-
Vascular Jun 2016To identify patients who are under higher threat for migration because of an old generation stent graft application. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIM
To identify patients who are under higher threat for migration because of an old generation stent graft application.
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature was undertaken to identify all studies which included older generation endografts and data reporting on graft migration after EVAR. Outcome data were pooled and combined, and were calculated using fixed or random effects models.
RESULTS
From 2000 to 2014, 22 retrospective studies were identified reporting on stent- graft migration after EVAR (8.6%). From those patients, 39% received re-intervention with the mean time of identification ranging from 12 to 36 months. Six of these retrospective nonrandomized studies were eligible for meta-analysis. AAA diameter (AAA diameter: 0.719 mm; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.00065-1.4384 mm; p = 0.00497) and neck length (neck length: 4.36 mm; 95% CI: 1.3277-7.394; p = 0.0048) were the only significant factors associated with stent- graft migration. Neck diameter and neck angulation did not have any important influence on stent-graft migration.
CONCLUSIONS
Patients with large AAA and short necks who were treated with older generation stent grafts such as AneurX and Talent are in higher risk for endograft migration than others. Stent- graft migration consists of an insidious and underestimated threat.
Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal; Blood Vessel Prosthesis; Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation; Endovascular Procedures; Female; Foreign-Body Migration; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Prosthesis Design; Reoperation; Risk Factors; Stents; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 26056151
DOI: 10.1177/1708538115590065 -
The British Journal of Nutrition Mar 2024Phytosterols/phytostanols are bioactive compounds found in vegetable oils, nuts and seeds and added to a range of commercial food products. Consumption of... (Review)
Review
Phytosterols/phytostanols are bioactive compounds found in vegetable oils, nuts and seeds and added to a range of commercial food products. Consumption of phytosterols/phytostanols reduces levels of circulating LDL-cholesterol, a causative biomarker of CVD, and is linked to a reduced risk of some cancers. Individuals who consume phytosterols/phytostanols in their diet may do so for many years as part of a non-pharmacological route to lower cholesterol or as part of a healthy diet. However, the impact of long term or high intakes of dietary phytosterols/phytostanols has not been on whole-body epigenetic changes before. The aim of this systematic review was to identify all publications that have evaluated changes to epigenetic mechanisms (post-translation modification of histones, DNA methylation and miRNA expression) in response to phytosterols/phytostanols. A systematic search was performed that returned 226 records, of which eleven were eligible for full-text analysis. Multiple phytosterols were found to inhibit expression of histone deacetylase (HDAC) enzymes and were also predicted to directly bind and impair HDAC activity. Phytosterols were found to inhibit the expression and activity of DNA methyl transferase enzyme 1 and reverse cancer-associated gene silencing. Finally, phytosterols have been shown to regulate over 200 miRNA, although only five of these were reported in multiple publications. Five tissue types (breast, prostate, macrophage, aortic epithelia and lung) were represented across the studies, and although phytosterols/phytostanols alter the molecular mechanisms of epigenetic inheritance in these mammalian cells, studies exploring meiotic or transgenerational inheritance were not found.
Topics: Male; Animals; Humans; Phytosterols; Noncommunicable Diseases; Cholesterol; Epigenesis, Genetic; Neoplasms; MicroRNAs; Mammals
PubMed: 37955052
DOI: 10.1017/S0007114523002532 -
Journal of Vascular Surgery Apr 2022We sought to evaluate the impact of obesity on perioperative mortality and complication rates in patients undergoing endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) and open surgical... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
We sought to evaluate the impact of obesity on perioperative mortality and complication rates in patients undergoing endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) and open surgical repair (OSR) for abdominal aortic aneurysms.
METHODS
A systematic review of all studies reporting abdominal aortic aneurysm treatment perioperative (30-day) outcomes in obese patients (body mass index ≥30 kg/m). The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included cardiac complications, respiratory complications, wound complication, renal complications, and neurological complications at 30 days. These outcomes were pooled for meta-analysis. Analysis first compared obese vs nonobese patients undergoing EVAR and OSR then compared EVAR with OSR in obese patients.
RESULTS
We identified seven observational studies with 14,971 patients (11,743 EVAR, 3228 OSR). Obese patients undergoing EVAR had lower 30-day mortality (1.5%) compared with nonobese patients (2.2%) (odds ratio [OR], 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.50-0.96; P = .03; I = 0%; Grade of evidence: low). In OSR, obese patients (5.0%) had similar 30-day mortality to nonobese patients (5.7%) (OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.70-1.20; P = .54; I = 0%; Grade of evidence: low). Wound complications were higher in obese patients undergoing OSR (OR, 2.30; 95% CI, 1.74-3.06; P < .001; I = 0%; Grade of evidence: low). EVAR was associated with a lower 30-day mortality (1.5%) compared with OSR (5.0%) in obese patients (OR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.12-0.46; P < .001; I = 38%; Grade of evidence: low). Cardiac, respiratory, wound, renal, and neurological complications were also reduced in EVAR.
CONCLUSIONS
Obese patients have lower 30-day mortality in EVAR compared with nonobese patients. In OSR, obese patients had similar 30-day mortality but higher wound complications compared with nonobese patients. Obese patients otherwise have similar cardiopulmonary complication rates compared with nonobese patients in both EVAR and OSR. EVAR offers lower 30-day mortality and morbidity compared with OSR in obese patients. This study suggests that EVAR is superior to OSR in obese patients.
Topics: Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal; Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation; Endovascular Procedures; Humans; Obesity; Postoperative Complications; Retrospective Studies; Risk Factors; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34785300
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2021.10.053 -
Current Osteoporosis Reports Feb 2018A systematic literature review was performed to evaluate diabetes mellitus (DM) as a risk factor of abdominal aortic calcification (AAC), and address factors that might...
PURPOSE OF REVIEW
A systematic literature review was performed to evaluate diabetes mellitus (DM) as a risk factor of abdominal aortic calcification (AAC), and address factors that might contribute to the development of AAC in DM patients.
RECENT FINDINGS
DM is an independent risk factor of AAC development. Bone metabolism along with lifestyle factors among DM patients makes them more prone to AAC. Hip and vertebral fractures, high phosphate, smoking, hypertension, and low osteocalcin could make DM patients prone to AAC. Low levels of high-density lipoprotein (HDL), high low-density lipoprotein (LDL), high total cholesterol/HDL ratio, low bone mineral density (BMD) may be risk factors, but the literature is more ambiguous. Body mass index (BMI) does not appear to increase risk of AAC. High phosphate levels and low osteocalcin levels seem to be biomarkers of AAC in patients with diabetes. However, the association between DM and AAC is complicated.
Topics: Aorta, Abdominal; Bone and Bones; Diabetes Complications; Diabetes Mellitus; Female; Humans; Male; Osteoporosis; Risk Factors; Vascular Calcification
PubMed: 29380116
DOI: 10.1007/s11914-018-0418-z -
Heart (British Cardiac Society) Aug 2021The review aims to summarise evidence addressing patients' values, preferences and practical issues on deciding between transcatheter aortic valve insertion (TAVI) and...
The review aims to summarise evidence addressing patients' values, preferences and practical issues on deciding between transcatheter aortic valve insertion (TAVI) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for aortic stenosis. We searched databases and grey literature until June 2020. We included studies of adults with aortic stenosis eliciting values and preferences about treatment, excluding medical management or palliative care. Qualitative findings were synthesised using thematic analysis, and quantitative findings were narratively described. Evidence certainty was assessed using CERQual (Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research) and GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). We included eight studies. Findings ranged from low to very low certainty. Most studies only addressed TAVI. Studies addressing both TAVI and SAVR reported on factors affecting patients' decision-making along with treatment effectiveness, instead of trade-offs between procedures. Willingness to accept risk varied considerably. To improve their health status, participants were willing to accept higher mortality risk than current evidence suggests for either procedure. No study explicitly addressed valve reintervention, and one study reported variability in willingness to accept shorter duration of known effectiveness of TAVI compared with SAVR. The most common themes were desire for symptom relief and improved function. Participants preferred minimally invasive procedures with shorter hospital stay and recovery. The current body of evidence on patients' values, preferences and practical issues related to aortic stenosis management is of suboptimal rigour and reports widely disparate results regarding patients' perceptions. These findings emphasise the need for higher quality studies to inform clinical practice guidelines and the central importance of shared decision-making to individualise care fitted to each patient.
Topics: Aortic Valve Stenosis; Decision Making; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation; Humans; Patient Preference; Quality-Adjusted Life Years; Risk Adjustment; Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33563630
DOI: 10.1136/heartjnl-2020-318334 -
Progress in Cardiovascular Diseases 2020Calcific aortic valve stenosis (AS) is the most common form of acquired valvular heart disease needing intervention and our understanding of this disease has evolved...
Calcific aortic valve stenosis (AS) is the most common form of acquired valvular heart disease needing intervention and our understanding of this disease has evolved from one of degenerative calcification to that of an active process driven by the interplay of genetic factors and chronic inflammation modulated by risk factors such as smoking, hypertension and elevated cholesterol. Lipoprotein(a) [Lp (a)] is a cholesterol rich particle secreted by the liver which functions as the major lipoprotein carrier of phosphocholine-containing oxidized phospholipids. Lp(a) levels are largely genetically determined by polymorphisms in the LPA gene. While there is an extensive body of evidence linking Lp(a) to atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, emerging evidence now suggests a similar association of Lp(a) to calcific AS. In this article, we performed a systematic review of all published literature to assess the association between Lp(a) and calcific aortic valve (AV) disease. In addition, we review the potential mechanisms by which Lp(a) influences the progression of valve disease. Our review identified a total of 21 studies, varying from case-control studies, prospective or retrospective observational cohort studies to Mendelian randomized studies that assessed the association between Lp(a) and calcific AS. All but one of the above studies demonstrated significant association between elevated Lp(a) and calcific AS. We conclude that there is convincing evidence supporting a causal association between elevated Lp(a) and calcific AS. In addition, elevated Lp(a) predicts a faster hemodynamic progression of AS, and increased risk of AV replacement, especially in younger patients. Further research into the clinical utility of Lp(a) as a marker for predicting the incidence, progression, and outcomes of sclerodegenerative AV disease is needed.
Topics: Aortic Valve; Aortic Valve Stenosis; Calcinosis; Humans; Lipoprotein(a)
PubMed: 32526213
DOI: 10.1016/j.pcad.2020.06.002 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2023Aortic aneurysms occur when the aorta, the body's largest artery, grows in size, and can occur in the thoracic or abdominal aorta. The approaches to repair aortic... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Aortic aneurysms occur when the aorta, the body's largest artery, grows in size, and can occur in the thoracic or abdominal aorta. The approaches to repair aortic aneurysms include directly exposing the aorta and replacing the diseased segment via open repair, or endovascular repair. Endovascular repair uses fluoroscopic-guidance to access the aorta and deliver a device to exclude the aneurysmal aortic segment without requiring a large surgical incision. Endovascular repair can be performed under a general anesthetic, during which the unconscious patient is paralyzed and reliant on an anesthetic machine to maintain the airway and provide oxygen to the lungs, or a loco-regional anesethetic, for which medications are administered to provide the person with sufficient sedation and pain control without requiring a general anesthetic. While people undergoing general anesthesia are more likely to remain still during surgery and have a well-controlled airway in the event of unanticipated complications, loco-regional anesthesia is associated with fewer postoperative complications in some studies. It remains unclear which anesthetic technique is associated with better outcomes following the endovascular repair of aortic aneurysms.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the benefits and harms of general anesthesia compared to loco-regional anesthesia for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair.
