Scandinavian trial of uncomplicated aortic dissection therapy : study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Peer reviewe

Editor's Choice - Assessment of International Outcomes of Intact Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair over 9 Years

Background: Case mix and outcomes of complex surgical procedures vary over time and between regions. This study analyses peri-operative mortality after intact abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair in 11 countries over 9 years. Methods: Data on primary AAA repair from vascular surgery registries in 11 countries for the years 2005-2009 and 2010-2013 were analysed. Multivariate adjusted logistic regression analyses were carried out to adjust for variations in case mix. Results: A total of 83,253 patients were included. Over the two periods, the proportion of patients >= 80 years old increased (18.5% vs. 23.1%; p <.0001) as did the proportion of endovascular repair (EVAR) (44.3% vs. 60.6; p <.0001). In the latter period, 25.8% of AAAs were less than 5.5 cm. The mean annual volume of open repairs per centre decreased from 12.9 to 10.6 between the two periods (p <.0001), and it increased for EVAR from 10.0 to 17.1 (p <.0001). Overall, peri-operative mortality fell from 3.0% to 2.4% (p <.0001). Mortality for EVAR decreased from 1.5% to 1.1% (p <.0001), but the outcome worsened for open repair from 3.9% to 4.4% (p = .008). The peri-operative risk was greater for octogenarians (overall, 3.6% vs. 2.1%, p <.0001; open, 9.5% vs. 3.6%, p <.0001; EVAR, 1.8% vs. 0.7%, p <.0001), and women (overall, 3.8% vs. 2.2%, p <.0001; open, 6.0% vs. 4.0%, p <.0001; EVAR, 1.9% vs. 0.9%, p <.0001). Peri-operative mortality after repair of AAAs Conclusions: In this large international cohort, total peri-operative mortality continues to fall for the treatment of intact AAAs. The number of EVAR procedures now exceeds open procedures. Mortality after EVAR has decreased, but mortality for open operations has increased. The peri-operative mortality for small AM treatment, particularly open surgical repair, is still considerable and should be weighed against the risk of rupture. (C) 2017 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.Peer reviewe

“Medically unexplained” symptoms and symptom disorders in primary care: prognosis-based recognition and classification

Background: Many patients consult their GP because they experience bodily symptoms. In a substantial proportion of cases, the clinical picture does not meet the existing diagnostic criteria for diseases or disorders. This may be because symptoms are recent and evolving or because symptoms are persistent but, either by their character or the negative results of clinical investigation cannot be attributed to disease: so-called “medically unexplained symptoms” (MUS). MUS are inconsistently recognised, diagnosed and managed in primary care. The specialist classification systems for MUS pose several problems in a primary care setting. The systems generally require great certainty about presence or absence of physical disease, they tend to be mind-body dualistic, and they view symptoms from a narrow specialty determined perspective. We need a new classification of MUS in primary care; a classification that better supports clinical decision-making, creates clearer communication and provides scientific underpinning of research to ensure effective interventions. Discussion: We propose a classification of symptoms that places greater emphasis on prognostic factors. Prognosis-based classification aims to categorise the patient’s risk of ongoing symptoms, complications, increased healthcare use or disability because of the symptoms. Current evidence suggests several factors which may be used: symptom characteristics such as: number, multi-system pattern, frequency, severity. Other factors are: concurrent mental disorders, psychological features and demographic data. We discuss how these characteristics may be used to classify symptoms into three groups: self-limiting symptoms, recurrent and persistent symptoms, and symptom disorders. The middle group is especially relevant in primary care; as these patients generally have reduced quality of life but often go unrecognised and are at risk of iatrogenic harm. The presented characteristics do not contain immediately obvious cut-points, and the assessment of prognosis depends on a combination of several factors. Conclusion: Three criteria (multiple symptoms, multiple systems, multiple times) may support the classification into good, intermediate and poor prognosis when dealing with symptoms in primary care. The proposed new classification specifically targets the patient population in primary care and may provide a rational framework for decision-making in clinical practice and for epidemiologic and clinical research of symptoms

Comparative analysis of the outcomes of elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in England and Sweden.

