Outcomes of open repair of postdissection abdominal aortic aneurysms

Background: Evidence to guide management of postdissection abdominal aortic aneurysms (PDAAA) is lacking. This study describes the outcomes of open repair of PDAAA. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted of all consecutive patients treated with open repair for PDAAA after a Stanford type A or type B thoracic aortic dissection between January 2006 and December 2017 in two vascular referral centers. Preceding type B dissection treatment could include conservative or surgical management. Primary outcomes were 30-day mortality, complication rates, survival, and reintervention-free survival. Survival and reintervention-free survival were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Reintervention was defined as any endovascular or surgical intervention after the index procedure. Results: Included were 36 patients (27 men [75%]) with a median age of 64 years (range, 35-81 years). The 30-day mortality was 2.7%. The median follow-up was 16 months (range, 0-88 months). The postoperative course was uneventful in 21 patients (58%). The most frequent complications were postoperative bleeding requiring repeat laparotomy (n = 4), pneumonia (n = 3), congestive heart failure (n = 2), new-onset atrial fibrillation (n = 2), mesenteric ischemia requiring left hemicolectomy (n=1), and ischemic cerebrovascular accident (n = 1). Renal failure requiring hemodialysis developed in one patient. The overall survival at 1 year was 88.8%. Reintervention-free survival was 95.5% after 1 year and 88.6% after 2 years. Conclusions: Open repair of PDAAA can be performed with a low mortality rate and an acceptable complication rate, comparable with elective open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms without dissection

Age and sex associate with outcome in older AML and high risk MDS patients treated with 10-day decitabine

Treatment choice according to the individual conditions remains challenging, particularly in older patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and high risk myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). The impact of performance status, comorbidities, and physical functioning on survival is not well defined for patients treated with hypomethylating agents. Here we describe the impact of performance status (14% ECOG performance status 2), comorbidity (40% HCT-comorbidity index ≥ 2), and physical functioning (41% short physical performance battery  76 years was significantly associated with reduced OS (HR 1.58; p = 0.043) and female sex was associated with superior OS (HR 0.62; p = 0.06). We further compared the genetic profiles of these subgroups. This revealed comparable mutational profiles in patients younger and older than 76 years, but, interestingly, revealed significantly more prevalent mutated ASXL1, STAG2, and U2AF1 in male compared to female patients. In this cohort of older patients treated with decitabine age and sex, but not comorbidities, physical functioning or cytogenetic risk were associated with overall survival

Inferior outcome of addition of the aminopeptidase inhibitor tosedostat to standard intensive treatment for elderly patients with aml and high risk mds

Treatment results of AML in elderly patients are unsatisfactory. We hypothesized that addition of tosedostat, an aminopeptidase inhibitor, to intensive chemotherapy may improve outcome in this population. After establishing a safe dose in a run-in phase of the study in 22 patients, 231 eligible patients with AML above 65 years of age (median 70, range 66–81) were randomly assigned in this open label randomized Phase II study to receive standard chemotherapy (3+7) with or without tosedostat at the selected daily dose of 120 mg (n = 116), days 1–21. In the second cycle, patients received cytarabine 1000 mg/m2 twice daily on days 1-6 with or without tosedostat. CR/CRi rates in the 2 arms were not significantly different (69% (95% C.I. 60–77%) vs 64% (55–73%), respectively). At 24 months, event-free survival (EFS) was 20% for the standard arm versus 12% for the tosedostat arm (Cox-p = 0.01) and overall survival (OS) 33% vs 18% respectively (p = 0.006). Infectious complications accounted for an increased early death rate in the tosedostat arm. Atrial fibrillation w

Isolated hip fracture care in an inclusive trauma system : A trauma system wide evaluation

Introduction: Elderly patients with a hip fracture represent a large proportion of the trauma population; however, little is known about outcome differences between different levels of trauma care for these patients. The aim of this study is to analyse the outcome of trauma care in patients with a hip fracture within our inclusive trauma system. Materials and methods: Retrospective cohort study. Data were collected from the electronic patient documentation of patients, with an isolated hip fracture (aged ≥60), admitted to a level I or level II trauma centre between January 2008 and December 2012. Main outcomes were time to operative treatment, complications, mortality, and secondary surgical intervention rate. Results: A total of 204 (level I) and 1425 (level II) patients were admitted. Significantly more ASA4 patients, by the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification, were treated at the level I trauma centre. At the level II trauma centre, median time to surgical treatment was shorter (0 days; IQR 0-1 vs 1 day; IQR 1-2; P <. 0.001), which was mainly influenced by postponement due to lack of operation room availability (14%, n = 28) and co-morbidities (13%, n = 26) present at the level I trauma centre. At the level II trauma centre, hospital stay was shorter (9 vs 11 days; P <. 0.001) and the complication rate was lower (41%; n = 590 vs 53%; n = 108; P = 0.002), as was mortality (4%; n = 54 vs 7%; n = 15; P = 0.018). Secondary surgical intervention was performed less often at the level II trauma centre (6%; n = 91vs 12%; n = 24; P = 0.005). However, no differences in secondary surgical procedures due to inadequate postoperative outcome or implant failure were observed. Conclusion and relevance: The clinical pathway and the large volume of patients at the level II centre resulted in earlier surgical intervention, lower overall complication and mortality rate, and a shorter length of stay. Therefore, the elderly patient with a hip fracture should ideally be treated in the large-volume level II hospital with a pre-established clinical pathway. However, complex patients requiring specific care that can only be provided at the level I trauma centre may be treated there with similar operative results