User login
Neck Pain With No Palpable Tenderness
ANSWER
The image shows an acute fracture at the base of the odontoid with evidence of posterior displacement of the fracture fragment. Such fractures are typically unstable.
In addition, there is evidence of a fracture and subluxation at the C4/C5 level. However, given the degree of sclerosis and chronic changes present, this finding is likely an old one.
The patient was maintained in a collar on bedrest. Subsequently, he underwent odontoid pinning to stabilize the fractures.
ANSWER
The image shows an acute fracture at the base of the odontoid with evidence of posterior displacement of the fracture fragment. Such fractures are typically unstable.
In addition, there is evidence of a fracture and subluxation at the C4/C5 level. However, given the degree of sclerosis and chronic changes present, this finding is likely an old one.
The patient was maintained in a collar on bedrest. Subsequently, he underwent odontoid pinning to stabilize the fractures.
ANSWER
The image shows an acute fracture at the base of the odontoid with evidence of posterior displacement of the fracture fragment. Such fractures are typically unstable.
In addition, there is evidence of a fracture and subluxation at the C4/C5 level. However, given the degree of sclerosis and chronic changes present, this finding is likely an old one.
The patient was maintained in a collar on bedrest. Subsequently, he underwent odontoid pinning to stabilize the fractures.
A 65-year-old man presents with neck pain following a fall. Earlier this evening, he says, he fell off his porch (approximately four feet in height) and hit the top/front of his head on the ground. He denies any loss of consciousness, adding that he only came in for evaluation at the urging of his family. The patient denies any extremity weakness or paresthesias. He also denies any significant medical history, although his sister, who has accompanied him, states that he drinks alcohol “regularly and heavily.” Physical examination reveals a man who appears much older than his stated age and is uncomfortable, but not in obvious distress. His vital signs are normal. He is currently wearing a hard cervical collar. There is no palpable tenderness posteriorly along his cervical spine. He is able to move all of his extremities well. His strength is good, and his sensation is intact. A lateral radiograph of the patient’s cervical spine is shown. What is your impression?
Is Lingering “Flu” Responsible for Lethargy?
ANSWER
This ECG shows a junctional rhythm with a rate of 47 beats/min and an incomplete right bundle branch block (RBBB). The QRS complexes are narrow, indicating conduction originating at or above the atrioventricular (AV) node.
With the absence of a P wave for every QRS complex, the origin of each beat occurs at the level of the AV node, with depolarization of the ventricles via the normal conduction pathway. Intrinsic automaticity of the AV node results in a rate of 40 to 60 beats/min. There may be retrograde conduction from the AV node into the atria; however, it is not apparent in this ECG.
An incomplete RBBB is evidenced by a QRS complex with a duration > 100 ms and ≤ 120 ms with a terminal R wave (eg, rsR’) in lead V1 and a slurred S wave in leads I and V6 (more common with complete RBBB).
The presence of new-onset junctional rhythm with an incomplete RBBB is suspicious for conduction system disease. Given her symptomatic bradycardia, the patient underwent implantation of a dual-chamber permanent pacemaker. She has since returned to her normal activities.
Of note: Careful examination of the baseline in this tracing raises suspicion for atrial fibrillation (AF). However, according to her primary care provider, this patient had had no previous episodes of AF. Intracardiac electrograms taken during her pacemaker implantation ruled out this diagnosis.
ANSWER
This ECG shows a junctional rhythm with a rate of 47 beats/min and an incomplete right bundle branch block (RBBB). The QRS complexes are narrow, indicating conduction originating at or above the atrioventricular (AV) node.
With the absence of a P wave for every QRS complex, the origin of each beat occurs at the level of the AV node, with depolarization of the ventricles via the normal conduction pathway. Intrinsic automaticity of the AV node results in a rate of 40 to 60 beats/min. There may be retrograde conduction from the AV node into the atria; however, it is not apparent in this ECG.
An incomplete RBBB is evidenced by a QRS complex with a duration > 100 ms and ≤ 120 ms with a terminal R wave (eg, rsR’) in lead V1 and a slurred S wave in leads I and V6 (more common with complete RBBB).
The presence of new-onset junctional rhythm with an incomplete RBBB is suspicious for conduction system disease. Given her symptomatic bradycardia, the patient underwent implantation of a dual-chamber permanent pacemaker. She has since returned to her normal activities.
Of note: Careful examination of the baseline in this tracing raises suspicion for atrial fibrillation (AF). However, according to her primary care provider, this patient had had no previous episodes of AF. Intracardiac electrograms taken during her pacemaker implantation ruled out this diagnosis.
ANSWER
This ECG shows a junctional rhythm with a rate of 47 beats/min and an incomplete right bundle branch block (RBBB). The QRS complexes are narrow, indicating conduction originating at or above the atrioventricular (AV) node.
With the absence of a P wave for every QRS complex, the origin of each beat occurs at the level of the AV node, with depolarization of the ventricles via the normal conduction pathway. Intrinsic automaticity of the AV node results in a rate of 40 to 60 beats/min. There may be retrograde conduction from the AV node into the atria; however, it is not apparent in this ECG.
An incomplete RBBB is evidenced by a QRS complex with a duration > 100 ms and ≤ 120 ms with a terminal R wave (eg, rsR’) in lead V1 and a slurred S wave in leads I and V6 (more common with complete RBBB).
The presence of new-onset junctional rhythm with an incomplete RBBB is suspicious for conduction system disease. Given her symptomatic bradycardia, the patient underwent implantation of a dual-chamber permanent pacemaker. She has since returned to her normal activities.
Of note: Careful examination of the baseline in this tracing raises suspicion for atrial fibrillation (AF). However, according to her primary care provider, this patient had had no previous episodes of AF. Intracardiac electrograms taken during her pacemaker implantation ruled out this diagnosis.
Accompanied by her daughter, whom she is visiting from out of town, a 72-year-old woman presents with a two-week history of lethargy. She says she had “the flu” three weeks ago and just can’t seem to recover from it. According to her daughter, she doesn’t appear ill but seems to tire very easily after simple tasks such as walking from her bedroom to the kitchen. The patient denies fever, chills, orthopnea, dyspnea, and cough. There have been no episodes of near-syncope or syncope. She repeatedly states that she is “just so tired.” Prior to the onset of her flulike symptoms, she was very active in her retirement community, dancing, gardening, and going on sponsored trips to a local casino without difficulty. She says she wouldn’t even attempt those activities in her current state, as any activity immediately exhausts her. Medical history is remarkable for hypertension, hypothyroidism, osteoarthritis, and diabetes. Surgical history is remarkable for a cholecystectomy, abdominal hysterectomy, and removal of several lipomas from her upper extremities. Her current medications include aspirin, hydrochlorothiazide, lisinopril, metformin, and levothyroxine. She is allergic to penicillin and sulfa, both of which cause hives and flushing. Social history reveals that she is a retired junior high school librarian, the mother of three living children, and a widow. She is a smoker, with a one-pack-per-day history from age 14 until her husband died four years ago. She quit at that time but has recently started again, smoking half a pack per day (but “only” when she goes to the casino). She does not use alcohol or recreational drugs. The review of systems is positive for corrective lenses and symptoms suggestive of a urinary tract infection. On physical exam, her blood pressure is 138/92 mm Hg; pulse, 50 beats/min; respiratory rate, 16 breaths/min-1; and temperature, 98.4°F. Her weight is 224 lb, and her height is 62 in. She walks with the assistance of a cane and appears tired and apprehensive. Pertinent physical findings include bilateral cataracts, clear lung fields, and a soft, early systolic murmur at the left lower sternal border. She has two well-healed scars on her abdomen and multiple well-healed scars on both upper extremities. Her hands show evidence of osteoarthritis, and she has limited range of motion but no pain in her right hip. The neurologic exam is grossly intact. Laboratory tests and an ECG are performed. The ECG findings include a ventricular rate of 47 beats/min; PR interval, not measured; QRS duration, 120 ms; QT/QTc interval, 454/401 ms; P axis, not measured; R axis, 171°; and T axis, 51°. What is your interpretation of this ECG—and does it provide an explanation for the patient’s recent lethargy?
Team creates faster method for diagnosing sepsis
for Staphylococcus infection
Credit: Bill Branson
A new technique could cut hours off the time it takes to diagnose blood infections, according to a report published in mBio.
