-
Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis :... Feb 2008Pulmonary embolism (PE) and intracardiac thrombosis (ICT) are rare but potentially lethal complications during orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Pulmonary embolism (PE) and intracardiac thrombosis (ICT) are rare but potentially lethal complications during orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT).
METHODS
We aimed to review clinical and pathological correlates of PE and ICT in patients undergoing OLT. A systematic review of the literature was conducted using MEDLINE and ISI Web of Science.
RESULTS
Seventy-four cases of intraoperative PE and/or ICT were identified; PE alone in 32 patients (43%) and a combination of PE and ICT in 42 patients (57%). Most frequent clinical symptoms included systemic hypotension and concomitant rising pulmonary artery pressure, often leading to complete circulatory collapse. PE and ICT occurred in every stage of the operation and were reported equally in patients with or without the use of venovenous bypass or antifibrinolytics. A large variety of putative risk factors have been suggested in the literature, including the use of pulmonary artery catheters or certain blood products. Nineteen patients underwent urgent thrombectomy or thrombolysis. Overall mortality was 68% (50/74) and 41 patients (82%) died intraoperatively.
CONCLUSION
Mortality was significantly higher in patients with an isolated PE, compared to patients with a combination of PE and ICT (91% and 50%, respectively; P < 0.001). Intraoperative PE and ICT during OLT appear to have multiple etiologies and may occur unexpectedly at any time during the procedure.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Child; Child, Preschool; Combined Modality Therapy; Female; Heart Diseases; Hospital Mortality; Humans; Hypertension, Pulmonary; Hypotension; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Intraoperative Complications; Liver Transplantation; Male; Middle Aged; Pulmonary Embolism; Risk Factors; Shock; Thrombelastography; Thrombosis
PubMed: 18005235
DOI: 10.1111/j.1538-7836.2008.02831.x -
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Nov 2023To assess the absolute treatment effects of intravascular imaging guided versus angiography guided percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with coronary artery... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To assess the absolute treatment effects of intravascular imaging guided versus angiography guided percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with coronary artery disease, considering their baseline risk.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases up to 31 August 2023.
STUDY SELECTION
Randomized controlled trials comparing intravascular imaging (intravascular ultrasonography or optical coherence tomography) guided versus coronary angiography guided percutaneous coronary intervention in adults with coronary artery disease.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
Random effect meta-analysis and GRADE (grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation) were used to assess certainty of evidence. Data included rate ratios and absolute risks per 1000 people for cardiac death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, target vessel revascularization, and target lesion revascularization. Absolute risk differences were estimated using SYNTAX risk categories for baseline risks at five years, assuming constant rate ratios across different cardiovascular risk thresholds.
RESULTS
In 20 randomized controlled trials (n=11 698), intravascular imaging guided percutaneous coronary intervention was associated with a reduced risk of cardiac death (rate ratio 0.53, 95% confidence interval 0.39 to 0.72), myocardial infarction (0.81, 0.68 to 0.97), stent thrombosis (0.44, 0.27 to 0.72), target vessel revascularization (0.74, 0.61 to 0.89), and target lesion revascularization (0.71, 0.59 to 0.86) but not all cause death (0.81, 0.64 to 1.02). Using SYNTAX risk categories, high certainty evidence showed that from low risk to high risk, intravascular imaging was likely associated with 23 to 64 fewer cardiac deaths, 15 to 19 fewer myocardial infarctions, 9 to 13 fewer stent thrombosis events, 28 to 38 fewer target vessel revascularization events, and 35 to 48 fewer target lesion revascularization events per 1000 people.
CONCLUSIONS
Compared with coronary angiography guided percutaneous coronary intervention, intravascular imaging guided percutaneous coronary intervention was associated with significantly reduced cardiac death and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with coronary artery disease. The estimated absolute effects of intravascular imaging guided percutaneous coronary intervention showed a proportional relation with baseline risk, driven by the severity and complexity of coronary artery disease.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42023433568.
Topics: Humans; Coronary Angiography; Coronary Artery Disease; Drug-Eluting Stents; Risk Factors; Myocardial Infarction; Thrombosis; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; Death; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37973170
DOI: 10.1136/bmj-2023-077848 -
JACC. Cardiovascular Interventions Jan 2017This study sought to compare the 2-year outcomes between bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) and everolimus-eluting metallic drug-eluting stent (EES). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
This study sought to compare the 2-year outcomes between bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) and everolimus-eluting metallic drug-eluting stent (EES).
