left subclavian artery (LSA) were excluded. Results: Between 06/2009 and 03/2017, twenty-five patients were treated by in situ stent-graft fenestrations for aortic arch pathologies at 9 institutions in 7 different countries, 3 of them as bailout procedures for stent-graft malplacement. In situ fenestrations were performed for the brachiocephalic trunk (n = 20), the left common carotid artery (n = 21) and the LSA (n = 9). Technical success for intended in situ fenestrations was 94.0% (47/50), with additional supraaortic bypass procedures performed in 14 patients. Perioperative mortality occurred in 1 (4.0%) patient, treated as a bailout procedure and 3 (12.0%) perioperative strokes were observed. One proximal aortic stent-graft nonalignment and 4 type III endoleaks, 2 early and 2 late, required reeintervention. During follow-up (1–118 months), the diameter of aortic arch aneurysms decreased from 61.5 ± 4.1 mm to 48.4 ± 3.2 mm (P = 0.02) and, so far, 6 patients died from diseases unrelated to their aortic arch pathologies with a mean survival time of 79.5 months and 3 endovascular reinterventions for distal aortic expansion were performed. Cerebrovascular event (n = 4) was the most relevant prognostic factor for mortality during midterm follow-up (P = 0.003). Conclusions: The aortic arch in situ fenestration technique for endovascular aortic arch repair seems to be valuable treatment option for selected patients, although initial consideration of other treatment options is mandatory. Data about long-term durability are required.
|
|
| 4. |
- Olsson, Karl Wilhelm, 1985-, et al.
(författare)
-
Outcomes after endovascular aortic intervention in patients with connective tissue disease
- 2023
-
Ingår i: JAMA Surgery. - : American Medical Association (AMA). - 2168-6254 .- 2168-6262. ; 158:8, s. 832-839
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Importance: Endovascular treatment is not recommended for aortic pathologies in patients with connective tissue diseases (CTDs) other than in redo operations and as bridging procedures in emergencies. However, recent developments in endovascular technology may challenge this dogma.Objective: To assess the midterm outcomes of endovascular aortic repair in patients with CTD.Design, Setting, and Participants: For this descriptive retrospective study, data on demographics, interventions, and short-term and midterm outcomes were collected from 18 aortic centers in Europe, Asia, North America, and New Zealand. Patients with CTD who had undergone endovascular aortic repair from 2005 to 2020 were included. Data were analyzed from December 2021 to November 2022.Exposure: All principal endovascular aortic repairs, including redo surgery and complex repairs of the aortic arch and visceral aorta.Main Outcomes and Measures: Short-term and midterm survival, rates of secondary procedures, and conversion to open repair.Results: In total, 171 patients were included: 142 with Marfan syndrome, 17 with Loeys-Dietz syndrome, and 12 with vascular Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (vEDS). Median (IQR) age was 49.9 years (37.9-59.0), and 107 patients (62.6%) were male. One hundred fifty-two (88.9%) were treated for aortic dissections and 19 (11.1%) for degenerative aneurysms. One hundred thirty-six patients (79.5%) had undergone open aortic surgery before the index endovascular repair. In 74 patients (43.3%), arch and/or visceral branches were included in the repair. Primary technical success was achieved in 168 patients (98.2%), and 30-day mortality was 2.9% (5 patients). Survival at 1 and 5 years was 96.2% and 80.6% for Marfan syndrome, 93.8% and 85.2% for Loeys-Dietz syndrome, and 75.0% and 43.8% for vEDS, respectively. After a median (IQR) follow-up of 4.7 years (1.9-9.2), 91 patients (53.2%) had undergone secondary procedures, of which 14 (8.2%) were open conversions.Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that endovascular aortic interventions, including redo procedures and complex repairs of the aortic arch and visceral aorta, in patients with CTD had a high rate of early technical success, low perioperative mortality, and a midterm survival rate comparable with reports of open aortic surgery in patients with CTD. The rate of secondary procedures was high, but few patients required conversion to open repair. Improvements in devices and techniques, as well as ongoing follow-up, may result in endovascular treatment for patients with CTD being included in guideline recommendations.
|
|
| 5. |
- Patel, Jayna J., et al.