The
method combines a selective lysis step in which blood cells are destroyed, a centrifugation step to collect any bacteria or
fungi, and a fluorescence step that reveals the “fingerprint” of any
pathogens present in the blood sample.
In tests, this method identified
the species of bacteria or fungi in 96.5% of positive blood culture
samples.
“The primary benefit of getting a rapid identification is making sure the patient is on the right [antibiotic] therapy and to quickly make any needed adjustments to the initial therapy,” said study author John Walsh, of bioMérieux, Inc. in Durham, North Carolina.
Walsh added that the current standard approach to diagnosing bloodstream infections—Gram staining and overnight sub-culture followed by phenotypic ID tests—has limitations that can prevent timely treatment.
Gram staining provides early, low-level information about the type of microorganism present, but it sometimes takes hours to deliver a result, and technicians can make mistakes in the process that provide misleading results.
Other, more specific identification methods are also available for diagnosis, but they can take at least a day or two to produce results, and many require expensive equipment.
So Walsh and his colleagues developed a new technique. With this method, a sample of positive blood culture is treated with lysis buffer, to “pop” the blood cells, then transferred to a specialized optical tube.
Next, the tube is centrifuged, which drives bacteria or fungi down through a liquid density cushion to form a pellet at the bottom of the tube.
Then comes the intrinsic fluorescence spectroscopy. The microbial pellet is irradiated with light ranging from the deep ultraviolet to infrared. This excites certain organic molecules in the microorganisms—tryptophan, NADH, FAD, porphyrins, and others—and causes them to fluoresce in a characteristic way depending on the identity of the microbe.
The exact pattern of fluorescence is then compared with a database of 37 common pathogens to identify the organism present.
“We’re using intrinsic fluorescence to identify the microorganisms,” Walsh noted. “It’s an innate property of most living organisms. Because it’s intrinsic, no reagents are needed for the identification step.”
This removes many of the opportunities for mistakes and lowers test costs, he added.
In tests, this method correctly identified the species in 96.5% of all samples. In the 2.7% of samples for which no species identity was provided, the system was able to correctly identify 67% to the family level, which is often enough information to select an effective therapy.
More than 1000 samples were tested, and the method never gave an incorrect result as to the family level or the Gram type.
Walsh and his colleagues are now working on automating this system with robotics to make it a fully hands-off process. He noted that blood cultures grow in their own time, often producing a positive result at an inconvenient time of the day for clinical labs, so automation could speed up diagnosis significantly.
“Our vision is to have a system that will automatically identify the blood culture isolate within 15 minutes of the culture being called positive,” Walsh said.
If a culture is positive at 2 am, automating this method could make it possible to identify the organism by 2:15 am and send an electronic report to a patient’s physician.
The researchers hope to begin testing and evaluating the feasibility of an automated form of the system in a clinical environment within months. 
for Staphylococcus infection
Credit: Bill Branson
A new technique could cut hours off the time it takes to diagnose blood infections, according to a report published in mBio.
The
method combines a selective lysis step in which blood cells are destroyed, a centrifugation step to collect any bacteria or
fungi, and a fluorescence step that reveals the “fingerprint” of any
pathogens present in the blood sample.
In tests, this method identified
the species of bacteria or fungi in 96.5% of positive blood culture
samples.
“The primary benefit of getting a rapid identification is making sure the patient is on the right [antibiotic] therapy and to quickly make any needed adjustments to the initial therapy,” said study author John Walsh, of bioMérieux, Inc. in Durham, North Carolina.
Walsh added that the current standard approach to diagnosing bloodstream infections—Gram staining and overnight sub-culture followed by phenotypic ID tests—has limitations that can prevent timely treatment.
Gram staining provides early, low-level information about the type of microorganism present, but it sometimes takes hours to deliver a result, and technicians can make mistakes in the process that provide misleading results.
Other, more specific identification methods are also available for diagnosis, but they can take at least a day or two to produce results, and many require expensive equipment.
So Walsh and his colleagues developed a new technique. With this method, a sample of positive blood culture is treated with lysis buffer, to “pop” the blood cells, then transferred to a specialized optical tube.
Next, the tube is centrifuged, which drives bacteria or fungi down through a liquid density cushion to form a pellet at the bottom of the tube.
Then comes the intrinsic fluorescence spectroscopy. The microbial pellet is irradiated with light ranging from the deep ultraviolet to infrared. This excites certain organic molecules in the microorganisms—tryptophan, NADH, FAD, porphyrins, and others—and causes them to fluoresce in a characteristic way depending on the identity of the microbe.
The exact pattern of fluorescence is then compared with a database of 37 common pathogens to identify the organism present.
“We’re using intrinsic fluorescence to identify the microorganisms,” Walsh noted. “It’s an innate property of most living organisms. Because it’s intrinsic, no reagents are needed for the identification step.”
This removes many of the opportunities for mistakes and lowers test costs, he added.
In tests, this method correctly identified the species in 96.5% of all samples. In the 2.7% of samples for which no species identity was provided, the system was able to correctly identify 67% to the family level, which is often enough information to select an effective therapy.
More than 1000 samples were tested, and the method never gave an incorrect result as to the family level or the Gram type.
Walsh and his colleagues are now working on automating this system with robotics to make it a fully hands-off process. He noted that blood cultures grow in their own time, often producing a positive result at an inconvenient time of the day for clinical labs, so automation could speed up diagnosis significantly.
“Our vision is to have a system that will automatically identify the blood culture isolate within 15 minutes of the culture being called positive,” Walsh said.
If a culture is positive at 2 am, automating this method could make it possible to identify the organism by 2:15 am and send an electronic report to a patient’s physician.
The researchers hope to begin testing and evaluating the feasibility of an automated form of the system in a clinical environment within months.
for Staphylococcus infection
Credit: Bill Branson
A new technique could cut hours off the time it takes to diagnose blood infections, according to a report published in mBio.
The
method combines a selective lysis step in which blood cells are destroyed, a centrifugation step to collect any bacteria or
fungi, and a fluorescence step that reveals the “fingerprint” of any
pathogens present in the blood sample.
In tests, this method identified
the species of bacteria or fungi in 96.5% of positive blood culture
samples.
“The primary benefit of getting a rapid identification is making sure the patient is on the right [antibiotic] therapy and to quickly make any needed adjustments to the initial therapy,” said study author John Walsh, of bioMérieux, Inc. in Durham, North Carolina.
Walsh added that the current standard approach to diagnosing bloodstream infections—Gram staining and overnight sub-culture followed by phenotypic ID tests—has limitations that can prevent timely treatment.
Gram staining provides early, low-level information about the type of microorganism present, but it sometimes takes hours to deliver a result, and technicians can make mistakes in the process that provide misleading results.
Other, more specific identification methods are also available for diagnosis, but they can take at least a day or two to produce results, and many require expensive equipment.
So Walsh and his colleagues developed a new technique. With this method, a sample of positive blood culture is treated with lysis buffer, to “pop” the blood cells, then transferred to a specialized optical tube.
Next, the tube is centrifuged, which drives bacteria or fungi down through a liquid density cushion to form a pellet at the bottom of the tube.
Then comes the intrinsic fluorescence spectroscopy. The microbial pellet is irradiated with light ranging from the deep ultraviolet to infrared. This excites certain organic molecules in the microorganisms—tryptophan, NADH, FAD, porphyrins, and others—and causes them to fluoresce in a characteristic way depending on the identity of the microbe.
The exact pattern of fluorescence is then compared with a database of 37 common pathogens to identify the organism present.
“We’re using intrinsic fluorescence to identify the microorganisms,” Walsh noted. “It’s an innate property of most living organisms. Because it’s intrinsic, no reagents are needed for the identification step.”
This removes many of the opportunities for mistakes and lowers test costs, he added.
In tests, this method correctly identified the species in 96.5% of all samples. In the 2.7% of samples for which no species identity was provided, the system was able to correctly identify 67% to the family level, which is often enough information to select an effective therapy.
More than 1000 samples were tested, and the method never gave an incorrect result as to the family level or the Gram type.
Walsh and his colleagues are now working on automating this system with robotics to make it a fully hands-off process. He noted that blood cultures grow in their own time, often producing a positive result at an inconvenient time of the day for clinical labs, so automation could speed up diagnosis significantly.
“Our vision is to have a system that will automatically identify the blood culture isolate within 15 minutes of the culture being called positive,” Walsh said.
If a culture is positive at 2 am, automating this method could make it possible to identify the organism by 2:15 am and send an electronic report to a patient’s physician.
