Outcomes of Patients with Acute Type B Aortic Dissection and High-Risk Features.

BACKGROUND: Recently the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) and Society for Thoracic Surgeons (STS) published contemporary guidelines clearly defining complicated versus uncomplicated acute type B aortic dissections (TBADs) with an additional high-risk grouping. Few studies have evaluated outcomes associated with "high-risk" TBADs. The objective of this study was to assess differences in demographics, clinical presentation, symptom onset, and outcomes in high-risk patients that underwent either thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) or best medical management for acute TBAD compared to those with complicated and uncomplicated acute TBAD. METHODS: Patients admitted with acute TBADs from a single academic medical center from October 2011 to March 2020 were analyzed. Per the STS/SVS 2020 guidelines, high risk was defined as refractory pain/hypertension, bloody pleural effusion, aortic diameter >4 cm, false lumen diameter >22 mm, radiographic malperfusion, and early readmission, and complicated was defined as ruptured/malperfusion presentation. Uncomplicated patients were those without malperfusion/rupture and without high-risk features. The primary end-point was inpatient mortality. Secondary end-points included complications, reintervention, and survival. RESULTS: Of the 159 patients identified with acute TBAD, 63 (40%) met the high-risk criteria. In the high-risk cohort, 38 (60%) underwent TEVAR (HR-TEVAR), with refractory pain as the most common indication, while 25 (40%) were managed medically (HR-medical). Malperfusion or rupture was present in 63 (40%) patients (complicated TBAD (C-TBAD)), all of whom underwent TEVAR. An additional 33 patients had no high-risk features and were all managed medically (uncomplicated TBAD). There were no differences in age, body mass index, and race between groups. Among the 4 groups, there were variable distributions in sex, insurance status, and incidence of several baseline comorbidities including congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and renal dysfunction (P < 0.05 for all). C-TBAD had increased length of stay (12, interquartile range [IQR] 9-22) compared to HR-TEVAR (11.5, IQR 7-15), HR-medical (6, IQR 5-8), and uncomplicated TBAD (7, IQR 5-10) (P < 0.01). C-TBAD had decreased days from admission to repair (0, IQR 0-2) compared to HR-TEVAR (3.5, IQR 1-8) (P < 0.01). C-TBAD patients had worse 3-year survival compared to other groups (log-rank P < 0.01), although when in-hospital mortality was excluded, survival was similar among groups (P = 0.37). Of patients initially managed medically, outpatient TEVAR was performed in 6 (24%) HR-medical and 4 (12%) uncomplicated patients, with no difference between rate of intervention between groups (P = 0.22). CONCLUSIONS: High-risk features, as defined in updated SVS/STS guidelines, are common in patients presenting with acute TBAD. High-risk patients had acceptable outcomes when managed either surgically or medically. High-risk patients that underwent TEVAR had improved perioperative outcomes and mortality compared to those undergoing TEVAR for C-TBAD, a finding which may help guide preoperative risk stratification and patient counseling.

Presentation and Outcomes of Elective and Nonelective Complex Endovascular Repair for Thoracoabdominal and Juxtarenal Aortic Aneurysms.

BACKGROUND: Endovascular repair of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAA) and juxtarenal aortic aneurysms (JAA) with fenestrated and/or branched endografts (B/FEVAR) has become common. Physician modified endografts for patients presenting with symptomatic or contained ruptures has made B/FEVAR a feasible option in nonelective settings. The purpose of this study was to describe our 10-year institutional experience with endovascular interventions for TAAA in elective and nonelective cases to evaluate differences in outcomes and the clinical risk factors associated with nonelective presentation. METHODS: A prospectively maintained database was retrospectively queried for patients undergoing B/FEVAR for TAAA and JAA at a single tertiary care academic institution between 1/2011 and 12/2020. Data collected included demographics, comorbidities, presenting symptoms, aneurysm characteristics, and clinical outcomes. Nonelective repair was defined as any patient that presented through the Emergency Department, as a hospital transfer, or as a direct admission from clinic and had aortic repair performed during the same admission. Univariate analyses were used to compare patients. The primary outcomes were 30-day and 1-year mortality. Secondary outcomes included perioperative complications and nonhome discharge. RESULTS: Between 1/201 and 12/2020, a total of 208 patients underwent B/FEVAR for TAAA (173) and JAA (35). Nonelective repair was performed in 44 (21%) patients with 39 for TAAA (23%) and 5 for JAA (14%). Nonelective patients were younger (71 ± 11 vs. 74 ± 7 years, P = 0.03), more likely to be self-pay or have Medicaid (11% vs. 2%, P = 0.02) and had a different race distribution compared to the elective cohort (P < 0.01). Thirty-day mortality was 4% (n = 6) in elective repairs and 7% (n = 3) in nonelective repairs. One-year mortality was 13% (n = 22) in elective repairs and 18% (n = 8) in nonelective repairs. There were no differences between patients receiving elective versus nonelective repair in 30-day (P = 0.40) or 1-year mortality (P = 0.47). Nonelective patients had longer median duration of stay (11 interquartile range (IQR) 6-15 vs. 5 IQR 4-8, P < 0.01), postoperative length of stay (7 IQR 5-12 vs. 4 IQR 3-7, P < 0.01), and more intensive care unit days (6 IQR 3-8 vs. 3 IQR 2-5, P < 0.01). There were no differences in other secondary outcomes between elective and nonelective patients including inpatient and access-related complications, re-interventions, and nonhome discharge (P > 0.05 for all comparisons). A composite "any complication" occurred more frequently in patients with nonelective repair (50% vs. 35%, P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular repair for TAAA or JAA is a good option in patients undergoing nonelective surgical intervention, with comparable 30-day mortality, 1-year mortality, and perioperative morbidity to that of patients undergoing elective B/FEVAR.

