Paclitaxel and Mortality Following Peripheral Angioplasty: An Adjusted and Case Matched Multicentre Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Paclitaxel based drug coated balloons (DCBs) and drug eluting stents (DESs) may be associated with increased mortality in patients with peripheral arterial occlusive disease (PAOD), based on a recent meta-analysis. This study, however, had a number of limitations, which have been discussed at great length among the vascular community. The aim of this research was to assess the association between paclitaxel based endovascular treatment (PTX) in the femoropopliteal (F-P) segment and mortality, adjusting for relevant risk factors and including patients with chronic limb threatening ischaemia (CLTI). METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of a prospectively maintained multicentre (three sites) database of patients with claudication or CLTI. Patients having F-P angioplasty between 1 January 2014 and 30 May 2019 with or without PTX were included. Survival was compared in Cox regression analyses adjusted for parameters of the Charlson comorbidity index. A separate nested case matched (based on each individual's Charlson index) analysis was performed to compare mortality rates between those who received PTX and those who did not. RESULTS: A total of 2 071 patients were analysed: 966 patients (46.6%) were treated with PTX (952 [46%] had CLTI and 1 119 [54%] severe claudication [Rutherford stage 3]). Over a 24 month median follow up, 456 (22.1%) patients died. Using multivariable Cox regression, PTX was not associated with mortality (HR 0.94, p = .46), even when assessed separately for those with intermittent claudication (HR 1.30, p = .15) or CLTI (HR 0.81, p = .060). In the case matched analysis (885 matched pairs of patients), PTX was not associated with mortality (HR 0.89, p = .17). Paclitaxel dose and use of a DCB or DES were not associated with mortality in any subanalysis. CONCLUSION: When relevant risk factors were taken into account, there were no associations between PTX and mid term mortality in patients with PAOD.

Editor's Choice - Acute Kidney Injury (AKI) in Aortic Intervention: Findings From the Midlands Aortic Renal Injury (MARI) Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: The incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) after open (OAR) or endovascular (EVAR) aortic repair is unknown. This research assessed the proportion of patients who develop AKI after aortic intervention using validated criteria, and explored AKI risk factors. METHODS: This was a multicentre national prospective cohort study. Eleven centres recruited patients undergoing EVAR or OAR (September 2017-December 2018). Serum creatinine (SCr) and urine outputs were measured over a minimum of 48 h or throughout the index inpatient stay to define post-operative AKI using the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) criteria. Renal decline at 30 days was calculated using estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and the Major Adverse Kidney Events (MAKE) 30 day composite endpoint (consisting of: death, new dialysis, > 25% eGFR decline). RESULTS: 300 patients (mean age: 71 years, standard deviation [SD] 4 years; 9% females) were included, who underwent: infrarenal endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) 139 patients, fenestrated EVAR (fEVAR) 30, branched EVAR (bEVAR) seven, infrarenal open aneurysm repair (OAR) 98, juxtarenal OAR 26. Overall, 24% of patients developed stage 1 AKI (defined at 48 h as per KDIGO), 2.7% stage 2 AKI and 1% needed renal replacement therapy before discharge. AKI proportions per intervention were: infrarenal EVAR 18%; fEVAR 27%; bEVAR 71%; infrarenal OAR 41%; juxtarenal OAR 63%. Older age (odds ratio [OR] 1.44 for EVAR, 1.58 for OAR), lower baseline eGFR (OR 0.88 EVAR, 0.74 OAR), and ischaemic heart disease (OR 4.42 EVAR, 5.80 OAR) were the main predictors of AKI for infrarenal EVAR and OAR. Overall, 24% developed the MAKE30 endpoint. All patients who died (0.6%) or developed a major cardiac event (5.6%) at one year had developed AKI. CONCLUSION: AKI and short term renal decline after aortic intervention are common. Age, renal function, and cardiovascular disease are the main risk factors. Research should now focus on AKI prevention in this high risk group.