The researchers hope to begin testing and evaluating the feasibility of an automated form of the system in a clinical environment within months.
Point-Counterpoint: Type II Endoleaks - To treat or not to treat
The management of Type II endoleaks remains controversial. At the Charing Cross meeting this year Jean- Pierre Becquemin and Hence Vehagen debated whether Type II endoleaks should be treated. Dr. Verhagen suggested that results of endoleak treatment are so poor and the natural history of Type II endoleaks so benign that perhaps we shouldn’t even try to treat them. Dr. Becquemin felt that an attempt at treatment for some endoleaks was still necessary. This prompted our editors to suggest a U.S. version of the debate. As you will see both Dr. Geraghty and Dr. Kwolek feel that there is merit in pursuing treatment but with certain caveats. We appreciate their insight into this important subject.
– Dr. Russell Samson is the medical editor of Vascular Specialist.
A slow start can be salvaged
Our group recently published the midterm outcomes of our series of percutaneous glue and /or coil embolizations to treat type II endoleaks (T2EL) accompanied by continued aneurysm sac growth.1 Painstaking retrospective data collection, augmented by blinded review of all follow-up CT scans, demonstrated that at 23 months post intervention, T2EL had persisted or recurred in 72% of patients. Furthermore, the rate of aneurysm sac growth was not altered by the percutaneous intervention.
Other institutions have also reported significant rates of T2EL persistence/recurrence following embolization, and in the Cleveland Clinic experience, continued sac growth in excess of 5 mm in diameter was documented in 56% of patients who had undergone an attempt at T2EL ablation.2-4 In light of this data, one might logically question why I continue to support intervention in this setting.
The midterm reappraisals of T2EL interventions are certainly sobering. We can no longer accept apparent procedural success as a guarantee that these endoleaks will remain clinically and radiographically dormant. Yet these studies were not without their bright spots. In our series, diagnostic angiography (via transfemoral and translumbar approaches) detected occult type I or type III endoleaks in 21% of patients, prompting definitive repair by additional endograft placement. Similar angiographic elucidation of type I and III endoleaks was confirmed by the University of Chicago experience, with a 16% detection rate.2 The diagnosis and treatment of these highly pressurized leaks likely contributed to the low incidence of aneurysm rupture and aneurysm-related mortality seen in most of these series.
Bright spots aside, current midterm results for T2EL intervention leave much to be desired. I would contend, however, that these interventions should be refined, not abandoned. We now appreciate that T2EL mimic the behavior of complex arteriovenous malformations in several ways: the presence of multiple feeding and draining branches, the finding that solitary branch vessel embolization often leads to inflow recruitment from less prominent branches, and the presence of a nidus whose ablation is critical. In retrospect, then, it is not surprising that treatment approaches consisting of single-vessel coiling, or simple embolization of the nidus without concomitant treatment of all feeding branches, failed to produce the desired result. The aggressiveness of early T2EL embolization procedures may have been tempered by the potential for visceral and spinal cord complications.5,6 However, current midterm outcomes data suggest that predictable and durable success in T2EL treatment will require complete nidus ablation and occlusion of all arterial branches of the sac.
How can we pursue this more aggressive goal while maintaining an appropriate safety profile? In several instances, we have pursued this objective via staged interventions: initial angiographic coil/glue deployment, followed by laparoscopic clipping of persistent feeding vessels. The use of Onyx® (EV3-Covidien), as championed by Abularrage and Bosiers,7,8 offers the potential to achieve full treatment with a single intervention.
Advantages of Onyx include predictable polymerization times and lack of adhesion to the delivery catheter. These features permit deliberate and complete obliteration of the nidus, with intentional extension of the polymerizing mixture into the feeding vessels.
T2EL intervention has thus completed its first iteration. The value of routine angiographic examination is clear, particularly as regards the detection of occult type I and III endoleaks. Failure analysis of first-generation T2EL interventions suggests that incomplete obliteration of the endoleak complex (nidus and all feeding branches) sets the stage for vessel recruitment and reestablishment of sac flow. Promising alternative therapies have been identified, and we await their thorough evaluation.
Dr. Geraghty is an associate professor, surgery and radiology, in the division of general surgery, vascular surgery section at Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Mo., and co-director of the Washington University Limb Preservation Center.
1. J Vasc Surg, 2012. 55(5): p. 1263-7.
2. J Vasc Interv Radiol, 2012. 23(7): p. 866-72; quiz 872.
3. J Endovasc Ther, 2012. 19(2): p. 182-92.
4. J Vasc Surg, 2012. 55(1): p. 33-40.
5. Ann Vasc Surg, 2012. 26(6): p. 860 e1-7.
6. J Vasc Interv Radiol, 2013. 24(1): p. 49-55.
7. J Vasc Surg, 2012. 56(3): p. 630-6.
8. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino), 2013.
A call for a prospective randomized trial
While I agree with Dr. Geraghty’s comments concerning the initial poor results reported for the percutaneous treatment of Type II endoleaks,1 I disagree with comments made in April 2013 at the Charing Cross meeting by Dr. Hence Verhagen that there is "no need to worry about Type II endoleaks since they are low pressure."2
Early on in our experience we began measuring sac pressures after trans- lumbar catheterization and have found that some aneurysm sacs may in fact have systolic arterial pressures of 8-90 mm HG from large lumbar or IMA collaterals. Furthermore, we and others have described the treatment of patients with ruptured AAA after EVAR who upon open exploration where found to have large patent lumbar arteries as the sole etiology of the ruptured AAA.
Dr. Geraghty and Dr. Sarac at Cleveland Clinic have also described the important observation that these Type II endoleaks may be associated with a Type I or III endoleaks and thus put patients at even higher risk of rupture.3 The extent of these leaks may not be completely elucidated until the time of angiography, again emphasizing the importance of a more aggressive approach to diagnosis and treatment in patients with an enlarging aneurysm sac.
These authors have also appropriately pointed out that overall treatment success rates are low with persistence of type II endoleaks on long–term follow-up. While we initially described an overall success rate of 30%, our approach has changed over time to include direct access to the endoleak nidus with the injection of a flow directed glue (Onyx) to obliterate the flow channel and feeding vessels.
We have found this approach to be more successful than attempting to cannulate each of the feeding lumbar vessels or coil embolization of the aneurysm sac, and can be performed via either a translumbar or transarterial approach using SMA to IMA collaterals. While our success rate using this technique has improved to nearly 80%, several words of caution should be noted. 1) Onyx glue is approved for use in the treatment of intracerebral vascular malformations and does not have a peripheral indication at this time. 2) It is critically important that the interventionalist obtains access into the nidus/flow channel to allow the embolic agent to flow. Otherwise you are injecting glue directly into the sac thrombus and wasting time and an expensive embolic agent. 3) There are often multiple levels of lumbar vessels involved and we have found that we often have to go back several times at different levels to treat extensive Type II endoleaks. All of these observations emphasize the need to further study the treatment of Type II endoleaks and the need for a prospective randomized trial to better identify the best treatment options.
Dr. Kwolek is the director of the vascular and endovascular training program at Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, and the chief of vascular surgery at Newton Wellesley Hospital.
1. J Vasc Surg, 2012. 55(5): p. 1263-7.
2. Management of Type II endoleaks divides the experts at CX 35. Vascular News International,58, May 2012, BIBA publishing.
3. J Vasc Surg, 2012. 55(1): p. 33-40.
4. J Vasc Surg, 2012. 56(3): p. 630-6.
The management of Type II endoleaks remains controversial. At the Charing Cross meeting this year Jean- Pierre Becquemin and Hence Vehagen debated whether Type II endoleaks should be treated. Dr. Verhagen suggested that results of endoleak treatment are so poor and the natural history of Type II endoleaks so benign that perhaps we shouldn’t even try to treat them. Dr. Becquemin felt that an attempt at treatment for some endoleaks was still necessary. This prompted our editors to suggest a U.S. version of the debate. As you will see both Dr. Geraghty and Dr. Kwolek feel that there is merit in pursuing treatment but with certain caveats. We appreciate their insight into this important subject.
– Dr. Russell Samson is the medical editor of Vascular Specialist.
A slow start can be salvaged
Our group recently published the midterm outcomes of our series of percutaneous glue and /or coil embolizations to treat type II endoleaks (T2EL) accompanied by continued aneurysm sac growth.1 Painstaking retrospective data collection, augmented by blinded review of all follow-up CT scans, demonstrated that at 23 months post intervention, T2EL had persisted or recurred in 72% of patients. Furthermore, the rate of aneurysm sac growth was not altered by the percutaneous intervention.
