Combined spinal-epidural anesthesia for renal transplantation

INTRODUCTION: A patient undergoing renal transplantation presents unique problems to the anesthetist, as almost every body system is affected. The combined spinal-epidural technique has become popular in lower abdominal surgeries because it offers the advantages of both spinal and epidural techniques. We review our experience of combined spinal-epidural technique in patients undergoing renal transplantation with respect to demographics, intraoperative anesthesia, hemodynamics, postoperative analgesia, and untoward adverse events. MATERIALS AND METHOD: Fifty consecutive patients scheduled for elective renal transplantation over a period of 4 months who consented for combined spinal-epidural anesthesia were enrolled in the study. Combined spinal-epidural anaesthesia was performed using a double-space technique in the right lateral position. Intraoperative monitoring included electrocardiography, pulse oximetry, noninvasive blood pressure, central venous pressure, and urinary output after clamp release. Intravenous fluids, colloids, and blood products were infused so as to keep the central venous pressure between 12 and 15 mm Hg. Postoperative analgesia was provided with buprenorphine via an epidural catheter. We noted intraoperative and postoperative complications. RESULTS: Neuraxial blockade was satisfactory in all but four patients who required supplementation with general anesthesia for unduly prolonged surgery. There were no significant intraoperative hemodynamic changes. The total intravenous fluid used during surgery was 64.24 +/- 12.3 mL/kg. During the postoperative period, all patients had good postoperative pain relief with no incidence of epidural hematoma. CONCLUSION: Combined spinal-epidural anesthesia proved to be a useful regional anesthetic technique, combining the reliability of spinal block and versatility of epidural block for renal transplantation.     

Paravertebral blockade with propofol sedation versus general anesthesia for elective endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

The objective of this study was to evaluate the applicability of paravertebral blockade (PVB) for endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair compared with general anesthesia (GA).Data from patients who underwent elective infrarenal endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair between August 2001 and July 2002 using PVB or GA were retrospectively reviewed and compared with respect to risk factors, intraoperative hemodynamic characteristics, operative outcome, and complications.Ten patients underwent elective infrarenal endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair under PVB, whereas 15 patients were operated on under GA. One conversion from PVB to GA was necessary for block failure. The perioperative (< 30 days) cardiovascular morbidity and overall mortality were zero in both groups. The PVB group benefited significantly with respect to the incidence of intraoperative hypotension (p < .05) and blood pressure lability (p < .01), as well as postoperative nausea (p < .01). Our preliminary results indicate that PVB is feasible and can be performed safely in a patient population with significant comorbidities.     

应用国产整体式分叉型支架腔内治疗肾下型腹主动脉瘤

目的探讨应用国产整体式分叉型支架腔内治疗肾下型腹主动脉瘤的效果。方法回顾性分析2009年9月—2011年6月采用国产整体式分叉型支架腔内隔绝术治疗27例肾下型腹主动脉瘤患者的临床资料。结果 27例腹主动脉瘤腔内修复均获成功,术后随访2～20个月复查CTA,DSA证实:瘤体被完全隔绝,支架无移位、扭曲及内漏现象。结论应用国产整体式分叉型支架腔内治疗肾下型腹主动脉瘤安全有效,与分体式支架相比,其简便、经济、并发症少。     

Spinal anesthesia for endoluminal abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine whether spinal anesthesia can be safely used for patients under endoluminal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. SETTING: University hospital. PARTICIPANTS: 38 patients who underwent endoluminal AAA repair from 1999 to 2000. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The charts of 38 patients who underwent endoluminal AAA repair from 1999 to 2000 were reviewed for variables known to be associated with AAA repair. Twenty-four patients had spinal anesthesia (63%), 13 patients had general anesthesia (35%), 1 patient had epidural anesthesia (2%). Eight patients (33%) in the spinal group eventually had to have general anesthesia. Reasons included prolonged procedure in six cases and patient intolerance and anxiety in two cases. CONCLUSION: Endoluminal AAA repair can be safely performed with spinal anesthesia. The major disadvantage of spinal anesthesia is limited duration of anesthesia. The anesthesia team must be prepared to induce general anesthesia at any time. The decision regarding anesthetic technique should focus on patient and physician needs and preferences.     