(författare)
-
Early outcomes associated with use of the Zenith TX2 Dissection Endovascular Graft for the treatment of Stanford type B aortic dissection
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Journal of Vascular Surgery. - : Elsevier. - 0741-5214 .- 1097-6809. ; 74:2, s. 547-555
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective: To evaluate short term outcomes related to the use of the Zenith TX2 Dissection Endovascular Graft (ZDEG) and the Zenith Dissection Bare stent (ZDES) for the treatment of Stanford type B aortic dissections. Methods: This retrospective multicenter case cohort study collated data from 10 European institutions for patients with both complicated and uncomplicated type B aortic dissection treated with ZDEG and ZDES between 2011 and 2018. The primary end point was mortality at 30 and 90 days. Secondary end points included complications related to TEVAR, such as, type Ia endoleak, stroke, paraparesis, paraplegia, and retrograde type A dissection (RTAD). Statistical analysis was carried out using the t test, or one-way analysis of variance and the chi(2) or Fisher exact tests. Results: We treated 120 patients (87 male; mean age, 62.7 +/- 12.2years) either in the acute 76 (63.3%), subacute 16 (13.3%), or chronic 28 (23.3%) phase. Seven patients (5.8%) died within 30 days after the index procedure and two (1.7%) between 30 and 90 days. There was one instance of postoperative RTAD in a patient treated for rupture. Stroke and paraplegia occurred in three (2.5%) and five (4.2%), patients, respectively. Eight patients (6.7%) had a type Ia endoleak in the perioperative period. There were no instances of paraplegia, no permanent dialysis, and no requirement for adjunctive superior mesenteric or celiac artery stenting in the 33 patients (27.5%) who were treated by concurrent placement of ZDES distal to the ZDEG. The length and distal oversizing of ZDEG components used was less in this group. Conclusions: The present series demonstrates a low (<1%) RTAD rate and favorable morbidity and mortality. The lower rate of paraplegia, dialysis, and visceral artery stenting in the cohort that had adjunctive use of ZDES is compelling and merits further assessment.
|
|
| 6. |
- Verscheure, Dorian, et al.
(författare)
-
Endovascular Treatment of Post Type A Chronic Aortic Arch Dissection With a Branched Endograft : Early Results From a Retrospective International Multicenter Study
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Annals of Surgery. - : Wolters Kluwer. - 0003-4932 .- 1528-1140. ; 273:5, s. 997-1003
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the outcome of endovascular aortic arch repair for chronic dissection with a custom-made branched endograft.BACKGROUND: Acute type A aortic dissections are often treated with prosthetic replacement of the ascending aorta. During follow-up, repair of an aneurysmal evolution of the false lumen distal to the ascending prosthesis can be a challenge both for the surgeon and the patient.METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, retrospective study of consecutive patients from 14 vascular units treated with a custom-made, inner-branched device (Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN) for chronic aortic arch dissection. Rates of in-hospital mortality and stroke, technical success, early and late complications, reinterventions, and mortality during follow-up were evaluated.RESULTS: Seventy consecutive patients were treated between 2011 and 2018. All patients were considered unfit for conventional surgery. In-hospital combined mortality and stroke rate was 4% (n = 3), including 1 minor stroke, 1 major stroke causing death, and 1 death following multiorgan failure. Technical success rate was 94.3%. Twelve (17.1%) patients required early reinterventions: 8 for vascular access complication, 2 for endoleak correction, and 2 for pericardial effusion drainage. Median follow-up was 301 (138-642) days. During follow-up, 20 (29%) patients underwent secondary interventions: 9 endoleak corrections, 1 open repair for prosthetic kink, and 10 distal extensions of the graft to the thoracic or thoracoabdominal aorta. Eight patients (11%) died during follow-up because of nonaortic-related cause in 7 cases.CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular treatment of aortic arch chronic dissections with a branched endograft is associated with low mortality and stroke rates but has a high reintervention rate. Further follow-up is required to confirm the benefits of this novel approach.
|
|