Other institutions have also reported significant rates of T2EL persistence/recurrence following embolization, and in the Cleveland Clinic experience, continued sac growth in excess of 5 mm in diameter was documented in 56% of patients who had undergone an attempt at T2EL ablation.2-4 In light of this data, one might logically question why I continue to support intervention in this setting.
The midterm reappraisals of T2EL interventions are certainly sobering. We can no longer accept apparent procedural success as a guarantee that these endoleaks will remain clinically and radiographically dormant. Yet these studies were not without their bright spots. In our series, diagnostic angiography (via transfemoral and translumbar approaches) detected occult type I or type III endoleaks in 21% of patients, prompting definitive repair by additional endograft placement. Similar angiographic elucidation of type I and III endoleaks was confirmed by the University of Chicago experience, with a 16% detection rate.2 The diagnosis and treatment of these highly pressurized leaks likely contributed to the low incidence of aneurysm rupture and aneurysm-related mortality seen in most of these series.
Bright spots aside, current midterm results for T2EL intervention leave much to be desired. I would contend, however, that these interventions should be refined, not abandoned. We now appreciate that T2EL mimic the behavior of complex arteriovenous malformations in several ways: the presence of multiple feeding and draining branches, the finding that solitary branch vessel embolization often leads to inflow recruitment from less prominent branches, and the presence of a nidus whose ablation is critical. In retrospect, then, it is not surprising that treatment approaches consisting of single-vessel coiling, or simple embolization of the nidus without concomitant treatment of all feeding branches, failed to produce the desired result. The aggressiveness of early T2EL embolization procedures may have been tempered by the potential for visceral and spinal cord complications.5,6 However, current midterm outcomes data suggest that predictable and durable success in T2EL treatment will require complete nidus ablation and occlusion of all arterial branches of the sac.
How can we pursue this more aggressive goal while maintaining an appropriate safety profile? In several instances, we have pursued this objective via staged interventions: initial angiographic coil/glue deployment, followed by laparoscopic clipping of persistent feeding vessels. The use of Onyx® (EV3-Covidien), as championed by Abularrage and Bosiers,7,8 offers the potential to achieve full treatment with a single intervention.
Advantages of Onyx include predictable polymerization times and lack of adhesion to the delivery catheter. These features permit deliberate and complete obliteration of the nidus, with intentional extension of the polymerizing mixture into the feeding vessels.
T2EL intervention has thus completed its first iteration. The value of routine angiographic examination is clear, particularly as regards the detection of occult type I and III endoleaks. Failure analysis of first-generation T2EL interventions suggests that incomplete obliteration of the endoleak complex (nidus and all feeding branches) sets the stage for vessel recruitment and reestablishment of sac flow. Promising alternative therapies have been identified, and we await their thorough evaluation.
Dr. Geraghty is an associate professor, surgery and radiology, in the division of general surgery, vascular surgery section at Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Mo., and co-director of the Washington University Limb Preservation Center.
1. J Vasc Surg, 2012. 55(5): p. 1263-7.
2. J Vasc Interv Radiol, 2012. 23(7): p. 866-72; quiz 872.
3. J Endovasc Ther, 2012. 19(2): p. 182-92.
4. J Vasc Surg, 2012. 55(1): p. 33-40.
5. Ann Vasc Surg, 2012. 26(6): p. 860 e1-7.
6. J Vasc Interv Radiol, 2013. 24(1): p. 49-55.
7. J Vasc Surg, 2012. 56(3): p. 630-6.
8. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino), 2013.
A call for a prospective randomized trial
While I agree with Dr. Geraghty’s comments concerning the initial poor results reported for the percutaneous treatment of Type II endoleaks,1 I disagree with comments made in April 2013 at the Charing Cross meeting by Dr. Hence Verhagen that there is "no need to worry about Type II endoleaks since they are low pressure."2
Early on in our experience we began measuring sac pressures after trans- lumbar catheterization and have found that some aneurysm sacs may in fact have systolic arterial pressures of 8-90 mm HG from large lumbar or IMA collaterals. Furthermore, we and others have described the treatment of patients with ruptured AAA after EVAR who upon open exploration where found to have large patent lumbar arteries as the sole etiology of the ruptured AAA.
Dr. Geraghty and Dr. Sarac at Cleveland Clinic have also described the important observation that these Type II endoleaks may be associated with a Type I or III endoleaks and thus put patients at even higher risk of rupture.3 The extent of these leaks may not be completely elucidated until the time of angiography, again emphasizing the importance of a more aggressive approach to diagnosis and treatment in patients with an enlarging aneurysm sac.
These authors have also appropriately pointed out that overall treatment success rates are low with persistence of type II endoleaks on long–term follow-up. While we initially described an overall success rate of 30%, our approach has changed over time to include direct access to the endoleak nidus with the injection of a flow directed glue (Onyx) to obliterate the flow channel and feeding vessels.
We have found this approach to be more successful than attempting to cannulate each of the feeding lumbar vessels or coil embolization of the aneurysm sac, and can be performed via either a translumbar or transarterial approach using SMA to IMA collaterals. While our success rate using this technique has improved to nearly 80%, several words of caution should be noted. 1) Onyx glue is approved for use in the treatment of intracerebral vascular malformations and does not have a peripheral indication at this time. 2) It is critically important that the interventionalist obtains access into the nidus/flow channel to allow the embolic agent to flow. Otherwise you are injecting glue directly into the sac thrombus and wasting time and an expensive embolic agent. 3) There are often multiple levels of lumbar vessels involved and we have found that we often have to go back several times at different levels to treat extensive Type II endoleaks. All of these observations emphasize the need to further study the treatment of Type II endoleaks and the need for a prospective randomized trial to better identify the best treatment options.
Dr. Kwolek is the director of the vascular and endovascular training program at Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, and the chief of vascular surgery at Newton Wellesley Hospital.
1. J Vasc Surg, 2012. 55(5): p. 1263-7.
2. Management of Type II endoleaks divides the experts at CX 35. Vascular News International,58, May 2012, BIBA publishing.
3. J Vasc Surg, 2012. 55(1): p. 33-40.
4. J Vasc Surg, 2012. 56(3): p. 630-6.
The management of Type II endoleaks remains controversial. At the Charing Cross meeting this year Jean- Pierre Becquemin and Hence Vehagen debated whether Type II endoleaks should be treated. Dr. Verhagen suggested that results of endoleak treatment are so poor and the natural history of Type II endoleaks so benign that perhaps we shouldn’t even try to treat them. Dr. Becquemin felt that an attempt at treatment for some endoleaks was still necessary. This prompted our editors to suggest a U.S. version of the debate. As you will see both Dr. Geraghty and Dr. Kwolek feel that there is merit in pursuing treatment but with certain caveats. We appreciate their insight into this important subject.
– Dr. Russell Samson is the medical editor of Vascular Specialist.
A slow start can be salvaged
Our group recently published the midterm outcomes of our series of percutaneous glue and /or coil embolizations to treat type II endoleaks (T2EL) accompanied by continued aneurysm sac growth.1 Painstaking retrospective data collection, augmented by blinded review of all follow-up CT scans, demonstrated that at 23 months post intervention, T2EL had persisted or recurred in 72% of patients. Furthermore, the rate of aneurysm sac growth was not altered by the percutaneous intervention.
Other institutions have also reported significant rates of T2EL persistence/recurrence following embolization, and in the Cleveland Clinic experience, continued sac growth in excess of 5 mm in diameter was documented in 56% of patients who had undergone an attempt at T2EL ablation.2-4 In light of this data, one might logically question why I continue to support intervention in this setting.
The midterm reappraisals of T2EL interventions are certainly sobering. We can no longer accept apparent procedural success as a guarantee that these endoleaks will remain clinically and radiographically dormant. Yet these studies were not without their bright spots. In our series, diagnostic angiography (via transfemoral and translumbar approaches) detected occult type I or type III endoleaks in 21% of patients, prompting definitive repair by additional endograft placement. Similar angiographic elucidation of type I and III endoleaks was confirmed by the University of Chicago experience, with a 16% detection rate.2 The diagnosis and treatment of these highly pressurized leaks likely contributed to the low incidence of aneurysm rupture and aneurysm-related mortality seen in most of these series.