Elective endovascular and open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms in octogenarians

OBJECTIVES: Endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) is an increasingly popular treatment option for patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA), although open repair is considered the standard by virtue of its durability. Octogenarians, as a subgroup, may stand to benefit the most by EVAR. The purpose of this study is to review operative results and durability of open AAA repair and EVAR in octogenarians. METHODS: From May 1996 to August 2006, 150 patients aged >or=80 years underwent elective repair of their infrarenal AAA. Eighty-one underwent EVAR and 69 had open repair. Demographic data, aneurysm specifics, comorbidities, operative morbidity and mortality, intensive care unit and hospital length of stay, and late outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: In the EVAR group, 27 of 81 (33%) patients died during a mean follow-up of 25 months. In the open repair group, 34 of 69 (49%) patients died during a mean follow-up of 43 months. The median survival time for EVAR was 350 weeks (range, 145-404 weeks) compared with 317 weeks (range, 233-342 weeks) for the open repair group. A Kaplan-Meier log-rank analysis showed no difference in early or long-term survival between EVAR and open repair (P = .13). EVAR was associated with decreased blood loss, decreased length of intensive care unit and hospital stays, and a greater number of patients discharged to home. CONCLUSIONS: EVAR and open repair are comparable in safety and efficacy in octogenarians. Operative repair outcomes remain acceptable. Mid- and long-term survival are similar, indicating no survival advantage of one procedure compared with the other.     

Patient-reported quality of life after abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery: a prospective comparison of endovascular and open repair

PURPOSE: This study evaluated and compared changes over time in health-related quality of life reported by patients with infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) undergoing elective endovascular (EVAR) and open aneurysm (OR) repair. METHODS: A prospective, nonrandomized cohort of 76 patients (62 men, 14 women; age range, 42 to 89 years) undergoing elective, infrarenal AAA repair (EVAR, n = 43; OR, n = 33) at two university teaching hospitals during a 15-month period were administered the Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form 36-item (SF-36) health survey preoperatively and then 1 week, 1 month, and 6 months postoperatively. Patient demographics, procedural details, postoperative follow-up data, and SF-36 scores were compared between groups. RESULTS: Both groups had total SF-36 scores that were significantly lower than preoperative scores at 1 week and 1 month after surgery but were not significantly different from the preoperative scores at 6 months (OR 66.2 +/- 21.1 to 72.3 +/- 19.8, P > .1; and EVAR 61.0 +/- 17.7 to 58.7 +/- 19.4, P > .1). Six-month total SF-36 scores were significantly higher in the OR group compared with the EVAR group (mean 72.3 +/- 19.8 OR vs 58.7 +/- 19.4 EVAR; P = .009). In the postoperative period, a significant drop occurred in mean scores in six of the eight domains of the SF-36 in the OR patients (physical function, PF; role physical, RP; bodily pain, BP; vitality, VT; social function, SF; role emotional, RE) and five domains for EVAR patients (PF, RP, BP, SF, RE). In two domains, RE and PF, scores returned to baseline values significantly sooner in EVAR patients than in OR patients (RE, EVAR 1 month vs OR 6 months; and PF, EVAR 1 month vs OR 6 months). In the VT domain, no significant postoperative drop occurred in the EVAR group, but in the OR group, mean scores were significantly lower at 1 week and 1 month compared with preoperative values. In the domains of general health and mental health, no significant drop occurred in SF-36 score postoperatively in either group. CONCLUSIONS: Patient reported health-related quality of life after infrarenal AAA repair is significantly impaired in the early postoperative period but returns to baseline by 6 months in patients treated with EVAR and OR. Patients having EVAR had significantly more rapid return to preoperative scores in selected domains of the SF-36. Even though EVAR is associated with shorter and less invasive perioperative hospital course and fewer postoperative complications, EVAR patients had lower quality of life scores 6 months after surgery than OR patients.     

Fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair is associated with lower perioperative morbidity and mortality compared with open repair for complex abdominal aortic aneurysms

