Two-Stage Endovascular Aneurysm Repair with Preemptive Embolization: A Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Type II endoleak is the most common complication of endovascular aneurysm repair. Retrograde perfusion from the aneurysmal sac side branch to the aneurysmal sac, including the inferior mesenteric artery and lumbar arteries, is associated with adverse events after endovascular aneurysm repair, such as aneurysm sac enlargement, reintervention, rupture, and abdominal aortic aneurysm-related death. Preemptive embolization of the aneurysmal sac side branch before endovascular aneurysm repair is an effective and safe procedure for preventing type II endoleak and reducing the size of the aneurysmal sac. Since 2019, we have been conducting preemptive embolization of the inferior mesenteric artery and lumbar arteries. Thus, we intended to work on a two-stage endovascular aneurysm repair in which embolization and endovascular aneurysm repair are performed on separate days, owing to concerns about prolonged operative time and increased contrast media use and radiation exposure from performing endovascular aneurysm repair simultaneously. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of a two-stage endovascular aneurysm repair. METHODS: This retrospective study included 114 cases of endovascular aneurysm repair (95 men and 19 women) for AAA performed at our hospital between January 2019 and December 2022. Inferior mesenteric artery and lumbar artery embolization were performed simultaneously with endovascular aneurysm repair (simultaneous group) in 49 cases, and two-stage embolization was performed (two-stage group) in 30 cases. The primary endpoints included the occurrence of T2EL during follow-up and the embolization rate of the IMA or LAs. RESULTS: Type II endoleak did not occur in the two-stage group (follow-up period: 35 ± 6.2 months), whereas it was observed in 8.2% of patients more than 6 months after EVAR in the simultaneous group (follow-up period: 28 ± 5.5 months). While the total operative time was 340 ± 111.2 min in the simultaneous group, the durations for embolization and endovascular aneurysm repair in the two-stage group were 169 ± 35.5 min and 135.0 ± 26.4 min (total time 304 ± 31.2 min, P = 0.21), respectively, indicating a reduction in the total time required for the 2 techniques. The total amounts of contrast media used in the simultaneous and two-stage groups were 200.0 ± 179.2 mL and 182.0 ± 51.2 mL (P = 0.42), respectively, and the corresponding total radiation doses were 2502.4 ± 690.5 mGy and 2114.6 ± 351.2 mGy (P = 0.28), respectively, showing a decrease in both in the two-stage group. The lumbar artery embolization rates were 74.3% and 87.9% (P < 0.01) in the simultaneous and two-stage groups, respectively, indicating a significant difference. CONCLUSIONS: Two-stage endovascular aneurysm repair with preemptive embolization of the inferior mesenteric artery and lumbar arteries may be an effective strategy for reducing type II endoleak occurrence, overall operative time, contrast use, and overall radiation exposure.

Total Synthesis of the Claimed Structure of (±)-Hyptinin and Structural Revision of Natural Hyptinin.

A total synthesis of (±)-hyptinin was achieved via a convergent route using the key phosphonate, cyclic ketone, and aryl Grignard components. The 1H and 13C NMR spectra of natural hyptinin did not agree with those of the synthesized compound. In particular, there were considerable differences between the signals assigned to the protons and carbons surrounding the lactone carbonyl group for the natural and synthesized compounds. The NMR data strongly suggested that the naturally occurring compound, hyptinin, was a structural isomer of the synthesized compound. The structure of the natural compound was eventually established as (+)-ß-apopicropodophyllin, based on the synthesis results.

Creation New Patient Information Leaflets with Diabetes by Pharmacists and Assesment Conducted by Patients.

We created a draft of new patient information leaflets to ensure patients' proper use of drugs and to highlight safety issues and improvement plans extracted and proposed by small group discussions (SGD) with pharmacists. A total of 3 SGDs (participants: 15 pharmacists) were conducted with the aim of improving patient information leaflets for oral diabetes drugs. First, the disadvantages and advantages of the current instructions as well as requests for ideal patient information leaflets were obtained from participants. Conventional patient information leaflets that could be improved were useful to understand drug efficacy, adverse effects, and instructions for daily consumption of medicines, and to encourage patients to re-check drugs at home and inform their family of the measures to be taken in the case of adverse effects from the standpoint of patients. However, some disadvantages arose; for example, the instructions were difficult to read because of small lettering and illustrations and too much text. It was not tailored for individual patients, and descriptions about serious adverse effects caused patients much anxiety. Therefore, we have created a draft of new patient information leaflets with diabetes that are simpler and easier to understand and use concise wording and illustrations that are impactful.