Bright spots aside, current midterm results for T2EL intervention leave much to be desired. I would contend, however, that these interventions should be refined, not abandoned. We now appreciate that T2EL mimic the behavior of complex arteriovenous malformations in several ways: the presence of multiple feeding and draining branches, the finding that solitary branch vessel embolization often leads to inflow recruitment from less prominent branches, and the presence of a nidus whose ablation is critical. In retrospect, then, it is not surprising that treatment approaches consisting of single-vessel coiling, or simple embolization of the nidus without concomitant treatment of all feeding branches, failed to produce the desired result. The aggressiveness of early T2EL embolization procedures may have been tempered by the potential for visceral and spinal cord complications.5,6 However, current midterm outcomes data suggest that predictable and durable success in T2EL treatment will require complete nidus ablation and occlusion of all arterial branches of the sac.
How can we pursue this more aggressive goal while maintaining an appropriate safety profile? In several instances, we have pursued this objective via staged interventions: initial angiographic coil/glue deployment, followed by laparoscopic clipping of persistent feeding vessels. The use of Onyx® (EV3-Covidien), as championed by Abularrage and Bosiers,7,8 offers the potential to achieve full treatment with a single intervention.
Advantages of Onyx include predictable polymerization times and lack of adhesion to the delivery catheter. These features permit deliberate and complete obliteration of the nidus, with intentional extension of the polymerizing mixture into the feeding vessels.
T2EL intervention has thus completed its first iteration. The value of routine angiographic examination is clear, particularly as regards the detection of occult type I and III endoleaks. Failure analysis of first-generation T2EL interventions suggests that incomplete obliteration of the endoleak complex (nidus and all feeding branches) sets the stage for vessel recruitment and reestablishment of sac flow. Promising alternative therapies have been identified, and we await their thorough evaluation.
Dr. Geraghty is an associate professor, surgery and radiology, in the division of general surgery, vascular surgery section at Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Mo., and co-director of the Washington University Limb Preservation Center.
1. J Vasc Surg, 2012. 55(5): p. 1263-7.
2. J Vasc Interv Radiol, 2012. 23(7): p. 866-72; quiz 872.
3. J Endovasc Ther, 2012. 19(2): p. 182-92.
4. J Vasc Surg, 2012. 55(1): p. 33-40.
5. Ann Vasc Surg, 2012. 26(6): p. 860 e1-7.
6. J Vasc Interv Radiol, 2013. 24(1): p. 49-55.
7. J Vasc Surg, 2012. 56(3): p. 630-6.
8. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino), 2013.
A call for a prospective randomized trial
While I agree with Dr. Geraghty’s comments concerning the initial poor results reported for the percutaneous treatment of Type II endoleaks,1 I disagree with comments made in April 2013 at the Charing Cross meeting by Dr. Hence Verhagen that there is "no need to worry about Type II endoleaks since they are low pressure."2
Early on in our experience we began measuring sac pressures after trans- lumbar catheterization and have found that some aneurysm sacs may in fact have systolic arterial pressures of 8-90 mm HG from large lumbar or IMA collaterals. Furthermore, we and others have described the treatment of patients with ruptured AAA after EVAR who upon open exploration where found to have large patent lumbar arteries as the sole etiology of the ruptured AAA.
Dr. Geraghty and Dr. Sarac at Cleveland Clinic have also described the important observation that these Type II endoleaks may be associated with a Type I or III endoleaks and thus put patients at even higher risk of rupture.3 The extent of these leaks may not be completely elucidated until the time of angiography, again emphasizing the importance of a more aggressive approach to diagnosis and treatment in patients with an enlarging aneurysm sac.
These authors have also appropriately pointed out that overall treatment success rates are low with persistence of type II endoleaks on long–term follow-up. While we initially described an overall success rate of 30%, our approach has changed over time to include direct access to the endoleak nidus with the injection of a flow directed glue (Onyx) to obliterate the flow channel and feeding vessels.
We have found this approach to be more successful than attempting to cannulate each of the feeding lumbar vessels or coil embolization of the aneurysm sac, and can be performed via either a translumbar or transarterial approach using SMA to IMA collaterals. While our success rate using this technique has improved to nearly 80%, several words of caution should be noted. 1) Onyx glue is approved for use in the treatment of intracerebral vascular malformations and does not have a peripheral indication at this time. 2) It is critically important that the interventionalist obtains access into the nidus/flow channel to allow the embolic agent to flow. Otherwise you are injecting glue directly into the sac thrombus and wasting time and an expensive embolic agent. 3) There are often multiple levels of lumbar vessels involved and we have found that we often have to go back several times at different levels to treat extensive Type II endoleaks. All of these observations emphasize the need to further study the treatment of Type II endoleaks and the need for a prospective randomized trial to better identify the best treatment options.
Dr. Kwolek is the director of the vascular and endovascular training program at Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, and the chief of vascular surgery at Newton Wellesley Hospital.
1. J Vasc Surg, 2012. 55(5): p. 1263-7.
2. Management of Type II endoleaks divides the experts at CX 35. Vascular News International,58, May 2012, BIBA publishing.
3. J Vasc Surg, 2012. 55(1): p. 33-40.
4. J Vasc Surg, 2012. 56(3): p. 630-6.
How To Maximize a Minimal Incision
Mini-incision carotid surgery was first reported (not necessarily performed) by Ascher et al. in 2005. In light of this report and an ever-growing patient demand for minimally invasive procedures, it is surprising that this procedure has not been widely adopted by the vascular surgical community. The reasons for this are probably multifactorial and may include a concern that cranial nerve injuries are more likely to occur as well as an added difficulty in placing a shunt or sewing in a patch. These concerns are mitigated by a thorough knowledge of the usual and variant anatomy of this area and a broad experience in carotid surgery. If performed properly, mini-incision is not synonymous with mini exposure carotid surgery.
It is important to identify the carotid bifurcation with duplex ultrasound prior to making the skin incision. It is my preference to make a vertical skin incision which extends from approximately 2 cm above to below the carotid bifurcation at a slight outside to inside angle to the anterior border of the sternocleidomastoid muscle (some surgeons prefer a transverse skin incision). The platysma muscle is identified and divided for a short distance between forceps.
The edges of the platysma are grasped with DeBakey forceps while the skin is retracted as far inferiorly as possible.
The platysma is then divided to this point following which this is repeated at the superior aspect of the wound. The extended division of the platysma is what allows for an exposure equal to that of a much larger incision. Now adequate visualization of the common and internal carotid arteries is achieved by use of a small retractor applied alternately to the inferior and superior ends of the wound respectively.
Using this technique, I have easily been able to perform both standard and eversion endarterectomies (as in photo), place a shunt when necessary, and/or sew on a carotid patch.
Once completed the platysma is closed with an absorbable suture and skin is closed with an absorbable monofilament suture.
In my experience, patients have less postoperative pain than those with a larger neck incision. They are also exceptionally pleased with the small, barely visible, neck scar. Finally, I have used the mini-incision for my carotid surgeries for more than 10 years during which time no patient has suffered a permanent cranial nerve injury.
Dr. Dietzek is the chief of the vascular and endovascular surgery section and the Linda and Stephen R. Cohen chair in vascular surgery at Danbury Hospital, Danbury Conn. He is also a clinical associate professor of surgery at the University of Vermont College of Medicine in Burlington.
Editor’s Note: If you would like to submit a similarly useful Tips and Tricks, contact us at [email protected].
Mini-incision carotid surgery was first reported (not necessarily performed) by Ascher et al. in 2005. In light of this report and an ever-growing patient demand for minimally invasive procedures, it is surprising that this procedure has not been widely adopted by the vascular surgical community. The reasons for this are probably multifactorial and may include a concern that cranial nerve injuries are more likely to occur as well as an added difficulty in placing a shunt or sewing in a patch. These concerns are mitigated by a thorough knowledge of the usual and variant anatomy of this area and a broad experience in carotid surgery. If performed properly, mini-incision is not synonymous with mini exposure carotid surgery.
It is important to identify the carotid bifurcation with duplex ultrasound prior to making the skin incision. It is my preference to make a vertical skin incision which extends from approximately 2 cm above to below the carotid bifurcation at a slight outside to inside angle to the anterior border of the sternocleidomastoid muscle (some surgeons prefer a transverse skin incision). The platysma muscle is identified and divided for a short distance between forceps.
The edges of the platysma are grasped with DeBakey forceps while the skin is retracted as far inferiorly as possible.