ObjectiveThe Zenith Fenestrated Endovascular Graft (ZFEN; Cook Medical, Bloomington, Ind) has expanded the anatomic eligibility of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). Current data on ZFEN mainly consist of single-institution experiences and show conflicting results. Therefore, we compared perioperative outcomes after repair using ZFEN with open complex AAA repair and infrarenal EVAR in a nationwide multicenter registry.MethodsWe identified all patients undergoing elective AAA repair using ZFEN, open complex AAA repair, and standard infrarenal EVAR between 2012 and 2016 within the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program targeted vascular module. Open complex AAA repairs were defined as those with a juxtarenal or suprarenal proximal AAA extent in combination with an aortic cross-clamping position that was above at least one renal artery. The primary outcome was perioperative mortality, defined as death within 30 days or within the index hospitalization. Secondary outcomes included postoperative renal dysfunction (creatinine concentration increase of >2 mg/dL from preoperative value or new dialysis), occurrence of any complication, procedure times, blood transfusion rates, and length of stay. To account for baseline differences, we calculated propensity scores and employed inverse probability-weighted logistic regression.ResultsWe identified 6825 AAA repairs—220 ZFENs, 181 open complex AAA repairs, and 6424 infrarenal EVARs. Univariate analysis of ZFEN compared with open complex AAA repair demonstrated lower rates of perioperative mortality (1.8% vs 8.8%; P = .001), postoperative renal dysfunction (1.4% vs 7.7%; P = .002), and overall complications (11% vs 33%; P < .001). In addition, fewer patients undergoing ZFEN received blood transfusions (22% vs 73%; P < .001), and median length of stay was shorter (2 vs 7 days; P < .001). After adjustment, open complex AAA repair was associated with higher odds of perioperative mortality (odds ratio [OR], 4.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4-18), postoperative renal dysfunction (OR, 13; 95% CI, 3.6-49), and overall complication rates (OR, 4.2; 95% CI, 2.3-7.5) compared with ZFEN. Compared with infrarenal EVAR, ZFEN presented comparable rates of perioperative mortality (1.8% vs 0.8%; P = .084), renal dysfunction (1.4% vs 0.7%; P = .19), and any complication (11% vs 7.7%; P = .09). Furthermore, after adjustment, there was no significant difference between the odds of perioperative mortality, postoperative renal dysfunction, or any complication between infrarenal EVAR and ZFEN.ConclusionsZFEN is associated with lower perioperative morbidity and mortality compared with open complex AAA repair, and outcomes are comparable to those of infrarenal EVAR. Long-term durability of ZFEN compared with open complex AAA repair warrants future research.     

The retroperitoneal approach combined with epidural anesthesia reduces morbidity in elective infrarenal aortic aneurysm repair

In elective open infrarenal aortic aneurysm repair the surgical approach and the use of epidural anesthesia (EDA) may determine patients' outcome. Hence we analyzed our results after elective open aneurysm repair in the light of the surgical approach and the use of EDA. Retrospective analysis of a prospective data base. From December 2005 to April 2008, 125 patients with infrarenal aortic aneurysm underwent elective open repair. Patients were divided into four groups: retro- and transperitoneal approach with and without epidural anesthesia (RP+/-EDA and TP+/-EDA). In terms of age, sex, aneurysm diameter, ASA score and clamping time all groups were comparable. In the retroperitoneal groups significantly more tube grafts were implanted (63 vs. 27; P=0.001). The rate of surgical complications did not differ between the groups. The RP+EDA group had the lowest rate of postoperative assisted mechanical ventilation (5.1% vs. 35.7%; P=0.002) and medical complications (17.9% vs. 42.8%; P=0.032). Concerning frequency of surgical complications, the retroperitoneal incision was comparable to the transperitoneal approach in infrarenal aortic reconstruction. Supplementation with EDA resulted in a decreased rate of postoperative assisted mechanical ventilation and in lower morbidity rates.     

Dopexamine hydrochloride does not modify hemodynamic response or tissue oxygenation or gut permeability during abdominal aortic surgery

PURPOSE: To assess the effects of intraoperative infusion of dopexamine (a DA-1 and B2 adrenoreceptor agonist) on hemodynamic function, tissue oxygen delivery and consumption, splanchnic perfusion and gut permeability following aortic cross- clamp and release. METHODS: In a randomised double blind controlled trial 24 patients scheduled for elective infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm repair were studied in two centres and were assigned to one of two treatment groups. Group I received a dopexamine infusion starting at 0.5 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1) increased to 2 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1) maintaining a stable heart rate; Group II received a placebo infusion titrated in the same volumes following induction of anesthesia. Measured and derived hemodynamic data, tissue oxygen delivery and extraction and gut permeability were recorded at set time points throughout the procedure. RESULTS: Dopexamine infusion (0.5 -2 microg x kg x min(-1)) was associated with enhanced hemodynamic function (MAP 65 +/- 5.5 vs 92 +/- 5.7 mm Hg, P = <0.05) only during the period of aortic cross clamping. However, during the most part of infrarenal abdominal aortic surgery, dopexamine did not reduce systemic vascular resistance index, mean arterial pressure nor oxygen extraction compared with the control group. The lactulose/ rhamnose permeation ratio was elevated above normal in both groups (0.22 and 0.29 in groups I and II respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Dopexamine infusion (0.5 -2 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1)) did not enhance hemodynamic function and tissue oxygenation values during elective infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.     

