The Viborg vascular (VIVA) screening trial of 65-74 year old men in the central region of Denmark: study protocol

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) of men aged 65-74 years reduces the AAA-related mortality and is generally considered cost effective. Despite of this only a few national health care services have implemented permanent programs.</p> <p>Around 10% of men in this group have peripheral arterial disease (PAD) defined by an ankle brachial systolic blood pressure index (ABI) below 0.9 resulting in an increased mortality-rate of 25-30%. In addition well-documented health benefits may be achieved through primary prophylaxis by initiating systematic cholesterol-lowering, smoking cessation, low-dose acetylsalicylic acid (aspirins), exercise, a healthy diet and blood-pressure control altogether reducing the increased risks for cardiovascular disease by at least 20-25%.</p> <p>The benefits of combining screening for AAA and PAD seem evident; yet they remain to be established. The objective of this study is to assess the efficacy and the cost-effectiveness of a combined screening program for AAA, PAD and hypertension.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The Viborg Vascular (VIVA) screening trial is a randomized, clinically controlled study designed to evaluate the benefits of vascular screening and modern vascular prophylaxis in a population of 50,000 men aged 65-74 years. Enrolment started October 2008 and is expected to stop in October 2010. The primary outcome is all-cause mortality. The secondary outcomes are cardiovascular mortality, AAA-related mortality, hospital services related to cardiovascular conditions, prevalence of AAA, PAD and potentially undiagnosed hypertension, health-related quality of life and cost effectiveness. Data analysis by intention to treat.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Major follow-up will be performed at 3, 5 and 10 years and final study result after 15 years.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00662480</p

Editor's Choice \u2013 Management of Atherosclerotic Carotid and Vertebral Artery Disease: 2017 Clinical Practice Guidelines of the European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS)

2017 Clinical Practice Guidelines of the European Society for Vascular Surgery

Is population screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm cost-effective?

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is responsible for 1–2% of all male deaths over the age of 65 years. Early detection of AAA and elective surgery can reduce the mortality risk associated with AAA. However, many patients will not be diagnosed with AAA and have therefore an increased death risk due to the untreated AAA. It has been suggested that population screening for AAA in elderly males is effective and cost-effective. The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review of published cost-effectiveness analyses of screening elderly men for AAA.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We performed a systematic search for economic evaluations in NHSEED, EconLit, Medline, Cochrane, Embase, Cinahl and two Scandinavian HTA data bases (DACEHTA and SBU). All identified studies were read in full and each study was systematically assessed according to international guidelines for critical assessment of economic evaluations in health care.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The search identified 16 cost-effectiveness studies. Most studies considered only short term cost consequences. The studies seemed to employ a number of "optimistic" assumptions in favour of AAA screening, and included only few sensitivity analyses that assessed less optimistic assumptions.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Further analyses of cost-effectiveness of AAA screening are recommended.</p

Editor's choice : European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) 2020 clinical practice guidelines on the management of acute limb ischaemia

A

Geography, private costs and uptake of screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm in a remote rural area

BACKGROUND: The relationship between geographical location, private costs, health provider costs and uptake of health screening is unclear. This paper examines these relationships in a screening programme for abdominal aortic aneurysm in the Highlands and Western Isles of Scotland, a rural and remote area of over 10,000 square miles. METHODS: Men aged 65–74 (n = 9323) were invited to attend screening at 51 locations in 50 settlements. Effects of geography, deprivation and age on uptake were examined. Among 8,355 attendees, 8,292 completed a questionnaire detailing mode of travel and costs incurred, time travelled, whether accompanied, whether dependants were cared for, and what they would have been doing if not attending screening, thus allowing private costs to be calculated. Health provider (NHS) costs were also determined. Data were analysed by deprivation categories, using the Scottish Indices of Deprivation (2003), and by settlement type ranging from urban to very remote rural. RESULTS: Uptake of screening was high in all settlement types (mean 89.6%, range 87.4 – 92.6%). Non-attendees were more deprived in terms of income, employment, education and health but there was no significant difference between non-attendees and attendees in terms of geographical access to services. Age was similar in both groups. The highest private costs (median £7.29 per man) and NHS screening costs (£18.27 per man invited) were observed in very remote rural areas. Corresponding values for all subjects were: private cost £4.34 and NHS cost £15.72 per man invited. CONCLUSION: Uptake of screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm in this remote and rural setting was high in comparison with previous studies, and this applied across all settlement types. Geographical location did not affect uptake, most likely due to the outreach approach adopted. Private and NHS costs were highest in very remote settings but still compared favourably with other published studies