The platysma is then divided to this point following which this is repeated at the superior aspect of the wound. The extended division of the platysma is what allows for an exposure equal to that of a much larger incision. Now adequate visualization of the common and internal carotid arteries is achieved by use of a small retractor applied alternately to the inferior and superior ends of the wound respectively.
Using this technique, I have easily been able to perform both standard and eversion endarterectomies (as in photo), place a shunt when necessary, and/or sew on a carotid patch.
Once completed the platysma is closed with an absorbable suture and skin is closed with an absorbable monofilament suture.
In my experience, patients have less postoperative pain than those with a larger neck incision. They are also exceptionally pleased with the small, barely visible, neck scar. Finally, I have used the mini-incision for my carotid surgeries for more than 10 years during which time no patient has suffered a permanent cranial nerve injury.
Dr. Dietzek is the chief of the vascular and endovascular surgery section and the Linda and Stephen R. Cohen chair in vascular surgery at Danbury Hospital, Danbury Conn. He is also a clinical associate professor of surgery at the University of Vermont College of Medicine in Burlington.
Editor’s Note: If you would like to submit a similarly useful Tips and Tricks, contact us at [email protected].
Mini-incision carotid surgery was first reported (not necessarily performed) by Ascher et al. in 2005. In light of this report and an ever-growing patient demand for minimally invasive procedures, it is surprising that this procedure has not been widely adopted by the vascular surgical community. The reasons for this are probably multifactorial and may include a concern that cranial nerve injuries are more likely to occur as well as an added difficulty in placing a shunt or sewing in a patch. These concerns are mitigated by a thorough knowledge of the usual and variant anatomy of this area and a broad experience in carotid surgery. If performed properly, mini-incision is not synonymous with mini exposure carotid surgery.
It is important to identify the carotid bifurcation with duplex ultrasound prior to making the skin incision. It is my preference to make a vertical skin incision which extends from approximately 2 cm above to below the carotid bifurcation at a slight outside to inside angle to the anterior border of the sternocleidomastoid muscle (some surgeons prefer a transverse skin incision). The platysma muscle is identified and divided for a short distance between forceps.
The edges of the platysma are grasped with DeBakey forceps while the skin is retracted as far inferiorly as possible.
The platysma is then divided to this point following which this is repeated at the superior aspect of the wound. The extended division of the platysma is what allows for an exposure equal to that of a much larger incision. Now adequate visualization of the common and internal carotid arteries is achieved by use of a small retractor applied alternately to the inferior and superior ends of the wound respectively.
Using this technique, I have easily been able to perform both standard and eversion endarterectomies (as in photo), place a shunt when necessary, and/or sew on a carotid patch.
Once completed the platysma is closed with an absorbable suture and skin is closed with an absorbable monofilament suture.
In my experience, patients have less postoperative pain than those with a larger neck incision. They are also exceptionally pleased with the small, barely visible, neck scar. Finally, I have used the mini-incision for my carotid surgeries for more than 10 years during which time no patient has suffered a permanent cranial nerve injury.
Dr. Dietzek is the chief of the vascular and endovascular surgery section and the Linda and Stephen R. Cohen chair in vascular surgery at Danbury Hospital, Danbury Conn. He is also a clinical associate professor of surgery at the University of Vermont College of Medicine in Burlington.
Editor’s Note: If you would like to submit a similarly useful Tips and Tricks, contact us at [email protected].
Welcome Our New Resident Editor
We are pleased to have Dr. Sapan S. Desai come on board as our Resident/Fellow Editor for the next year. Dr. Desai was selected from an excellent candidate pool who submitted their credentials as well as samples of their writings.
Dr. Desai is currently a vascular fellow at University of Texas at Houston/Memorial Hermann Hospital Houston, Tex. He did his surgical residency at Duke University where he still holds the rank of adjunct assistant professor of surgery.
He also has a PhD from the University of Illinois at Chicago, College of Medicine and an MBA in Health Care Management from Western Governors University, Salt Lake City. He is the founder and Executive Editor of the Journal of Surgical Radiology.
We look forward to his contributions and insight into issues that pertain to residents and fellows.
Dr. Russell Samson, Medical Editor, Vascular Specialist
We are pleased to have Dr. Sapan S. Desai come on board as our Resident/Fellow Editor for the next year. Dr. Desai was selected from an excellent candidate pool who submitted their credentials as well as samples of their writings.
Dr. Desai is currently a vascular fellow at University of Texas at Houston/Memorial Hermann Hospital Houston, Tex. He did his surgical residency at Duke University where he still holds the rank of adjunct assistant professor of surgery.
He also has a PhD from the University of Illinois at Chicago, College of Medicine and an MBA in Health Care Management from Western Governors University, Salt Lake City. He is the founder and Executive Editor of the Journal of Surgical Radiology.
We look forward to his contributions and insight into issues that pertain to residents and fellows.
Dr. Russell Samson, Medical Editor, Vascular Specialist
We are pleased to have Dr. Sapan S. Desai come on board as our Resident/Fellow Editor for the next year. Dr. Desai was selected from an excellent candidate pool who submitted their credentials as well as samples of their writings.
Dr. Desai is currently a vascular fellow at University of Texas at Houston/Memorial Hermann Hospital Houston, Tex. He did his surgical residency at Duke University where he still holds the rank of adjunct assistant professor of surgery.
He also has a PhD from the University of Illinois at Chicago, College of Medicine and an MBA in Health Care Management from Western Governors University, Salt Lake City. He is the founder and Executive Editor of the Journal of Surgical Radiology.
We look forward to his contributions and insight into issues that pertain to residents and fellows.
Dr. Russell Samson, Medical Editor, Vascular Specialist
No sex differences in carotid revascularization outcomes?
SAN FRANCISCO – There were no significant differences in endpoints between men and women after carotid endarterectomy or carotid artery stenting, results from a large registry study showed.
"These data suggest that, contrary to previous reports, women do not have a higher risk of adverse events after carotid revascularization," Dr. Jeffrey Jim said at the Society for Vascular Surgery Annual Meeting. "As such, women may derive similar benefits as men from carotid revascularization."
Carotid endarterectomy is considered by many as the gold standard treatment option for patients with severe internal carotid artery stenosis, said Dr. Jim, a vascular surgeon at Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis. "Its benefit over best medical therapy has been proven by several landmark randomized controlled trials," he said. "While the efficacy of carotid artery stenting compared with carotid endarterectomy remains highly debated, there is clear utility in patients with select high risk criteria. However, it’s important to remember that gender plays an important role in cardiovascular disease. Epidemiologic studies clearly show that males have a higher stroke incidence as well as prevalence rate compared with women. However, when strokes do happen in women they tend to be more severe."
In terms of revascularization, he continued, available data suggested that women have a higher risk of perioperative adverse events compared with men, "suggesting that they may not benefit as much from revascularization compared with men."
He and other members of the SVS Outcomes Committee set out to evaluate the impact of gender on the outcomes after carotid revascularization (CAE and CAS), with the primary endpoint being composite risk of death, stroke, or MI at 30 days. They used data from 9,865 patients in the SVS Vascular Registry, which was developed in 2005 as a response to CMS approval of CAS. The registry was available to all clinical facilities and individual providers. "There are no specific inclusion or exclusion criteria because it aims to capture real-world results," Dr. Jim said. The registry is closed "but it remains one of the largest databases on carotid revascularization in the country."
Of the 9,865 patients 59% were men. There was no difference in age between sexes (both had a mean age of 71 years), but men were more likely to be symptomatic compared with women (42% vs. 39%, respectively).
For disease etiology in CAS, restenosis was higher in women compared with men (29% vs. 20%), while a greater proportion of men were being treated with radiation compared with women (6.2% vs. 2.6%). For CEA, more men were symptomatic compared with women (39% vs. 36%). "This was primarily driven by the fact that slightly more men than women had a stroke in the past (22% vs. 19%)," he said.
"Among patients overall, men had a slightly higher prevalence of coronary artery disease as well as MI, while women had a higher prevalence of hypertension as well as COPD," Dr. Jim said.
The researchers found no statistically significant differences in the composite endpoint of death, stroke, and MI at 30 days between men and women for either CEA (4.06% vs. 4.07%, respectively) or CAS (6.80% vs. 6.69%). The findings remained similar even after stratification by symptomatology and multivariate risk adjustment.