Cardiovascular and catecholamine responses during endovascular and conventional abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVES: To compare changes in plasma catecholamines, acid-base status and cardiovascular dynamics in patients undergoing endovascular or conventional infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair under standard general anaesthesia. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. MATERIALS: 30 patients scheduled for elective infrarenal AAA repair. METHODS: Plasma epinephrine and norepinephrine concentrations, acid-base status and cardiovascular measurement were compared before surgery, and 5 min after aortic clamping and clamp release (conventional group) or occlusion and release (endovascular group) in patients undergoing endovascular (n = 15) or conventional AAA repair (n = 15). RESULTS: Arterial pH (p < 0.005) and base deficit (p < 0.05) increased, and plasma bicarbonate decreased (p < 0.005) during aortic cross-clamping in the conventional group. pH decreased further (p < 0.005), and base deficit and pCO2 increased (both p < 0.005) after clamp release. These changes were significantly greater than during endovascular repair, in whom within-group changes were not statistically significant. Values were similar in the two groups 30 min after reperfusion. Plasma epinephrine concentrations increased during conventional surgery (p < 0.05) and were greater than in the endovascular group (p < 0.05). Plasma norepinephrine concentrations increased during surgery in both groups but the changes were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Plasma catecholamine concentrations, changes in cardiovascular variables and acid-base status were increased during conventional compared with endovascular AAA repair.     

Elective treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm with endovascular or open repair: the first decade

OBJECTIVES: The development of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) as an alternative to open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) has led to an increasing number of patients being treated by this less-invasive technique. It was anticipated that EVAR would reduce the operative mortality and morbidity compared with open repair. This study examined the initial 10-year experience in one center when both techniques were available to determine if there were advantages to one technique or the other, putting the results into the perspective of routine clinical care of patients with infrarenal AAA. METHODS: From June 1996 to May 2005, 677 patients underwent elective repair of their infrarenal AAA, of which 417 were treated with open repair and 260 by EVAR. Demographic and aneurysm-specific data, comorbidities, operative morbidity, mortality, and late outcome were analyzed. RESULTS: Open repair patients were 2 years younger (71 vs 74 years, P < .001), had larger aneurysms (6.01 +/- 1.38 cm vs 5.45 +/- 0.99 cm, P < .001), greater familial predisposition, a higher incidence of current smokers, and a higher incidence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease than the EVAR group. There were no differences in renal function, hypertension, coronary artery disease, or heart failure between the two groups. Overall operative mortality was 3.1%; operative mortality per group was 3.5% for open and 2.7% for EVAR (P = .627). Procedure-related outcomes showed significant differences in operative blood loss and length of hospital stay in favor of EVAR, and 95% of the EVAR patients were discharged home vs 83% in the open repair group (P < .001). A Kaplan-Meier log-rank analysis showed no difference in early or long-term survival between open repair and EVAR (P = .20), but did show a difference in mid-term (3-year) survival favoring open repair (P < .002). Survival analysis by age (<70 and > or =70 years) showed no difference between treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Open repair and EVAR are both performed safely in patients treated for elective infrarenal AAA. EVAR has the perioperative advantages of reduced blood loss, reduced length of intensive care unit and hospital stay, and increased number of patients discharged to home. The mid-term survival advantage of open repair has been observed in other reports and deserves further study.     