BACKGROUND
The occurrence of very late stent/scaffold thrombosis (VLST) of BVS beyond 1 year after implantation is an increasing concern.
METHODS
We conducted a meta-analysis of 24 studies (BVS: n = 2,567 and EES: n = 19,806) reporting the 2-year outcomes of BVS and/or EES to compare the risk of BVS versus EES for stent/scaffold thrombosis (ST) and target lesion failure (TLF) in 7 comparative studies (3 randomized and 4 observational), and to estimate the pooled incidence rates of ST and TLF including additional 17 single-arm studies.
RESULTS
In the 7 comparative studies, the risk for VLST between 1 and 2 years was numerically higher in BVS than in EES (odds ratio [OR]: 2.03 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.62 to 6.71]). The excess risk of BVS relative to EES for ST through 2 years was significant (OR: 2.08 [95% CI: 1.02 to 4.26]). The risk for TLF was neutral between BVS and EES. In the 24 studies, the pooled estimated incidence rates of VLST, and ST through 2 years were higher in BVS than in EES (0.240 [95% CI: 0.022 to 0.608]% vs. 0.003 [95% CI: 0.000 to 0.028]%, and 1.43 [95% CI: 0.67 to 2.41]% vs. 0.56 [95% CI: 0.43 to 0.70]%, respectively). The corresponding rates for TLF were comparable between BVS and EES (1.88 [95% CI: 1.30 to 2.55]% and 1.78 [95% CI: 1.17 to 2.49]% and 7.90 [95% CI: 6.26 to 9.69]% and 7.49 [95% CI: 5.86 to 9.29]%, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS
In this meta-analysis, BVS as compared with EES was associated with higher risk for VLST between 1 and 2 years and ST through 2 years.
Topics: Absorbable Implants; Aged; Cardiovascular Agents; Coronary Artery Disease; Coronary Thrombosis; Drug-Eluting Stents; Everolimus; Female; Humans; Incidence; Kaplan-Meier Estimate; Male; Metals; Middle Aged; Odds Ratio; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; Propensity Score; Prosthesis Design; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28057284
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2016.10.027 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2022The primary manifestation of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is respiratory insufficiency that can also be related to diffuse pulmonary microthrombosis and... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The primary manifestation of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is respiratory insufficiency that can also be related to diffuse pulmonary microthrombosis and thromboembolic events, such as pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis, or arterial thrombosis. People with COVID-19 who develop thromboembolism have a worse prognosis. Anticoagulants such as heparinoids (heparins or pentasaccharides), vitamin K antagonists and direct anticoagulants are used for the prevention and treatment of venous or arterial thromboembolism. Besides their anticoagulant properties, heparinoids have an additional anti-inflammatory potential. However, the benefit of anticoagulants for people with COVID-19 is still under debate.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the benefits and harms of anticoagulants versus active comparator, placebo or no intervention in people hospitalised with COVID-19.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS and IBECS databases, the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register and medRxiv preprint database from their inception to 14 April 2021. We also checked the reference lists of any relevant systematic reviews identified, and contacted specialists in the field for additional references to trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Eligible studies were randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, cluster-RCTs and cohort studies that compared prophylactic anticoagulants versus active comparator, placebo or no intervention for the management of people hospitalised with COVID-19. We excluded studies without a comparator group and with a retrospective design (all previously included studies) as we were able to include better study designs. Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and necessity for additional respiratory support. Secondary outcomes were mortality related to COVID-19, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, major bleeding, adverse events, length of hospital stay and quality of life.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. We used Cochrane RoB 1 to assess the risk of bias for RCTs, ROBINS-I to assess risk of bias for non-randomised studies (NRS) and GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence. We meta-analysed data when appropriate.