SEARCH METHODS
We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search was 11 March 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We searched for all randomized controlled trials that assessed the effects of general anesthesia compared to loco-regional anesthesia for endovascular aortic aneurysm repairs.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were: all-cause mortality, length of hospital stay, length of intensive care unit stay. Our secondary outcomes were: incidence of endoleaks, requirement for re-intervention, incidence of myocardial infarction, quality of life, incidence of respiratory complications, incidence of pulmonary embolism, incidence of deep vein thrombosis, and length of procedure. We planned to use GRADE methodology to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome.
MAIN RESULTS
We found no studies, published or ongoing, that met our inclusion criteria.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We did not identify any randomized controlled trials that compared general versus loco-regional anesthesia for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair. There is currently insufficient high-quality evidence to determine the benefits or harms of either anesthetic approach during endovascular aortic aneurysm repair. Well-designed prospective randomized trials with relevant clinical outcomes are needed to adequately address this.
Topics: Humans; Anesthesia, Conduction; Anesthesia, General; Anesthetics, General; Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal; Endovascular Procedures; Prospective Studies; Quality of Life
PubMed: 37052421
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013182.pub2 -
Journal of Endovascular Therapy : An... Feb 2024Comparative effectiveness of fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (FEVAR) and chimney graft endovascular aneurysm repair (ChEVAR) for juxtarenal aortic aneurysms... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
Comparative effectiveness of fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (FEVAR) and chimney graft endovascular aneurysm repair (ChEVAR) for juxtarenal aortic aneurysms (JAAs) remains unclear. Our objective was to identify and analyze the current body of evidence comparing the effectiveness of both techniques for JAA.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the effectiveness of FEVAR and ChEVAR for JAA repair. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Register for Controlled Trials from January 1, 1990, for randomized and non-randomized studies assessing outcomes of FEVAR and ChEVAR for JAA repair. Screening, data extraction, risk of bias assessment, and GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessments, Development, and Evaluations) certainty of evidence were performed in duplicate. Data were pooled statistically where possible.
RESULTS
Nine retrospective cohort studies comparing the use of FEVAR and ChEVAR for juxtarenal aneurysm were included for meta-analysis. The FEVAR and ChEVAR arms of the meta-analysis consisted of 726 participants and 518 participants, respectively. There were 598 (86.8%) and 332 (81.6%) men in each arm. The mean diameter was larger in the ChEVAR arm (59 mm vs 52.5 mm). Both techniques had similar rates of postoperative 30-day mortality, 3.38% (8/237) versus 3.52% (8/227), acute kidney injury, 16.76% (31/185) versus 17.31% (18/104), and major adverse cardiac events, 7.30% (46/630) versus 6.60% (22/333). The meta-analysis supported the use of FEVAR for most outcomes, with significant advantage for technical success (odds ratio [OR]: 3.24, 95% CI: 1.24-8.42) and avoidance of type 1 endoleak (OR: 5.76, 95% CI: 1.94-17.08), but a disadvantage for spinal cord ischemia (OR: 10.21, 95% CI: 1.21-86.11), which had a very low number of events. The quality of evidence was "moderate" for most outcomes.
CONCLUSION
Both endovascular techniques had good safety profiles. The evidence does not support superiority of either FEVAR or ChEVAR for JAA.
CLINICAL IMPACT
While lack of equipoise has hampered the design of randomised trials of open versus endovascular repair of juxtarenal aortic aneurysms, concern about the durability of endovascular repair highlights the need for stronger evidence of the comparative efficacy of endovascular techniques. This review performed meta-analysis and evidence appraisal of recent data from large observational studies comparing fenestrated and chimney techniques, using a comprehensive outcome set. Superiority of either intervention could not be established due to differences in participants' baseline risk in each study arm. However, data suggests that both techniques are safe and suitable for use when indicated.