Editor's Choice - Overview of Primary and Secondary Analyses From 20 Randomised Controlled Trials Comparing Carotid Artery Stenting With Carotid Endarterectomy.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this review was to carry out primary and secondary analyses of 20 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) with carotid artery stenting (CAS). METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis of data from 20 RCTs (126 publications) was carried out. RESULTS: Compared with CEA, the 30 day death/stroke rate was significantly higher after CAS in seven RCTs involving 3467 asymptomatic patients (odds ratio [OR] 1.64, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02-2.64) and in 10 RCTs involving 5797 symptomatic patients (OR 1.71, 95% CI 1.38-2.11). Excluding procedural risks, late ipsilateral stroke was about 4% at 9 years for both CEA and CAS, i.e., CAS was durable. Reducing procedural death/stroke after CAS may be achieved through better case selection, e.g., performing CEA in (i) symptomatic patients aged > 70 years; (ii) interventions within 14 days of symptom onset; and (iii) situations where stroke risk after CAS is predicted to be higher (segmental/remote plaques, plaque length > 13 mm, heavy burden of white matter lesions [WMLs], where two or more stents might be needed). New WMLs were significantly more common after CAS (52% vs. 17%) and were associated with higher rates of late stroke/transient ischaemic attack (23% vs. 9%), but there was no evidence that new WMLs predisposed towards late cognitive impairment. Restenoses were more common after CAS (10%) but did not increase late ipsilateral stroke. Restenoses (70%-99%) after CEA were associated with a small but significant increase in late ipsilateral stroke (OR 3.87, 95% CI 1.96-7.67; p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: CAS confers higher rates of 30 day death/stroke than CEA. After 30 days, ipsilateral stroke is virtually identical for CEA and CAS. Key issues to be resolved include the following: (i) Will newer stent technologies and improved cerebral protection allow CAS to be performed < 14 days after symptom onset with risks similar to CEA? (ii) What is the optimal volume of CAS procedures to maintain competency? (iii) How to deliver better risk factor control and best medical treatment? (iv) Is there a role for CEA/CAS in preventing/reversing cognitive impairment?

The evolution of minimally invasive bariatric surgery.

BACKGROUND: Obesity is a pandemic associated with significant morbidity and mortality. This historical article charts the progress of successful strategies that have been used to tackle weight loss from dietary modifications to the development of surgical interventions that have subsequently evolved. It also provides a précis of the reported outcome data following minimally invasive bariatric procedures. METHODS: A literature review was performed. All articles relevant to the progression of bariatric surgery and minimally invasive surgery were assessed, as were those articles that described the ultimate evolution, combination, and establishment of the two techniques. RESULTS: This article charts the progression of early weight loss strategies, from early dietary modifications and pharmacologic interventions to initial techniques in small bowel bypass procedures, banding techniques, and sleeve gastrectomies. It also describes the simultaneous developments of endoscopic interventions and laparoscopic procedures. CONCLUSIONS: A range of procedures are described, which differ in their success in terms of loss of excess weight and in their complication rates. Weight loss is greatest for biliopancreatic diversion followed by gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy and least for adjustable gastric banding. Bariatric surgery is an evolving field, which will continue to expand given current epidemiologic trends. Developments in instrumentation and surgical techniques, including single access and natural orifice approaches, may offer further benefit in terms of patient acceptability.

Risk of erectile dysfunction and retrograde ejaculation associated with thulium laser vaporesection of the prostate for bladder outflow obstruction: a retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of erectile dysfunction and retrograde ejaculation following thulium:yttrium-aluminium-garnet (Tm:YAG) laser prostate vaporesection (ThuVaRP). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between January 2009 and June 2010, 113 consecutive patients underwent ThuVaRP for bladder outflow obstruction. Of these, 54 (48%) were included in the study as they were able to maintain an erection for sexual intercourse prior to undergoing ThuVaRP. All patients had benign pathology and had not undergone previous bladder neck surgery. The incidence of erectile dysfunction and retrograde ejaculation was reported at a mean follow-up period of 12 months post-operatively. RESULTS: The mean patient age was 71 years (range 46-90). The mean follow-up period was 12 months (range 4-21). 11 (20%) patients experienced worsening erectile function with 3 (6%) noticing an improvement. A total of 30 patients (56%) experienced some degree of retrograde ejaculation. 4 patients (7%) noticed an improvement in their ejaculation. Retrograde ejaculation was more common in patients with an indwelling catheter in situ for refractory urinary retention (43 vs. 17%, p = 0.04) and in diabetic patients (27 vs. 4%, p = 0.03). There was an increased trend of erectile dysfunction in men aged ≥70 years, with hypertension and with hypercholesterolaemia, but this was not significant. CONCLUSION: Our retrospective study has demonstrated that the overall risk of erectile dysfunction and retrograde ejaculation associated with ThuVaRP is 20 and 56%, respectively.

