Midterm outcomes of the Zenith Renu AAA Ancillary Graft

ObjectiveThe Zenith Renu abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) Ancillary Graft (Cook Medical Inc, Bloomington, Ind) provides active proximal fixation for treatment of pre-existing endografts with failed or failing proximal fixation or seal. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the midterm outcomes of treatment with this device.MethodsFrom September 2005 to November 2006, a prospective, nonrandomized, multicenter, postmarket registry was utilized to collect physician experiences from 151 cases (89 converters and 62 main body extensions) at 95 institutions. Preoperative indications and procedural and postimplantation outcomes were collected and analyzed. Technical success and clinical success were determined as defined by the Society of Vascular Surgery reporting standards.ResultsPatients were predominantly male (87%) with a mean age of 77 years. The interval between the original endograft implantation to Renu treatment was 43.4 ± 18.7 months. The indications for treatment were endoleak (n = 111), migration (n = 136), or both (n = 94). Technical success was 98.0% with two cases of intraoperative conversion and one case of persistent type IA endoleak. The median follow-up for the cohort was 45.0 months (range, 0-56 months; interquartile range, 25.0 months). Overall, 32 cases had treatment failures that included at least one of the following: death (n = 5), type I/III endoleak (n = 18), graft infection (n = 1), thrombosis (n = 1), aneurysm enlargement >5 mm (n = 9), rupture (n = 4), conversion (n = 9, with 7 after 30 days), and migration (n = 1). Overall, the clinical success for the entire cohort during the follow-up period was 78.8% (119/151).ConclusionsThe postmarket registry data confirm that the Zenith Renu AAA Ancillary Graft can be used to treat endovascular repairs that failed due to proximal attachment failures. The salvage treatment with the Renu device had high technical success rate and resulted in clinical success in a majority of patients (78.8%). While failed endovascular repairs can be salvaged, a clinical failure in one of five patients still emphasizes the importance of patient and device selection during initial endovascular aneurysm repair to ensure durable success

Venous thromboembolism after inpatient surgery in administrative data vs NSQIP: a multi-institutional study

Previous studies have documented significant differences between administrative data and registry data in the determination of postoperative venous thromboembolism (VTE). The goal of this study was to characterize the discordance between administrative and registry data in the determination of postoperative VTE.This study was performed using data from the American College of Surgeons NSQIP merged with administrative data from 8 different hospitals (5 different medical centers) between 2013 and 2015. Occurrences of postoperative vein thrombosis (VT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) as ascertained by administrative data and NSQIP data were compared. In each situation where the 2 sources disagreed (discordance), a 2-clinician chart review was performed to characterize the reasons for discordance.The cohort used for analysis included 43,336 patients, of which 53.3% were female and the mean age was 59.5 years. Concordance between administrative and NSQIP data was worse for VT (κ 0.57; 95% CI 0.51 to 0.62) than for PE (κ 0.83; 95% CI 0.78 to 0.89). A total of 136 cases of discordance were noted in the assessment of VT; of these, 50 (37%) were explained by differences in the criteria used by administrative vs NSQIP systems. In the assessment of postoperative PE, administrative data had a higher accuracy than NSQIP data (odds ratio for accuracy 2.86; 95% CI 1.11 to 7.14) when compared with the 2-clinician chart review.This study identifies significant problems in ability of both NSQIP and administrative data to assess postoperative VT/PE. Administrative data functioned more accurately than NSQIP data in the identification of postoperative PE. The mechanisms used to translate VTE measurement into quality improvement should be standardized and improved

Reconfiguring ruins: Beyond Ruinenlust

What explains the global proliferation of interest in ruins? Can ruins be understood beyond their common framing as products of European Romanticism? Might a transdisciplinary approach allow us to see ruins differently? These questions underpinned the Arts and Humanities Research Council–funded project Reconfiguring Ruins, which deployed approaches from history, literature, East Asian studies, and geography to reflect on how ruins from different historical contexts are understood by reference to different theoretical frameworks. In recognition of the value of learning from other models of knowledge production, the project also involved a successful collaboration with the Museum of London Archaeology and the artist-led community The NewBridge Project in Newcastle. By bringing these varied sets of knowledges to bear on the project’s excavations of specific sites in the United Kingdom, the United States, and Japan, the article argues for an understanding of ruins as thresholds, with ruin sites providing unique insights into the relationship between lived pasts, presents, and futures. It does so by developing three key themes that reflect on the process of working collaboratively across the arts, humanities, and social sciences, including professional archaeology: inter- and transdisciplinarity, the limits of cocreation, and traveling meanings and praxis. Meanings of specific ruins are constructed out of specific languages and cultural resonances and read though different disciplines, but can also be reconfigured through concepts and practices that travel beyond disciplinary, cultural, and linguistic borders. As we show here, the ruin is, and should be, a relational concept that moves beyond the romantic notion of Ruinenlust