MAIN RESULTS
We included seven studies (16,185 participants) with participants hospitalised with COVID-19, in either intensive care units, hospital wards or emergency departments. Studies were from Brazil (2), Iran (1), Italy (1), and the USA (1), and two involved more than country. The mean age of participants was 55 to 68 years and the follow-up period ranged from 15 to 90 days. The studies assessed the effects of heparinoids, direct anticoagulants or vitamin K antagonists, and reported sparse data or did not report some of our outcomes of interest: necessity for additional respiratory support, mortality related to COVID-19, and quality of life. Higher-dose versus lower-dose anticoagulants (4 RCTs, 4647 participants) Higher-dose anticoagulants result in little or no difference in all-cause mortality (risk ratio (RR) 1.03, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.16, 4489 participants; 4 RCTs) and increase minor bleeding (RR 3.28, 95% CI 1.75 to 6.14, 1196 participants; 3 RCTs) compared to lower-dose anticoagulants up to 30 days (high-certainty evidence). Higher-dose anticoagulants probably reduce pulmonary embolism (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.70, 4360 participants; 4 RCTs), and slightly increase major bleeding (RR 1.78, 95% CI 1.13 to 2.80, 4400 participants; 4 RCTs) compared to lower-dose anticoagulants up to 30 days (moderate-certainty evidence). Higher-dose anticoagulants may result in little or no difference in deep vein thrombosis (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.57 to 2.03, 3422 participants; 4 RCTs), stroke (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.40 to 2.03, 4349 participants; 3 RCTs), major adverse limb events (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.99, 1176 participants; 2 RCTs), myocardial infarction (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.55, 4349 participants; 3 RCTs), atrial fibrillation (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.07 to 1.70, 562 participants; 1 study), or thrombocytopenia (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.24, 2789 participants; 2 RCTs) compared to lower-dose anticoagulants up to 30 days (low-certainty evidence). It is unclear whether higher-dose anticoagulants have any effect on necessity for additional respiratory support, mortality related to COVID-19, and quality of life (very low-certainty evidence or no data). Anticoagulants versus no treatment (3 prospective NRS, 11,538 participants) Anticoagulants may reduce all-cause mortality but the evidence is very uncertain due to two study results being at critical and serious risk of bias (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.74, 8395 participants; 3 NRS; very low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain if anticoagulants have any effect on necessity for additional respiratory support, mortality related to COVID-19, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, major bleeding, stroke, myocardial infarction and quality of life (very low-certainty evidence or no data). Ongoing studies We found 62 ongoing studies in hospital settings (60 RCTs, 35,470 participants; 2 prospective NRS, 120 participants) in 20 different countries. Thirty-five ongoing studies plan to report mortality and 26 plan to report necessity for additional respiratory support. We expect 58 studies to be completed in December 2021, and four in July 2022. From 60 RCTs, 28 are comparing different doses of anticoagulants, 24 are comparing anticoagulants versus no anticoagulants, seven are comparing different types of anticoagulants, and one did not report detail of the comparator group.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
When compared to a lower-dose regimen, higher-dose anticoagulants result in little to no difference in all-cause mortality and increase minor bleeding in people hospitalised with COVID-19 up to 30 days. Higher-dose anticoagulants possibly reduce pulmonary embolism, slightly increase major bleeding, may result in little to no difference in hospitalisation time, and may result in little to no difference in deep vein thrombosis, stroke, major adverse limb events, myocardial infarction, atrial fibrillation, or thrombocytopenia. Compared with no treatment, anticoagulants may reduce all-cause mortality but the evidence comes from non-randomised studies and is very uncertain. It is unclear whether anticoagulants have any effect on the remaining outcomes compared to no anticoagulants (very low-certainty evidence or no data). Although we are very confident that new RCTs will not change the effects of different doses of anticoagulants on mortality and minor bleeding, high-quality RCTs are still needed, mainly for the other primary outcome (necessity for additional respiratory support), the comparison with no anticoagulation, when comparing the types of anticoagulants and giving anticoagulants for a prolonged period of time.
Topics: Aged; Anticoagulants; COVID-19; Heparin; Humans; Middle Aged; SARS-CoV-2; Thromboembolism
PubMed: 35244208
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013739.pub2 -
Annals of Vascular Surgery Jan 2021Emerging evidence suggests that severe form of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is mediated, in part, by a hypercoagulable state characterized by micro- and...
BACKGROUND
Emerging evidence suggests that severe form of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is mediated, in part, by a hypercoagulable state characterized by micro- and macro-vascular thrombotic angiopathy. Although venous thrombotic events in COVID-19 patients have been well described, data on arterial thrombosis (AT) in these patients is still limited. We, therefore, conducted a rapid systematic review of current scientific literature to identify and consolidate evidence of AT in COVID-19 patients.
METHODS
A systematic search of literature was conducted between November 1, 2019, and June 9, 2020, on PubMed and China National Knowledge Infrastructure to identify potentially eligible studies.