BACKGROUND: There is substantial international variation in mortality after abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair; many non-operative factors influence risk-adjusted outcomes. This study compared 90-day and 5-year mortality for patients undergoing elective AAA repair in England and Sweden. METHODS: Patients were identified from English Hospital Episode Statistics and the Swedish Vascular Registry between 2003 and 2012. Ninety-day mortality and 5-year survival were compared after adjustment for age and sex. Separate within-country analyses were performed to examine the impact of co-morbidity, hospital teaching status and hospital annual caseload. RESULTS: The study included 36 249 patients who had AAA treatment in England, with a median age of 74 (i.q.r. 69-79) years, of whom 87·2 per cent were men. There were 7806 patients treated for AAA in Sweden, with a median of age 73 (68-78) years, of whom 82·9 per cent were men. Ninety-day mortality rates were poorer in England than in Sweden (5·0 versus 3·9 per cent respectively; P < 0·001), but were not significantly different after 2007. Five-year survival was poorer in England (70·5 versus 72·8 per cent; P < 0·001). Use of EVAR was initially lower in England, but surpassed that in Sweden after 2010. In both countries, poor outcome was associated with increased age. In England, institutions with higher operative annual volume had lower mortality rates. CONCLUSION: Mortality for elective AAA repair was initially poorer in England than Sweden, but improved over time alongside greater uptake of EVAR, and now there is no difference. Centres performing a greater proportion of EVAR procedures achieved better results in England

Peri-Operative Management of Patients Undergoing Fenestrated-Branched Endovascular Repair for Juxtarenal, Pararenal and Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysms: Preventing, Recognizing and Treating Complications to Improve Clinical Outcomes

The advent and refinement of complex endovascular techniques in the last two decades has revolutionized the field of vascular surgery. This has allowed an effective minimally invasive treatment of extensive disease involving the pararenal and the thoracoabdominal aorta. Fenestrated-branched EVAR (F/BEVAR) now represents a feasible technical solution to address these complex diseases, moving the proximal sealing zone above the renal-visceral vessels take-off and preserving their patency. The aim of this paper was to provide a narrative review on the peri-operative management of patients undergoing F/BEVAR procedures for juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (JAAA), pararenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (PRAA) or thoracoabdominal aortic aneurism (TAAA). It will focus on how to prevent, diagnose, and manage the complications ensuing from these complex interventions, in order to improve clinical outcomes. Indeed, F/BEVAR remains a technically, physiologically, and mentally demanding procedure. Intraoperative adverse events often require prolonged or additional procedures and complications may significantly impact a patient’s quality of life, health status, and overall cost of care. The presence of standardized preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative pathways of care, together with surgeons and teams with significant experience in aortic surgery, should be considered as crucial points to improve clinical outcomes. Aggressive prevention, prompt diagnosis and timely rescue of any major adverse events following the procedure remain paramount clinical needs

Editor's Choice - The Impact of Centralisation and Endovascular Aneurysm Repair on Treatment of Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms Based on International Registries

Objectives: Current management of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (RAAA) varies among centres and countries, particularly in the degree of implementation of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and levels of vascular surgery centralisation. This study assesses these variations and the impact they have on outcomes. Materials and methods: RAAA repairs from vascular surgical registries in 11 countries, 2010-2013, were investigated. Data were analysed overall, per country, per treatment modality (EVAR or open aortic repair [OAR]), centre volume (quintiles IV), and whether centres were predominantly EVAR (>= 50% of RAAA performed with EVAR [EVAR(p)]) or predominantly OAR [OAR(p)]. Primary outcome was peri-operative mortality. Data are presented as either mean values or percentages with 95% CI within parentheses, and compared with chi-square tests, as well as with adjusted OR. Results: There were 9273 patients included. Mean age was 74.7 (74.5-74.9) years, and 82.7% of patients were men (81.9-83.6). Mean AAA diameter at rupture was 7.6 cm (7.5-7.6). Of these aneurysms, 10.7% (10.0-11.4) were less than 5.5 cm. EVAR was performed in 23.1% (22.3-24.0). There were 6817 procedures performed in OAR(p) centres and 1217 performed in EVAR(p) centres. Overall peri-operative mortality was 28.8% (27.9-29.8). Peri-operative mortality for OAR was 32.1% (31.0-33.2) and for EVAR 17.9% (16.3-19.6), p 22 repairs per year), 23.3% (21.2-25.4) than in QII-V, 30.0% (28.9-31.1), p <.001. Peri-operative mortality after OAR was lower in high volume centres compared with the other centres, 25.3% (23.0-27.6) and 34.0% (32.7-35.4), respectively, p <.001. There was no significant difference in peri-operative mortality after EVAR between centres based on volume. Conclusions: Peri-operative mortality is lower in centres with a primary EVAR approach or with high case volume. Most repairs, however, are still performed in low volume centres and in centres with a primary OAR strategy. Reorganisation of acute vascular surgical services may improve outcomes of RAAA repair. (C) 2018 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.Peer reviewe

