Coagulation factor V gene 1691G>A polymorphism as an indicator for risk and prognosis of lower extremity deep venous thrombosis in Chinese Han population.

The purpose of this study was to explore the negative influence coagulation factor V (FV) 1691G>A polymorphism had on the risk and prognosis of lower extremity deep venous thrombosis (LDVT) in Chinese Han population.A total of 348 patients with LDVT (LDVT group) and 398 healthy individuals (control group) were selected to further this study. A polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism method was used to analyze the FV gene 1691G>A polymorphism; coagulation and anticoagulation indexes of patients with LDVT were detected as a result. A 3-year follow-up and logistic regression analysis were conducted to determine the corresponding correlations between FV gene and LDVT.In comparison with the control group, the frequencies of GA and AA genotypes and A allele of 1691G>A polymorphism significantly increased in the LDVT group. Also, in comparison with patients with LDVT carrying GG genotype of FV gene 1691G>A polymorphism, the following activities reduced significantly: prothrombin time, activated partial thromboplastin time, fibrinogen, protein C, and protein S, while activated protein C resistance and lupus anticoagulant positive rate increased in patients carrying A allele (GA + AA). Logistic regression analysis indicated that FV gene 1691G>A polymorphism, total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and LDVT family histories were all closely related with LDVT and were subsequent independent risk factors for LDVT. Moreover, patients with LDVT carrying A allele (GA + AA) had both higher patency and recurrence rates than those carrying GG genotype.FV gene 1691G>A polymorphism may be associated with both the risk and prognosis of LDVT, potentially being a useful index for monitoring LDVT prognosis and risk.

Comparison of Efficacy of Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Versus Open Surgical Repair in Middle/High-Risk Patients With Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm.

To explore the efficacy of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) compared with traditional open surgical repair (OSR) in the treatment of middle/high-risk patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). With a retrospective method, we analyzed the clinical data of 57 patients with middle/high-risk AAA admitted to Linyi People's Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University from January 2010 to January 2014. Twenty-eight of the 57 patients received EVAR and 29 others received OSR. Statistical analysis was conducted by the design of spreadsheet according to preoperative, intraoperative, perioperative, and postoperative follow-up relevant information. Our study showed that the difference in baseline characteristics of different therapies in middle/high-risk AAA patients was not statistically significant in preoperative period (P > 0.05). In intraoperative period, the efficacy of middle/high-risk AAA patients in EVAR group was significantly superior to OSR group in terms of blood loss, blood transfusion, and general anesthesia rate (all P < 0.01). In perioperative period, the ICU observation time and the average fasting time of middle/high-risk AAA patients in EVAR group were remarkably lower than OSR group (all P < 0.01), but the average hospital stay and the operation cost of middle/high-risk AAA patients in EVAR group were notably higher than OSR group. In postoperative follow-up period, OSR group was identified with a lower incidence of surgery-related complications than EVAR group (P < 0.05), but EVAR group was demonstrated with a higher survival rate than OSR group (P < 0.05); after 12 months of follow-up, SF-36 scale scores in OSR group were higher than EVAR group (P < 0.05). In conclusion, EVAR may have a better short-term effect, whereas OSR may have a better long-term effect in the treatment of middle/high-risk AAA patients.