Fenofibrate in the management of AbdoMinal aortic anEurysm (FAME): Study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Background: Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is a slowly progressive destructive process of the main abdominal artery. Experimental studies indicate that fibrates exert beneficial effects on AAAs by mechanisms involving both serum lipid modification and favourable changes to the AAA wall. Methods/design: Fenofibrate in the management of AbdoMinal aortic anEurysm (FAME) is a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial to assess the effect of orally administered therapy with fenofibrate on key pathological markers of AAA in patients undergoing open AAA repair. A total of 42 participants scheduled for an elective open AAA repair will be randomly assigned to either 145 mg of fenofibrate per day or identical placebo for a minimum period of 2 weeks prior to surgery. Primary outcome measures will be macrophage number and osteopontin (OPN) concentration within the AAA wall as well as serum concentrations of OPN. Secondary outcome measures will include levels of matrix metalloproteinases and proinflammatory cytokines within the AAA wall, periaortic fat and intramural thrombus and circulating concentrations of AAA biomarkers. Discussion: At present, there is no recognised medical therapy to limit AAA progression. The FAME trial aims to assess the ability of fenofibrate to alter tissue markers of AAA pathology. Trial registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12612001226897. Registered on 20 November 2012. © 2017 The Author(s)

The Efficacy of Pharmacotherapy for Decreasing the Expansion Rate of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND: Pharmacotherapy may represent a potential means to limit the expansion rate of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). Studies evaluating the efficacy of different pharmacological agents to slow down human AAA-expansion rates have been performed, but they have never been systematically reviewed or summarized. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Two independent reviewers identified studies and selected randomized trials and prospective cohort studies comparing the growth rate of AAA in patients with pharmacotherapy vs. no pharmacotherapy. We extracted information on study interventions, baseline characteristics, methodological quality, and AAA growth rate differences (in mm/year). Fourteen prospective studies met eligibility criteria. Five cohort studies raised the possibility of benefit of beta-blockers [pooled growth rate difference: -0.62 mm/year, (95%CI, -1.00 to -0.24)], but this was not confirmed in three beta-blocker RCTs [pooled RCT growth rate difference: -0.05 mm/year (-0.16 to 0.05)]. Statins have been evaluated in two cohort studies that yield a pooled growth rate difference of -2.97 (-5.83 to -0.11). Doxycycline and roxithromycin have been evaluated in two RCTs that suggest possible benefit [pooled RCT growth rate difference: -1.32 mm/year (-2.89 to 0.25)]. Studies assessing NSAIDs, diuretics, calcium channel blockers and ACE inhibitors, meanwhile, did not find statistically significant differences. CONCLUSIONS: Beta-blockers do not appear to significantly reduce the growth rate of AAAs. Statins and other anti-inflammatory agents appear to hold promise for decreasing the expansion rate of AAA, but need further evaluation before definitive recommendations can be made

Corrigendum to 'Editor's Choice - European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) 2020 Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Management of Vascular Graft and Endograft Infections' [European Journal of Vascular &amp; Endovascular Surgery 59/3 (2020) 339-384]

peer reviewe

Editor's Choice – European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) 2023 Clinical Practice Guidelines on Radiation Safety

info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio