Laser clad and HVOF sprayed Stellite 6 coating in chlorine rich environment with KCI at 700 °C

Laser clads and HVOF coatings from a stellite 6 alloy (Co–Cr–W–C alloy) on 304 stainless steel substrates were exposed both bare and with KCl deposits in 500 ppm HCl with 5% O2 for 250 h at 700 C. SEM/EDX and PXRD analyses with Rietveld refinement were used for assessment of the attack and for analysis of the scales. The bare samples suffered from scale spallation and the scale was mostly composed of Cr2O3, CoCr2O4 and CoO, although due to dilution haematite (Fe2O3) was detected in the scale formed on the laser clad sample. A small amount of hydrated HCl was detected in bare samples. While the corrosion of the bare surfaces was limited to comparatively shallow depths and manifested by g and M7C3 carbide formation, the presence of KCl on the surface led to severe Cr depletion from the HVOF coating (to 1 wt%). Both inward and outward diffusion of elements occurred in the HVOF coating resulting in Kirdendall voids at the coating–steel interface. The laser clad sample performed significantly better in conditions of the KCl deposit-induced corrosion. In addition to the oxides, CoCl2 was detected in the HVOF sample and K3CrO4 was detected in the laser clad sample. Thermodynamic calculations and kinetic simulations were carried out to interpret the oxidation and diffusion behaviours of coatings

Meta-analysis of individual-patient data from EVAR-1, DREAM, OVER and ACE trials comparing outcomes of endovascular or open repair for abdominal aortic aneurysm over 5 years.

BACKGROUND: The erosion of the early mortality advantage of elective endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) compared with open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm remains without a satisfactory explanation. METHODS: An individual-patient data meta-analysis of four multicentre randomized trials of EVAR versus open repair was conducted to a prespecified analysis plan, reporting on mortality, aneurysm-related mortality and reintervention. RESULTS: The analysis included 2783 patients, with 14 245 person-years of follow-up (median 5·5 years). Early (0-6 months after randomization) mortality was lower in the EVAR groups (46 of 1393 versus 73 of 1390 deaths; pooled hazard ratio 0·61, 95 per cent c.i. 0·42 to 0·89; P = 0·010), primarily because 30-day operative mortality was lower in the EVAR groups (16 deaths versus 40 for open repair; pooled odds ratio 0·40, 95 per cent c.i. 0·22 to 0·74). Later (within 3 years) the survival curves converged, remaining converged to 8 years. Beyond 3 years, aneurysm-related mortality was significantly higher in the EVAR groups (19 deaths versus 3 for open repair; pooled hazard ratio 5·16, 1·49 to 17·89; P = 0·010). Patients with moderate renal dysfunction or previous coronary artery disease had no early survival advantage under EVAR. Those with peripheral artery disease had lower mortality under open repair (39 deaths versus 62 for EVAR; P = 0·022) in the period from 6 months to 4 years after randomization. CONCLUSION: The early survival advantage in the EVAR group, and its subsequent erosion, were confirmed. Over 5 years, patients of marginal fitness had no early survival advantage from EVAR compared with open repair. Aneurysm-related mortality and patients with low ankle : brachial pressure index contributed to the erosion of the early survival advantage for the EVAR group. Trial registration numbers: EVAR-1, ISRCTN55703451; DREAM (Dutch Randomized Endovascular Aneurysm Management), NCT00421330; ACE (Anévrysme de l'aorte abdominale, Chirurgie versus Endoprothèse), NCT00224718; OVER (Open Versus Endovascular Repair Trial for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms), NCT00094575