"In all the different ways we looked at it men and women had similar outcomes," Dr. Jim said. "This data is important. It’s representative of real-world outcomes, but there are limitations. It was an observational study done in a retrospective manner, and there is the potential for reporting bias. The most important limitation is that there is no comparison group of patients treated with best medical therapy. That’s an investigation that needs to be done going forward."
Dr. Jim said that he had no relevant financial conflicts to disclose.
SAN FRANCISCO – There were no significant differences in endpoints between men and women after carotid endarterectomy or carotid artery stenting, results from a large registry study showed.
"These data suggest that, contrary to previous reports, women do not have a higher risk of adverse events after carotid revascularization," Dr. Jeffrey Jim said at the Society for Vascular Surgery Annual Meeting. "As such, women may derive similar benefits as men from carotid revascularization."
Carotid endarterectomy is considered by many as the gold standard treatment option for patients with severe internal carotid artery stenosis, said Dr. Jim, a vascular surgeon at Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis. "Its benefit over best medical therapy has been proven by several landmark randomized controlled trials," he said. "While the efficacy of carotid artery stenting compared with carotid endarterectomy remains highly debated, there is clear utility in patients with select high risk criteria. However, it’s important to remember that gender plays an important role in cardiovascular disease. Epidemiologic studies clearly show that males have a higher stroke incidence as well as prevalence rate compared with women. However, when strokes do happen in women they tend to be more severe."
In terms of revascularization, he continued, available data suggested that women have a higher risk of perioperative adverse events compared with men, "suggesting that they may not benefit as much from revascularization compared with men."
He and other members of the SVS Outcomes Committee set out to evaluate the impact of gender on the outcomes after carotid revascularization (CAE and CAS), with the primary endpoint being composite risk of death, stroke, or MI at 30 days. They used data from 9,865 patients in the SVS Vascular Registry, which was developed in 2005 as a response to CMS approval of CAS. The registry was available to all clinical facilities and individual providers. "There are no specific inclusion or exclusion criteria because it aims to capture real-world results," Dr. Jim said. The registry is closed "but it remains one of the largest databases on carotid revascularization in the country."
Of the 9,865 patients 59% were men. There was no difference in age between sexes (both had a mean age of 71 years), but men were more likely to be symptomatic compared with women (42% vs. 39%, respectively).
For disease etiology in CAS, restenosis was higher in women compared with men (29% vs. 20%), while a greater proportion of men were being treated with radiation compared with women (6.2% vs. 2.6%). For CEA, more men were symptomatic compared with women (39% vs. 36%). "This was primarily driven by the fact that slightly more men than women had a stroke in the past (22% vs. 19%)," he said.
"Among patients overall, men had a slightly higher prevalence of coronary artery disease as well as MI, while women had a higher prevalence of hypertension as well as COPD," Dr. Jim said.
The researchers found no statistically significant differences in the composite endpoint of death, stroke, and MI at 30 days between men and women for either CEA (4.06% vs. 4.07%, respectively) or CAS (6.80% vs. 6.69%). The findings remained similar even after stratification by symptomatology and multivariate risk adjustment.
"In all the different ways we looked at it men and women had similar outcomes," Dr. Jim said. "This data is important. It’s representative of real-world outcomes, but there are limitations. It was an observational study done in a retrospective manner, and there is the potential for reporting bias. The most important limitation is that there is no comparison group of patients treated with best medical therapy. That’s an investigation that needs to be done going forward."
Dr. Jim said that he had no relevant financial conflicts to disclose.
SAN FRANCISCO – There were no significant differences in endpoints between men and women after carotid endarterectomy or carotid artery stenting, results from a large registry study showed.
"These data suggest that, contrary to previous reports, women do not have a higher risk of adverse events after carotid revascularization," Dr. Jeffrey Jim said at the Society for Vascular Surgery Annual Meeting. "As such, women may derive similar benefits as men from carotid revascularization."
Carotid endarterectomy is considered by many as the gold standard treatment option for patients with severe internal carotid artery stenosis, said Dr. Jim, a vascular surgeon at Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis. "Its benefit over best medical therapy has been proven by several landmark randomized controlled trials," he said. "While the efficacy of carotid artery stenting compared with carotid endarterectomy remains highly debated, there is clear utility in patients with select high risk criteria. However, it’s important to remember that gender plays an important role in cardiovascular disease. Epidemiologic studies clearly show that males have a higher stroke incidence as well as prevalence rate compared with women. However, when strokes do happen in women they tend to be more severe."
In terms of revascularization, he continued, available data suggested that women have a higher risk of perioperative adverse events compared with men, "suggesting that they may not benefit as much from revascularization compared with men."
He and other members of the SVS Outcomes Committee set out to evaluate the impact of gender on the outcomes after carotid revascularization (CAE and CAS), with the primary endpoint being composite risk of death, stroke, or MI at 30 days. They used data from 9,865 patients in the SVS Vascular Registry, which was developed in 2005 as a response to CMS approval of CAS. The registry was available to all clinical facilities and individual providers. "There are no specific inclusion or exclusion criteria because it aims to capture real-world results," Dr. Jim said. The registry is closed "but it remains one of the largest databases on carotid revascularization in the country."
Of the 9,865 patients 59% were men. There was no difference in age between sexes (both had a mean age of 71 years), but men were more likely to be symptomatic compared with women (42% vs. 39%, respectively).
For disease etiology in CAS, restenosis was higher in women compared with men (29% vs. 20%), while a greater proportion of men were being treated with radiation compared with women (6.2% vs. 2.6%). For CEA, more men were symptomatic compared with women (39% vs. 36%). "This was primarily driven by the fact that slightly more men than women had a stroke in the past (22% vs. 19%)," he said.
"Among patients overall, men had a slightly higher prevalence of coronary artery disease as well as MI, while women had a higher prevalence of hypertension as well as COPD," Dr. Jim said.
The researchers found no statistically significant differences in the composite endpoint of death, stroke, and MI at 30 days between men and women for either CEA (4.06% vs. 4.07%, respectively) or CAS (6.80% vs. 6.69%). The findings remained similar even after stratification by symptomatology and multivariate risk adjustment.
"In all the different ways we looked at it men and women had similar outcomes," Dr. Jim said. "This data is important. It’s representative of real-world outcomes, but there are limitations. It was an observational study done in a retrospective manner, and there is the potential for reporting bias. The most important limitation is that there is no comparison group of patients treated with best medical therapy. That’s an investigation that needs to be done going forward."
Dr. Jim said that he had no relevant financial conflicts to disclose.
From the Vascular Community
In November, Dr. George Andros was honored with the MedStar Georgetown 2013 Distinguished Achievement Award in Diabetic Limb Salvage at this year’s Diabetic Limb Salvage Conference in Washington, D.C. Dr. Andros is pictured with his award between DLS Conference co-chairs Dr. Christopher E. Attinger (left) and Dr. John S. Steinberg (right).
Dr. Andros is a founding partner of Los Angeles Vascular Specialists and is founder and medical director of the Amputation Prevention Center at Valley Presbyterian Hospital in Van Nuys, Calif.
For the last 14 years, Dr. Andros has been co-chair of the Diabetic Foot Global Conference (DFCon), held in Los Angeles. He is also the emeritus medical editor of Vascular Specialist .
In November, Dr. George Andros was honored with the MedStar Georgetown 2013 Distinguished Achievement Award in Diabetic Limb Salvage at this year’s Diabetic Limb Salvage Conference in Washington, D.C. Dr. Andros is pictured with his award between DLS Conference co-chairs Dr. Christopher E. Attinger (left) and Dr. John S. Steinberg (right).
Dr. Andros is a founding partner of Los Angeles Vascular Specialists and is founder and medical director of the Amputation Prevention Center at Valley Presbyterian Hospital in Van Nuys, Calif.
For the last 14 years, Dr. Andros has been co-chair of the Diabetic Foot Global Conference (DFCon), held in Los Angeles. He is also the emeritus medical editor of Vascular Specialist .
In November, Dr. George Andros was honored with the MedStar Georgetown 2013 Distinguished Achievement Award in Diabetic Limb Salvage at this year’s Diabetic Limb Salvage Conference in Washington, D.C. Dr. Andros is pictured with his award between DLS Conference co-chairs Dr. Christopher E. Attinger (left) and Dr. John S. Steinberg (right).
Dr. Andros is a founding partner of Los Angeles Vascular Specialists and is founder and medical director of the Amputation Prevention Center at Valley Presbyterian Hospital in Van Nuys, Calif.