Editor's Choice - Infective Native Aortic Aneurysms: A Delphi Consensus Document on Terminology, Definition, Classification, Diagnosis, and Reporting Standards.

There is no consensus regarding the terminology, definition, classification, diagnostic criteria, and algorithm, or reporting standards for the disease of infective native aortic aneurysm (INAA), previously known as mycotic aneurysm. The aim of this study was to establish this by performing a consensus study. The Delphi methodology was used. Thirty-seven international experts were invited via mail to participate. Four two week Delphi rounds were performed, using an online questionnaire, initially with 22 statements and nine reporting items. The panellists rated the statements on a five point Likert scale. Comments on statements were analysed, statements revised, and results presented in iterative rounds. Consensus was defined as ≥ 75% of the panel selecting "strongly agree" or "agree" on the Likert scale, and consensus on the final assessment was defined as Cronbach's alpha coefficient &gt; .80. All 38 panellists completed all four rounds, resulting in 100% participation and agreement that this study was necessary, and the term INAA was agreed to be optimal. Three more statements were added based on the results and comments of the panel, resulting in a final 25 statements and nine reporting items. All 25 statements reached an agreement of ≥ 87%, and all nine reporting items reached an agreement of 100%. The Cronbach's alpha increased for each consecutive round (round 1 = .84, round 2 = .87, round 3 = .90, and round 4 = .92). Thus, consensus was reached for all statements and reporting items. This Delphi study established the first consensus document on INAA regarding terminology, definition, classification, diagnostic criteria, and algorithm, as well as reporting standards. The results of this study create essential conditions for scientific research on this disease. The presented consensus will need future amendments in accordance with newly acquired knowledge

Systematic review of measurement properties of questionnaires measuring somatization in primary care patients

Objective The aim of this review is to critically appraise the evidence on measurement properties of self-report questionnaires measuring somatization in adult primary care patients and to provide recommendations about which questionnaires are most useful for this purpose. Methods We assessed the methodological quality of included studies using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist. To draw overall conclusions about the quality of the questionnaires, we conducted an evidence synthesis using predefined criteria for judging the measurement properties. Results We found 24 articles on 9 questionnaires. Studies on the Patient Health Questionnaire-15 (PHQ-15) and the Four-Dimensional Symptom Questionnaire (4DSQ) somatization subscale prevailed and covered the broadest range of measurement properties. These questionnaires had the best internal consistency, test-retest reliability, structural validity, and construct validity. The PHQ-15 also had good criterion validity, whereas the 4DSQ somatization subscale was validated in several languages. The Bodily Distress Syndrome (BDS) checklist had good internal consistency and structural validity. Some evidence was found for good construct validity and criterion validity of the Physical Symptom Checklist (PSC-51) and good construct validity of the Symptom Check-List (SCL-90-R) somatization subscale. However, these three questionnaires were only studied in a small number of primary care studies. Conclusion Based on our findings, we recommend the use of either the PHQ-15 or 4DSQ somatization subscale for somatization in primary care. Other questionnaires, such as the BDS checklist, PSC-51 and the SCL-90-R somatization subscale show promising results but have not been studied extensively in primary care. © 2017 Elsevier Inc