Analysis of medical risk factors and outcomes in patients undergoing open versus endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE: The emergence of endovascular repair (ER) for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) has provided surgeons with a new technique that should ideally improve patient outcomes. To more accurately characterize the advantages of ER versus traditional/open AAA repair (TOR), we compared the preoperative medical risk factors (PMRFs) and perioperative outcomes (PO) of those patients undergoing elective treatment of infrarenal AAA with ER and TOR over a recent 18-month period at our center. METHODS: Through our institutional vascular surgery patient registry, all patients undergoing aortic aneurysm repair of any type between December 1999 and June 2001 were identified. Only those patients undergoing elective infrarenal AAA repair were analyzed. Hospital records were examined for all patients, and PMRF and PO were assessed via Society for Vascular Surgery/International Society for Cardiovascular Surgery reporting guidelines. Student t, chi(2), Fisher exact, or Wilcoxon rank sum tests were applied where appropriate to determine differences among PMRF and PO according to method of aneurysm repair. RESULTS: During the 18-month study period, a total of 199 aortic aneurysms were repaired at our institution. Ninety-nine elective infrarenal AAA repairs made up the study cohort (ER, n = 33; TOR, n = 66). When examined by method of aneurysm repair, no differences existed in demographics or AAA size. Patients undergoing ER had a significantly greater degree of preoperative pulmonary comorbidity than patients undergoing TOR (P <.001). However, no differences existed in terms of American Society of Anesthesiologists classification or cardiac (P =.52), cerebrovascular (P =.44), diabetic (P =.51), hypertensive (P =.90), hyperlipidemia (P =.91) or renal (P =.23) comorbidities between the two groups. Perioperative morbidity and mortality rates were also not significantly different by method of repair. ER was associated with shorter operative time, intensive care unit stay, and overall hospital length of stay (P <.0001). However, subsequent operative procedures related to the AAA repair were performed more frequently after ER (TOR = 1.5% versus ER = 15.2%; P = 0.015). CONCLUSION: These results suggest that ER offers improvements in hospital convalescent and operating room times but no beneficial impact on overall morbidity and mortality rates when similar PMRFs exist, especially when used at medical centers where low morbidity and mortality rates are already established for TOR. Other centers performing ER should undertake such an analysis to assess its impact on their patients.     

A randomized trial of intraoperative autotransfusion during aortic surgery

Purpose: The net benefit of routine intraoperative autotransfusion (IAT) in patients undergoing elective infrarenal aortic surgery was studied. Methods: One hundred patients undergoing abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair (n = 50) or aortofemoral bypass (AFB) for occlusive disease (n = 50) were randomized to IAT and control groups. This experience accounted for 58% of patients undergoing aortic surgery during the 16-month study period. Results: IAT and control groups were balanced for preoperative demographics, disease (50:50 split of AFB:AAA in each group), and risk factors. There were no significant differences between patients randomized to IAT and control patients in estimated blood loss (EBL), allogeneic blood transfusion (units administered intraoperatively, postoperatively, and total), proportion of patients not receiving allogeneic blood (34% of patients randomized to IAT and 28% of control patients), postoperative hemoglobin/hematocrit levels, and complications. IAT did not reduce allogeneic blood transfusion among all patients undergoing aortic surgery nor in any subgroups that might be more likely to benefit, such as those undergoing AAA repair, those with 1000 mL or more EBL, and those receiving larger volumes of IAT-processed blood. Conclusion: We could find no net benefit of IAT in patients undergoing elective, infrarenal aortic surgery. (J Vasc Surg 1999;29:22-31.)     

Abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in octogenarians: myth or reality?

AIM: We studied the thirty-day mortality and morbidity rate to assess the value of conventional open repair vs endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) in an elderly population presenting with a ruptured, symptomatic or asymptomatic abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) undergoing emergency, urgent or elective repair. METHODS: During the period from January 2004 to May 2007, 329 consecutive patients were treated for AAA in our Department. Among these, 81 (24.6%) were aged >80 years (mean age 83.6, range 80-95 years). These older patients were divided into groups according to their clinical presentation: ruptured AAA group (rAAA) - 22 cases (4 emergency EVAR, 18 emergency open repair); symptomatic non-ruptured AAA group (sAAA) - 15 cases (11 urgent EVAR, 4 urgent open repair); asymptomatic AAA group (asAAA) - 44 cases (32 elective EVAR, 12 elective open repair). The main outcome measures were 30-day mortality and 30-day morbidity rate. RESULTS: The mortality rate following open surgery vs EVAR was 66.6% vs 50% (P=NS) in the rAAA group, 25% vs 0% (P=NS) in the sAAA group, and 9% vs 3.2% (P=NS) in the asAAA group. When comparing postoperative morbidities in the octogenarians, 3 of the patients that received EVAR (6.4%) and 15 of those that received open repair (48.4%) had a severe complication (P<0.01). CONCLUSION: The introduction of EVAR has considerably changed the balance of risks and benefits for AAA treatment. Our study confirms the high mortality rate for octogenarians with rAAA and haemodynamic instability, and supports the value of an active EVAR approach for octogenarians with AAA to prevent rupture. Moreover, the introduction of endovascular techniques as part of an overall treatment algorithm for ruptured AAAs appears to be potentially associated with improved outcomes in terms of mortality and morbidity as compared to open surgical repairs alone.     