RESULTS
A total of 27 studies (5 cohort, 5 case series, and 17 case reports) describing arterial thrombotic events in 90 COVID-19 patients were included. The pooled incidence of AT in severe/critically ill intensive care unit-admitted COVID-19 patients across the 5 cohort studies was 4.4% (95% confidence interval 2.8-6.4). Most of the patients were male, elderly, and had comorbidities. AT was symptomatic in >95% of these patients and involved multiple arteries in approximately 18% of patients. The anatomical distribution of arterial thrombotic events was wide, occurring in limb arteries (39%), cerebral arteries (24%), great vessels (aorta, common iliac, common carotid, and brachiocephalic trunk; 19%), coronary arteries (9%), and superior mesenteric artery (8%). The mortality rate in these patients is approximately 20%.
CONCLUSIONS
AT occurs in approximately 4% of critically ill COVID-19 patients. It often presents symptomatically and can affect multiple arteries. Further investigation of the underlying mechanism of AT in COVID-19 would be needed to clarify possible therapeutic targets.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Arterial Occlusive Diseases; Blood Coagulation; COVID-19; Host-Pathogen Interactions; Humans; Incidence; Male; Middle Aged; Prognosis; Risk Factors; SARS-CoV-2; Thrombosis
PubMed: 32866574
DOI: 10.1016/j.avsg.2020.08.087 -
Blood Advances Jun 2019In the last years, a growing amount of evidence has been produced regarding the role of leukocytosis as a risk factor for thrombosis in patients with myeloproliferative... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
In the last years, a growing amount of evidence has been produced regarding the role of leukocytosis as a risk factor for thrombosis in patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms, predominantly in polycythemia vera (PV) and essential thrombocythemia (ET). Results from epidemiologic studies on this issue, however, are inconclusive. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of articles published in the last 12 years addressing the issue, according to a predefined protocol. Forty-one articles analyzing >30 000 patients met our inclusion criteria and were deemed of acceptable methodologic quality. In addition to data on thrombosis, data were collected on bleeding, hematologic evolution, secondary cancer, and death. The relative risk (RR) of thrombosis in the presence of leukocytosis was 1.59 (95% CI, 1.40-1.80), mainly accounted for by ET (RR, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.43-1.91) and arterial thrombosis (RR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.13-1.86) subgroups; the effect was not significant in venous thrombosis alone. Sensitivity analyses considering recurrent events as well as white blood cell estimates adjusted or unadjusted for confounding factors confirmed the primary results. In addition, the pooled RR of studies that tested white blood cell counts in time-dependent models suggested a causative effect of leukocytes in the mechanism that triggers thrombosis. The effect of leukocytosis on bleeding (RR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.26-2.77) and death (RR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.59-2.23) was confirmed, whereas conclusions on hematologic evolutions and solid tumors were uncertain. To confirm the accuracy of these results, an investigation on individual patient data in a large collective archive of homogeneous patients is warranted.
Topics: Female; Hemorrhage; Humans; Leukocytosis; Male; Polycythemia Vera; Risk Factors; Thrombocythemia, Essential; Thrombosis
PubMed: 31175128
DOI: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2019000211 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2014Stroke affects 15 million people per year worldwide. Despite recent developments in acute stroke treatment, prevention remains very important. Stroke has a high rate of... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Stroke affects 15 million people per year worldwide. Despite recent developments in acute stroke treatment, prevention remains very important. Stroke has a high rate of recurrence; therefore secondary prevention is also important. Many clinical approaches to control risk factors have been proposed. One of these approaches is the prescription of beta-blockers that have effects beyond the reduction of blood pressure, which can reduce the recurrence of stroke.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the efficacy of beta-blockers for preventing stroke recurrence and for reducing death and major vascular events in people with a previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA), and to determine their safety, particularly with regard to the development of diabetes mellitus.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (May 2014), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) (The Cochrane Library 2014, Issue 5), the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) (May 2014), MEDLINE (1966 to May 2014), EMBASE (1980 to May 2014), and Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS) (1982 to May 2014). We also searched ongoing trials registers and reference lists.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that included participants with previous stroke or TIA due to arterial thrombosis or embolism. The intervention was any beta-blocker versus control, or beta-blocker plus other treatment versus other treatment.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened the trials identified, appraised quality, and extracted data.
MAIN RESULTS
We included two RCTs involving 2193 participants in the review. Both studies randomised participants to either beta-blocker (atenolol 5 mg) or placebo and were of a high methodological quality. We noted no statistical differences among the groups in risks of fatal and non-fatal stroke (risk ratio (RR) 0.94, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76 to 1.18). For other outcomes analysed (major vascular events, death from all causes, death from cardiovascular causes) , we observed no significant differences between the groups. There were minor blood pressure reductions in the intervention group. Neither of the included studies reported the occurrence of diabetes among their outcomes or assessed quality of life. Adverse events were significantly more frequent in participants taking atenolol than in those given placebo, and were the most common reason given for discontinuing treatment (RR 1.85, 95% CI 1.45 to 2.35).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
To date, no available evidence supports the routine use of beta-blockers for secondary prevention after stroke or TIA. More studies with larger samples are needed.
