Low-dose Thrombolysis for Thromboembolic Lower Extremity Arterial Occlusions is Effective Without Major Hemorrhagic Complications

ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and bleeding complications associated with a low-dose thrombolysis protocol for thromboembolic lower extremity arterial occlusions.DesignA retrospective cohort study.Materials and methodsA retrospective analysis was performed using data from all consecutive patients who underwent catheter-directed, intra-arterial thrombolysis for thromboembolic lower extremity arterial occlusions between January 2004 and May 2013. All patients were treated on a standard surgical ward. Endpoints were incidence of bleeding complications, duration of thrombolysis, angiographic patency rate, 30-day mortality rate, and amputation-free rate at 6 months.ResultsOf the 171 cases analyzed, 129 cases underwent low-dose thrombolysis and 42 underwent high-dose thrombolysis. No major bleeding complications occurred in the low-dose group versus 5% in the high-dose group (p = .01). The median duration of thrombolysis was 67 hours (4–304 hours) in the low-dose and 49 hours (2–171 hours) in the high-dose group (p = .027). Angiographic patency was restored in 67% of the cases in the low-dose group versus 79% of the high-dose group (p = .17). The 30-day mortality rates were 1% in the low-dose versus 5% in the high-dose group (p = .09). However, this higher mortality rate was not related to bleeding complications. Major amputation-free rates at 6 months were 81% in the low-dose group and 88% in the high-dose group (p = .22).ConclusionsBased on this data series, low-dose thrombolysis for thromboembolic lower extremity arterial occlusions is as effective as high-dose thrombolysis; however, the risk of major bleeding complications is substantially lower when using low-dose thrombolysis

Saccular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms Patient Characteristics, Clinical Presentation, Treatment, and Outcomes in the Netherlands

Objective: The aim of this was to analyze differences between saccularshaped abdominal aortic aneurysms (SaAAAs) and fusiform abdominal aortic aneurysms (FuAAAs) regarding patient characteristics, treatment, and outcome, to advise a threshold for intervention for SaAAAs.Background: Based on the assumption that SaAAAs are more prone to rupture, guidelines suggest early elective treatment. However, little is known about the natural history of SaAAAs and the threshold for intervention is not substantiated.Methods: Observational study including primary repairs of degenerative AAAs in the Netherlands between 2016 and 2018 in which the shape was registered, registered in the Dutch Surgical Aneurysm Audit (DSAA). Patients were stratified by urgency of surgery; elective versus acute (symptomatic/ruptured). Patient characteristics, treatment, and outcome were compared between SaAAAs and FuAAAs.Results: A total of 7659 primary AAA-patients were included, 6.1% (n = 471) SaAAAs and 93.9% (n = 7188) FuAAAs. There were 5945 elective patients (6.5% SaAAA) and 1714 acute (4.8% SaAAA). Acute SaAAApatients were more often female (28.9% vs 17.2%, P = 0.007) compared with acute FuAAA-patients. SaAAAs had smaller diameters than FuAAAs, in elective (53.0mm vs 61 mm, P = 0.000) and acute (68mm vs 75 mm, P = 0.002) patients, even after adjusting for sex. In addition, 25.2% of acute SaAAA-patients presented with diameters <55mm and 8.4% <45 mm, versus 8.1% and 0.6% of acute FuAAA-patients (P = 0.000). Postoperative outcomes did not significantly differ between shapes in both elective and acute patients.Conclusions: SaAAAs become acute at smaller diameters than FuAAAs in DSAA patients. This study therefore supports the current idea that SaAAAs should be electively treated at smaller diameters than FuAAAs. The exact diameter threshold for elective treatment of SaAAAs is difficult to determine, but a diameter of 45mm seems to be an acceptable threshold.Vascular Surger