For the last 14 years, Dr. Andros has been co-chair of the Diabetic Foot Global Conference (DFCon), held in Los Angeles. He is also the emeritus medical editor of Vascular Specialist .
From the Vascular Community
In November, Dr. George Andros was honored with the MedStar Georgetown 2013 Distinguished Achievement Award in Diabetic Limb Salvage at this year’s Diabetic Limb Salvage Conference in Washington, D.C. Dr. Andros is pictured with his award between DLS Conference co-chairs Dr. Christopher E. Attinger (left) and Dr. John S. Steinberg (right).
Dr. Andros is a founding partner of Los Angeles Vascular Specialists and is founder and medical director of the Amputation Prevention Center at Valley Presbyterian Hospital in Van Nuys, Calif.
For the last 14 years, Dr. Andros has been co-chair of the Diabetic Foot Global Conference (DFCon), held in Los Angeles. He is also the emeritus medical editor of Vascular Specialist .
In November, Dr. George Andros was honored with the MedStar Georgetown 2013 Distinguished Achievement Award in Diabetic Limb Salvage at this year’s Diabetic Limb Salvage Conference in Washington, D.C. Dr. Andros is pictured with his award between DLS Conference co-chairs Dr. Christopher E. Attinger (left) and Dr. John S. Steinberg (right).
Dr. Andros is a founding partner of Los Angeles Vascular Specialists and is founder and medical director of the Amputation Prevention Center at Valley Presbyterian Hospital in Van Nuys, Calif.
For the last 14 years, Dr. Andros has been co-chair of the Diabetic Foot Global Conference (DFCon), held in Los Angeles. He is also the emeritus medical editor of Vascular Specialist .
In November, Dr. George Andros was honored with the MedStar Georgetown 2013 Distinguished Achievement Award in Diabetic Limb Salvage at this year’s Diabetic Limb Salvage Conference in Washington, D.C. Dr. Andros is pictured with his award between DLS Conference co-chairs Dr. Christopher E. Attinger (left) and Dr. John S. Steinberg (right).
Dr. Andros is a founding partner of Los Angeles Vascular Specialists and is founder and medical director of the Amputation Prevention Center at Valley Presbyterian Hospital in Van Nuys, Calif.
For the last 14 years, Dr. Andros has been co-chair of the Diabetic Foot Global Conference (DFCon), held in Los Angeles. He is also the emeritus medical editor of Vascular Specialist .
No Benefit to Addition of Pentoxifylline to Steroids for Treatment of Severe Alcoholic Hepatitis
Clinical question
Does the combination of prednisolone and pentoxifylline improve survival in patients with severe alcoholic hepatitis?
Bottom line
Although pentoxifylline and prednisolone have both been demonstrated to be effective individual treatments for alcoholic hepatitis, the combination of both did not improve survival more than prednisolone alone. (LOE = 1b)
Reference
Mathurin P, Louvet A, Duhamel A, et al. Prednisolone with vs without pentoxifylline and survival of patients with severe alcoholic hepatitis: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2013;310(10):1033-1041.
Study design
Randomized controlled trial (double-blinded)
Funding source
Government
Allocation
Concealed
Setting
Inpatient (any location) with outpatient follow-up
Synopsis
Current guidelines recommend the use of either prednisolone or pentoxifylline for the treatment of severe alcoholic hepatitis. The benefit of the combination of these 2 medications in this setting is unclear. These investigators enrolled patients who were current heavy alcohol users and who had biopsy-proven alcoholic hepatitis with a Maddrey score of 32 or more. Patients were randomized, using concealed allocation, to receive prednisolone 40 mg daily plus pentoxifylline 400 mg 3 times daily (n = 133) or prednisolone 40 mg daily plus placebo (n = 137). Treatment lasted for 28 days and follow-up was 100% at 6 months. The patients had a mean age of 51 years and an average Maddrey score in the 50s (indicating severe disease). No significant difference was detected in 6-month survival between the 2 groups in either the intention-to-treat or per-protocol analyses. Overall, there were 82 deaths in the cohort at 6 months -- 40 in the pentoxifylline-prednisolone group and 42 in the placebo-prednisolone group. The risk of hepatorenal syndrome was decreased at 1 month in the combination therapy group as compared with the placebo group (3.1% vs 11.7%; P = .007), but this difference did not remain significant at 6 months. It is important to note, however, that this study was not powered to detect a difference in the incidence of hepatorenal syndrome.
Dr. Kulkarni is an assistant professor of hospital medicine at Northwestern University in Chicago.
Clinical question
Does the combination of prednisolone and pentoxifylline improve survival in patients with severe alcoholic hepatitis?
Bottom line
Although pentoxifylline and prednisolone have both been demonstrated to be effective individual treatments for alcoholic hepatitis, the combination of both did not improve survival more than prednisolone alone. (LOE = 1b)
Reference
Mathurin P, Louvet A, Duhamel A, et al. Prednisolone with vs without pentoxifylline and survival of patients with severe alcoholic hepatitis: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2013;310(10):1033-1041.
Study design
Randomized controlled trial (double-blinded)
Funding source
Government
Allocation
Concealed
Setting
Inpatient (any location) with outpatient follow-up
Synopsis
Current guidelines recommend the use of either prednisolone or pentoxifylline for the treatment of severe alcoholic hepatitis. The benefit of the combination of these 2 medications in this setting is unclear. These investigators enrolled patients who were current heavy alcohol users and who had biopsy-proven alcoholic hepatitis with a Maddrey score of 32 or more. Patients were randomized, using concealed allocation, to receive prednisolone 40 mg daily plus pentoxifylline 400 mg 3 times daily (n = 133) or prednisolone 40 mg daily plus placebo (n = 137). Treatment lasted for 28 days and follow-up was 100% at 6 months. The patients had a mean age of 51 years and an average Maddrey score in the 50s (indicating severe disease). No significant difference was detected in 6-month survival between the 2 groups in either the intention-to-treat or per-protocol analyses. Overall, there were 82 deaths in the cohort at 6 months -- 40 in the pentoxifylline-prednisolone group and 42 in the placebo-prednisolone group. The risk of hepatorenal syndrome was decreased at 1 month in the combination therapy group as compared with the placebo group (3.1% vs 11.7%; P = .007), but this difference did not remain significant at 6 months. It is important to note, however, that this study was not powered to detect a difference in the incidence of hepatorenal syndrome.
Dr. Kulkarni is an assistant professor of hospital medicine at Northwestern University in Chicago.
Clinical question
Does the combination of prednisolone and pentoxifylline improve survival in patients with severe alcoholic hepatitis?
Bottom line
Although pentoxifylline and prednisolone have both been demonstrated to be effective individual treatments for alcoholic hepatitis, the combination of both did not improve survival more than prednisolone alone. (LOE = 1b)
Reference
Mathurin P, Louvet A, Duhamel A, et al. Prednisolone with vs without pentoxifylline and survival of patients with severe alcoholic hepatitis: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2013;310(10):1033-1041.
Study design
Randomized controlled trial (double-blinded)
Funding source
Government
Allocation
Concealed
Setting
Inpatient (any location) with outpatient follow-up
Synopsis
Current guidelines recommend the use of either prednisolone or pentoxifylline for the treatment of severe alcoholic hepatitis. The benefit of the combination of these 2 medications in this setting is unclear. These investigators enrolled patients who were current heavy alcohol users and who had biopsy-proven alcoholic hepatitis with a Maddrey score of 32 or more. Patients were randomized, using concealed allocation, to receive prednisolone 40 mg daily plus pentoxifylline 400 mg 3 times daily (n = 133) or prednisolone 40 mg daily plus placebo (n = 137). Treatment lasted for 28 days and follow-up was 100% at 6 months. The patients had a mean age of 51 years and an average Maddrey score in the 50s (indicating severe disease). No significant difference was detected in 6-month survival between the 2 groups in either the intention-to-treat or per-protocol analyses. Overall, there were 82 deaths in the cohort at 6 months -- 40 in the pentoxifylline-prednisolone group and 42 in the placebo-prednisolone group. The risk of hepatorenal syndrome was decreased at 1 month in the combination therapy group as compared with the placebo group (3.1% vs 11.7%; P = .007), but this difference did not remain significant at 6 months. It is important to note, however, that this study was not powered to detect a difference in the incidence of hepatorenal syndrome.
Dr. Kulkarni is an assistant professor of hospital medicine at Northwestern University in Chicago.