Pre-discharge duplex ultrasound scans detect endoleaks not seen on completion angiography after endovascular aneurysm repair.

PURPOSE: To determine whether a pre-discharge duplex ultrasound scan detects early endoleaks that would not otherwise have been identified. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of all patients undergoing elective infrarenal endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) at our center. These patients underwent intraoperative completion angiography, had a duplex ultrasound scan prior to hospital discharge, and were followed at 1, 3, and 6 months and at 6-month intervals thereafter. The outcome of any patients found to have an endoleak on a pre-discharge scan was studied. RESULTS: There were 52 EVAR patients (50 men; mean age 76 years, range 61-87) with endoleak on the pre-discharge duplex: 17 (2.8%) type I, 28 (4.6%) type II, and 8 (1.3%) type III. Of these, only 7 of the type I and 2 of the type II leaks had been detected on completion angiography. Among the patients with type I endoleaks, 5 had resolution of the leak, 10 required further endovascular interventions, and 2 had open repair (1 died of aneurysm rupture). Two patients with failed endovascular repairs of the leak also had open repair. Fifteen of the 28 type II endoleaks resolved, 4 were treated with endovascular procedures, 1 had open repair, 7 are being observed, and 1 was lost to follow-up. Six of the 8 type III leaks resolved, 1 required open repair for an enlarging sac, and 1 is being observed. CONCLUSION: Despite routine completion angiography, new endoleaks may be identified postoperatively, which suggests that more rigorous imaging at the point of completion angiography is required.

The role of students as teachers: four years' experience of a large-scale, peer-led programme.

AIM: This study set out to explore whether a teaching programme developed and delivered by medical students yielded an improvement of attendees' examination performance or their experience of preparing for the target assessment. METHODS: Over 4 years all students were invited to consent to use of their official examination data. Students were ranked for baseline performance and again for performance in the target assessment. Change in rank was compared for attendees and non-attenders. Additionally, a questionnaire was distributed to students before and after the peer-led programme. Attendees' responses were compared to those of non-attenders. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference in change in rank was observed between the two groups on evaluation of quantitative performance data. The majority of students (81.0%) scored the programme four or five in terms of perceived usefulness on a five-point Likert scale. Attendees reported statistically significant increases in preparedness for the examination (p=0.001) and in familiarity with the style of examination questions (p=0.004) compared to students who did not attend. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that teaching from peers may improve students' perception of their preparedness for official assessments. However, such interventions may be limited in their ability to produce a demonstrable benefit in terms of examination performance.

Defining Patient Safety: a Student Perspective.

BACKGROUND: Patient safety is recognised as an important aspect of the undergraduate medical curriculum. However, packed medical curricula have been slow to evolve despite repeated mandates and large-scale tragedies resulting from unlearnt lessons. The aim of this work was to explore students' perspectives on patient safety to inform curriculum re-design. METHODS: Using a qualitative approach, medical students from year 2 and year 4 of the undergraduate course were invited to participate in focus groups to consider: their personal conceptualisation of patient safety, their perceptions of patient safety education in the existing curriculum and their collective preferences for future teaching in this area. Transcripts of the focus groups were subjected to thematic analysis. RESULTS: Six focus groups were convened with a total of 77 students. Thirteen major themes were identified which included conceptual ambiguity, healthcare culture, error theory, specific safety topics (such as infection prevention and control, medication safety, technical/procedural safety, communication and other non-technical skills), self-awareness, patient-centredness, low student morale and raising concerns. Students were more aware of technical than non-technical competence. They wanted learning aligned to the realities of practice, a clearer concept of patient safety and improved visibility of patient safety topics within an integrated curriculum. CONCLUSIONS: Students are keen to engage with safety topics but frequently feel disempowered as future change agents. Educators need to advocate a clear definition of patient safety and consider the implication of the theory-practice gap on students' evolving attitudes.