Combined general and epidural anesthesia for abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery

Management of the patient with an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is based on the size of the aneurysm and the presence of a coexisting medical disease. Anesthesia for AAA repair requires an understanding of the major physiological changes occurring during aortic cross-clamping and unclamping so that fluid and vasodilator/vasopressor requirements can be anticipated, especially with supraceliac clamping. The goals are to provide hemodynamic stability and to preserve end-organ function-notably cardiac, renal, and spinal cord function. A combination of general and thoracic epidural anesthesia is commonly used for AAA surgery. The advantages of intraoperative use of epidural local anesthetics are (1) a reduced need for intraoperative inhalational and intravenous (opioid) anesthetics, which allows for early extubation of the trachea; (2) reduced requirements for vasodilating agents before and during cross-clamping of the aorta; and (3) excellent postoperative analgesia, which allows for earlier recovery of pulmonary and gastrointestinal functions. Disadvantages include the close attention to intravascular volume status that is necessary during unclamping of the aorta. Although much literature has been published suggesting benefits of thoracic epidural anesthesia and analgesia on the cardiac, respiratory, and immune systems as well as on the surgical stress response, most currently published studies lack the power to provide definitive answers to the question, “Does intraoperative use of epidural local anesthetics improve outcome?” Copyright © 2000 by W.B. Saunders Company     

Consumption of mannan-binding lectin during abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: Patients undergoing abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair are exposed to an ischaemia-reperfusion injury (IRI), which is in part mediated by complement activation. We investigated the role of the novel lectin pathway of complement during IRI in patients undergoing AAA repair. METHODS: Patients undergoing elective open infrarenal AAA repair had systemic blood samples taken at induction of anaesthesia, prior to aortic clamping, prior to aortic declamping and at reperfusion. Control patients undergoing major abdominal surgery were also included. Plasma was assayed for levels of mannan-binding lectin (MBL) using ELISA techniques. Consumption of plasma MBL was used as a measure of lectin pathway activation. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients undergoing AAA repair and eight control patients were recruited. No lectin pathway activation could be demonstrated in the control patients. AAA patients experienced a mean decrease in plasma MBL levels of 41% representing significant lectin pathway activation (p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: Consumption of MBL occurs during AAA repair, suggesting an important role for the lectin pathway in IRI. Specific transient inhibition of lectin pathway activity could be of significant therapeutic value in patients undergoing open surgical AAA repair.     

A Multiantioxidant Supplementation Reduces Damage from Ischaemia Reperfusion in Patients after Lower Torso Ischaemia. A Randomised Trial

BACKGROUND: open repair of intra-abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is associated with lower torso ischaemia and reperfusion. OBJECTIVE: to examine the effect of antioxidants on the activation and sequestration of white blood cells and muscle injury during AAA repair. METHOD: forty-two patients undergoing elective infrarenal aneurysm repair, were randomised to either standard therapy (22 patients) or standard therapy with additional multiantioxidant supplementation (20 patients). Vitamin E and C, Allopurinol, N-acetylcysteine and mannitol was administered perioperatively. White blood cell count (WBC), serum creatine kinase, aspartateaminotransferase, lactate and lipofuscine were measured. RESULTS: WBC remained higher after reperfusion in the antioxidant group (p = 0.008). CK, ASAT and lipofuscine levels were significantly lower after reperfusion in the antioxidant group (p = 0.02, p = 0.018, p = 0.017). CONCLUSION: multi-antioxidant supplementation was associated with a reduction in serum CK and ASAT after AAA repair. This is likely due to a reduction in oxidative stress and a decreased leucocyte sequestration and activation.     

Endovascular aneurysm repair for an abdominal aortic aneurysm and a left ruptured common iliac artery aneurysm in a patient with hepatocellular carcinoma: report of a case

We performed an endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) and a ruptured common iliac artery aneurysm (rCIAA) in a patient complicated by severe liver dysfunction due to obstructive jaundice resulting from hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). A 68-year-old male presented with acute lower abdominal pain. Abdominal computed tomography (CT) showed a 4.5-cm infrarenal AAA, a 6.0-cm left rCIAA with retroperitoneal hematoma and a 13-cm mass in the liver, which was suspected to be HCC. His laboratory data showed severe liver dysfunction. An emergency EVAR was done under local anesthesia because of his liver dysfunction. He was transferred to another hospital without any complications.     