Topics: Adrenergic beta-1 Receptor Antagonists; Atenolol; Humans; Ischemic Attack, Transient; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Recurrence; Secondary Prevention; Stroke
PubMed: 25317988
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007890.pub3 -
Hamostaseologie Aug 2022Lemierre syndrome is a potentially life-threatening disease, which affects otherwise healthy young adults and adolescents. It is characterized by acute neck vein... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Lemierre syndrome is a potentially life-threatening disease, which affects otherwise healthy young adults and adolescents. It is characterized by acute neck vein thrombosis and septic embolism, usually complicating a bacterial infection. Data on the syndrome are sparse, particularly concerning arterial complications.
METHODS
We evaluated the frequency and patterns of cerebral arterial and cardiac involvement ("arterial complications") in an individual patient level cohort of 712 patients, representing all cases described over the past 20 years in the medical literature who fulfilled the criteria: (1) bacterial infection in the neck/head site and (2) objectively confirmed thrombotic complication or septic embolism. The study outcomes were defined as all-cause in-hospital deaths and the occurrence of clinical sequelae at discharge or in the postdischarge period.
RESULTS
A total of 55 (7.7%) patients had an arterial complication. The most frequent arterial complications were carotid involvement (52.7%), stroke (38.2%), and pericardial complications (20%). Patients with an arterial involvement were more likely to be treated with a greater number of antibiotics (23 vs. 10%) and to receive anticoagulation. In addition, patients with arterial complications had a greater risk of all-cause death ( = 20/600, 3.3% vs. = 6/52, 12%; odds ratio [OR]: 3.8; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.5-9.9) and late clinical sequelae ( = 49/580, 9.0% vs. = 15/46, 35%; OR: 5.2; 95% CI: 2.65-10.37).
CONCLUSIONS
While Lemierre syndrome is known to be primarily characterized by venous thromboembolic events, our results suggest that local or distant arterial complications may occur in approximately one-tenth of patients and may be associated with a greater risk of long-term sequelae and death.
Topics: Adolescent; Aftercare; Bacterial Infections; Embolism; Humans; Lemierre Syndrome; Patient Discharge; Venous Thrombosis; Young Adult
PubMed: 35255510
DOI: 10.1055/a-1694-8723 -
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 -
VASA. Zeitschrift Fur Gefasskrankheiten Mar 2023Vascular handlebar syndrome with blunt injury of the common femoral artery is a rare vascular trauma mechanism, with high possibility of being missed or delayed. We... (Review)
Review
Vascular handlebar syndrome with blunt injury of the common femoral artery is a rare vascular trauma mechanism, with high possibility of being missed or delayed. We present two cases of vascular handlebar syndrome treated in our hospital and a systematic review of the literature using MEDLINE and SCOPUS databases. Literature review identified 20 similar cases. The median age of patients was 18 years, and in vast majority males in gender. In most cases, the common femoral artery injury was an intimal flap and lumen occlusion with intramural thrombosis followed by transection and intimal injury without occlusion or thrombosis. The median time between injury and diagnosis/treatment was half an hour. Clinical presentation ranged from asymptomatic to acute limb ischemia. The grade of acute ischemia was mostly Rutherford class I (n=14), while acute IIa (n=4), chronic ischemia (n=3), and no ischemia (n=1) were also noticed. The correct diagnosis was revealed by clinical examination only (n=1), or by the combination of clinical and imaging techniques including computed tomography angiography (n=7) and duplex ultrasonography (n=4) or both (n=10). Management of the handlebar trauma syndrome injuries was surgical in most cases. Outcome was favorable in all patients. Vascular handlebar syndrome is extremely rare and high suspicion is required for early diagnosis and definitive treatment, as the early management is effective and crucial for averting the devastating consequences. An individualized approach to the vascular trauma patient is to be applied with considerations taken to the age of the patient, the mechanism of the injury, the anatomy of the lesion, and symptomatology of the case.
Topics: Adolescent; Humans; Male; Femoral Artery; Ischemia; Thrombosis; Tomography, X-Ray Computed; Vascular System Injuries; Wounds, Nonpenetrating
PubMed: 36698255
DOI: 10.1024/0301-1526/a001054