Thresholds for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair in England and the United States.

Background Thresholds for repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms vary considerably among countries. Methods We examined differences between England and the United States in the frequency of aneurysm repair, the mean aneurysm diameter at the time of the procedure, and rates of aneurysm rupture and aneurysm-related death. Data on the frequency of repair of intact (nonruptured) abdominal aortic aneurysms, in-hospital mortality among patients who had undergone aneurysm repair, and rates of aneurysm rupture during the period from 2005 through 2012 were extracted from the Hospital Episode Statistics database in England and the U.S. Nationwide Inpatient Sample. Data on the aneurysm diameter at the time of repair were extracted from the U.K. National Vascular Registry (2014 data) and from the U.S. National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (2013 data). Aneurysm-related mortality during the period from 2005 through 2012 was determined from data obtained from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the U.K. Office of National Statistics. Data were adjusted with the use of direct standardization or conditional logistic regression for differences between England and the United States with respect to population age and sex. Results During the period from 2005 through 2012, a total of 29,300 patients in England and 278,921 patients in the United States underwent repair of intact abdominal aortic aneurysms. Aneurysm repair was less common in England than in the United States (odds ratio, 0.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.48 to 0.49; P<0.001), and aneurysm-related death was more common in England than in the United States (odds ratio, 3.60; 95% CI, 3.55 to 3.64; P<0.001). Hospitalization due to an aneurysm rupture occurred more frequently in England than in the United States (odds ratio, 2.23; 95% CI, 2.19 to 2.27; P<0.001), and the mean aneurysm diameter at the time of repair was larger in England (63.7 mm vs. 58.3 mm, P<0.001). Conclusions We found a lower rate of repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms and a larger mean aneurysm diameter at the time of repair in England than in the United States and lower rates of aneurysm rupture and aneurysm-related death in the United States than in England. (Funded by the Circulation Foundation and others.)

Aneurysms—from traumatology to screening

This paper deals with aneurysmal disease, primarily when localized in the abdominal aorta. It is based on the Olof Rudbeck lecture 2009. Aneurysm is a localized widening of an artery, and its definition has become an important issue today when the disease is in focus for screening programmes. Aetiology and pathogenesis are still poorly understood, but a genetic component determining the strength of the aortic wall is important, and there is a strong male dominance. Historically, several attempts have been made to treat the disease, but reconstructive treatment has been possible only since 1951, in an increasing number of cases performed endovascularly. By early detection through screening, and thereby the possibility to treat before rupture, it has now become possible to decrease the total mortality from the disease in the population

Increased Fluorodeoxyglucose Uptake Following Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair: A Predictor of Endoleak?

The main criterion for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair is an AAA diameter ≥5.5 cm. However, some AAAs rupture when they are smaller. Size alone may therefore not be a sufficient criterion to determine rupture risk. Fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) uptake is increased in the presence of inflammation and it was suggested that this may be a better predictor of rupture risk than AAA size. Furthermore, increased FDG uptake following endovascular AAA repair may be an indirect predictor of continuous AAA sac enlargement due to the presence of an endoleak (even if this is not detected by imaging modalities) and/or increased AAA rupture risk. The role of FDG uptake needs to be explored further in the management of AAAs

Examining the role of genetic risk and longitudinal transmission processes underlying maternal parenting and psychopathology and children’s ADHD symptoms and aggression: utilizing the advantages of a prospective adoption design

Although genetic factors may contribute to initial liability for ADHD onset, there is growing evidence of the potential importance of the rearing environment on the developmental course of ADHD symptomatology. However, associations between family-level variables (maternal hostility, maternal depressive symptoms) and child behaviors (developmental course of ADHD and aggression) may be explained by genes that are shared by biologically related parents and children. Furthermore, ADHD symptoms and aggression commonly co-occur: it is important to consider both simultaneously to have a better understanding of processes underlying the developmental course of ADHD and aggression. To addresses these issues, we employed a longitudinal genetically sensitive parent–offspring adoption design. Analyses were conducted using Cohort I (n = 340) of the Early Growth and Development Study with cross-validation analyses conducted with Cohort II (n = 178). Adoptive mother hostility, but not depression, was associated with later child ADHD symptoms and aggression. Mothers and their adopted children were genetically unrelated, removing passive rGE as a possible explanation. Early child impulsivity/activation was associated with later ADHD symptoms and aggression. Child impulsivity/activation was also associated with maternal hostility, with some evidence for evocative gene-environment correlation processes on adoptive mother depressive symptoms. This study provides novel insights into family-based environmental influences on child ADHD and aggression symptoms, independent of shared parental genetic factors, implications of which are further explicated in the discussion