To what extent has endovascular aneurysm repair influenced abdominal aortic aneurysm management in the state of Illinois?

PURPOSE: This study was performed using population-based data to determine the changing trends in the techniques for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair in the state of Illinois during the past 9 years and to examine the extent to which endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has influenced overall AAA management. METHODS: All records of patients who underwent AAA repair (1995 to 2003 inclusive) were retrieved from the Illinois Hospital Association COMPdata database. The outcome as determined by in-hospital mortality was analyzed according to intervention type (open vs EVAR) and indication (elective repair vs ruptured AAA). Data were stratified by age, gender, and hospital type (university vs community setting) and then analyzed using both univariate (chi 2 , t tests) and multivariate (stepwise logistic regression) techniques. RESULTS: Between 1995 and 2003, 14,517 patients underwent AAA repair (85% for elective and 15% for ruptured AAA). The average age was 71.4 +/- 7.9 years, and 76% were men. For elective cases, open repair was performed in 86% and EVAR in 14%; and for ruptured cases, open repair in 97% and EVAR in 3%. Elective EVAR was associated with lower in-hospital mortality compared with open repair regardless of age. No differences were observed with age after either type of repair for a ruptured aneurysm. Men had a lower in-hospital mortality compared with women for open repair of both elective and ruptured aneurysms. For EVAR, the mortality of an elective repair was lower in men, but there was no difference after a ruptured AAA. In men, the difference in mortality between elective open repair and EVAR was significant; the type of institution did not influence outcome. Patients >80 years of age had a higher mortality after open repair for both elective and ruptured AAA and after EVAR of a ruptured AAA. The average length of stay was 9.9 days for open elective repair, 13.1 days after open repair of a ruptured AAA, and 3.6 days for EVAR. The independent predictors of higher in-hospital mortality were female gender, age >80 years, diagnosis (ruptured vs open), and procedure (open vs EVAR). The year of the procedure and type of hospital (university vs community) were not predictive of outcome. CONCLUSIONS: EVAR has had a significant impact on AAA management in Illinois over a relatively short time period. In this population-based review, EVAR was associated with a significantly decreased in-hospital mortality and length of stay. Octogenarians had higher mortality after both types of repair, with the exception of elective EVAR.     

Endovascular versus open surgical repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm with concomitant malignancy

BACKGROUND: The management of patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) and concurrent malignancy is controversial. This study retrospectively assessed the outcome of endovascular repair (EVAR) and open repair (OR) for the treatment of AAA in patients undergoing curative treatment for concomitant malignancies. METHODS: All patients who underwent surgery for a nonruptured infrarenal AAA of > or =5.5 cm and concomitant malignancy between 1997 and 2005 were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: Identified were 25 patients (22 men; mean age, 70.3 years) with nonruptured infrarenal AAA of > or =5.5 cm (mean size, 6.4 cm) and concomitant malignancy amenable for curative treatment. EVAR was used to treat 11 patients, and 14 underwent OR. The EVAR patients had a smaller mean aneurysm size (5.9 cm vs 6.8 cm; P = .006) than the OR patients. The mean cumulative length of stay for all patients who received treatment for both AAA and cancer was 12.8 days (range, 4 to 26) for EVAR and 18.2 days (range, 9 to 42 days) for OR. In the EVAR group, no patients died perioperatively; in the OR group, three patients died perioperatively (21.4%; P = NS). Postoperative complications occurred in one patient in the EVAR group and in seven in the OR group for a morbidity rate, respectively, of 9.1% and 50% (P = .04). One late complication (9.1%) occurred in the EVAR group. The mean follow-up was 37.7 months (range, 16 to 60 months) in the EVAR group and 29.6 months (range, 11 to 55 months) in the OR group. At 1 and 2 years, survival rates were 100% and 90.9% in the EVAR group and 71.4% and 49% in the OR group (log-rank P = .103) CONCLUSIONS: With low morbidity and mortality, EVAR is a safe technique for the treatment of AAA in patients with concomitant malignancy and could be considered as an alternative to OR.