PubMed: 38388373
DOI: 10.1177/15266028241231171 -
International Journal of Surgery... Apr 2024The clinical data regarding the relationships between BMI and abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) are inconsistent, especially for the obese and overweight patients. The... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The clinical data regarding the relationships between BMI and abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) are inconsistent, especially for the obese and overweight patients. The aims of this study were to determine whether obesity is associated with the presence of AAA and to investigate the quantitative relationship between BMI and the risk of AAA presence and postoperative mortality.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase databases were used to search for pertinent studies updated to December 2023. The pooled relative risk (RR) with 95% CI was estimated by conventional meta-analysis based on random effects model. Dose-response meta-analyses using robust-error meta-regression (REMR) model were conducted to quantify the associations between BMI and AAA outcome variables. Subgroup analysis, sensitivity analysis, and publication bias analysis were performed according to the characteristics of participants.
RESULTS
Eighteen studies were included in our study. The meta-analysis showed a higher prevalence of AAA with a RR of 1.07 in patients with obesity. The dose-response meta-analysis revealed a nonlinear relationship between BMI and the risk of AAA presence. A 'U' shape curve reflecting the correlation between BMI and the risk of postoperative mortality in AAA patients was also uncovered, suggesting the 'safest' BMI interval (28.55, 31.05) with the minimal RR.
CONCLUSIONS
Obesity is positively but nonlinearly correlated with the increased risk of AAA presence. BMI is related to AAA postoperative mortality in a 'U' shaped curve, with the lowest RR observed among patients suffering from overweight and obesity. These findings offer a preventive strategy for AAA morbidity and provide guidance for improving the prognosis in patients undergone AAA surgical repair.
Topics: Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal; Humans; Body Mass Index; Obesity; Risk Factors; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 38320094
DOI: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000001125 -
Progress in Cardiovascular Diseases 2023The relationship of body mass index (BMI) and an "obesity paradox" with cardiovascular risk prediction is controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The relationship of body mass index (BMI) and an "obesity paradox" with cardiovascular risk prediction is controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare the associations of different BMI ranges on transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) outcomes.
METHODS
International databases, including PubMed, the Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library, were systematically searched for observational and randomized controlled trial studies investigating TAVI outcomes in any of the four BMI categories: underweight, normal weight, overweight, and obese with one of the predefined outcomes. Primary outcomes were in-hospital, 30-day, and long-term all-cause mortality. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed to calculate the odds ratio (OR) or standardized mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for each paired comparison between two of the BMI categories.
RESULTS
A total of 38 studies were included in our analysis, investigating 99,829 patients undergoing TAVI. There was a trend toward higher comorbidities such as hypertension, diabetes, and dyslipidemia in overweight patients and individuals with obesity. Compared with normal-weight, patients with obesity had a lower rate of 30-day mortality (OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.25-0.72, p < 0.01), paravalvular aortic regurgitation (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.44-0.91, p = 0.01), 1-year mortality (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.24-0.96, p = 0.04), and long-term mortality (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.51-0.94, p = 0.02). However, acute kidney injury (OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.04-1.30, p = 0.01) and permanent pacemaker implantation (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.05-1.50, p = 0.01) odds were higher in patients with obesity. Noteworthy, major vascular complications were significantly higher in underweight patients in comparison with normal weight cases (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.07-2.46, p = 0.02). In terms of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), patients with obesity had higher post-operative LVEF compared to normal-weight individuals (SMD 0.12, 95% CI 0.02-0.22, p = 0.02).
CONCLUSION
Our results suggest the presence of the "obesity paradox" in TAVI outcomes with higher BMI ranges being associated with lower short- and long-term mortality. BMI can be utilized for risk prediction of patients undergoing TAVI.
Topics: Humans; Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement; Body Mass Index; Overweight; Risk Factors; Aortic Valve Stenosis; Stroke Volume; Thinness; Treatment Outcome; Ventricular Function, Left; Obesity; Aortic Valve
PubMed: 36657654
DOI: 10.1016/j.pcad.2022.12.006