Outcomes of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair conversion in octogenarians treated at a high-volume aorta center.

BACKGROUND: Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) has become the dominant treatment strategy for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms but has been especially preferred for octogenarian (age ≥80 years) patients because of concerns surrounding comorbidity severity and physiologic frailty. However, EVAR failure resulting in subsequent open conversion (EVAR-c) has been increasingly reported in older patients, although a paucity of literature focusing on the outcomes in this subgroup is available. The purpose of the present analysis was to evaluate our experience with EVAR-c for octogenarians (age ≥80 years) compared with that for younger patients (age <80 years). METHODS: A retrospective review of all nonmycotic EVAR-c procedures (2002-2020) at a single high-volume academic hospital with a dedicated aorta center (available at: https://www.uf-health-aortic-disease-center) was performed. A total of 162 patients were categorized into octogenarian (age ≥80 years; n = 43) and nonoctogenarian (age <80 years; n = 119) cohorts and compared. The primary end point was 30-day mortality. The secondary end points included complications, 90-day mortality, and overall survival. Cox regression was used to determine the effects of selected covariates on mortality risk. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate survival. RESULTS: No differences in the preadmission EVAR reintervention rates were present (octogenarians, 42%; nonoctogenarians, 43%; P = 1.00) although the interval to the first reintervention was longer for the octogenarians (41 months) than for the nonoctogenarians (15 months; P = .01). In addition, the time to EVAR-c was significantly longer for the octogenarian patients (61 months) than for the nonoctogenarian patients (39 months; P < .01). No difference in rupture presentation was evident (14% vs 10%; P = .6). However, elective EVAR-c occurred less frequently for octogenarians (42%) than for nonoctogenarians (59%; P = .07). The abdominal aortic aneurysm diameter was significantly larger for elective octogenarian EVAR-c (7.8 ± 1.9 cm) than for nonoctogenarian EVAR-c (7.0 ± 1.5 cm; P = .02), and the presence of a type Ia endoleak was the most common indication overall (58%; n = 91). A trend toward greater 30-day mortality was evident for octogenarian patients (16%) compared with nonoctogenarian patients (7%; P = .06). Similarly, the 90-day mortality was greater for the octogenarian patients (26%) than for the nonoctogenarian patients (10%; P = .02). However, the incidence of any complication (56% vs 49%; P = .5), readmission rate (12% vs 6%; P = .3), unplanned reoperation rate (10% vs 5%; P = .5), and length of stay (11 days vs 9 days; P = .3) were not significantly different between the two groups. Age ≥80 years was predictive of short-term mortality after nonelective but not after elective surgery. However, increasing comorbidities, nonelective admission, and renal or mesenteric revascularization showed the strongest association with mortality risk. Survival at 1 and 3 years was not different between the two groups when comparing all patients after the first 90 days postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: Although the unadjusted perioperative mortality was greater for octogenarian patients, the risk-adjusted elective outcomes were comparable to those for younger EVAR-c patients when treated at a high-volume aortic surgery center. This finding underscores the importance of appropriate patient selection and modulation of operative complexity when feasible to achieve optimal results. Providers caring for octogenarian patients with EVAR failure should consider timely elective referral to high-volume aorta centers to reduce resource usage and the frequency of nonelective presentations.

Treatment and Outcomes of Aortic Graft Infections Using a Decision Algorithm.

BACKGROUND: Aortic graft infection (AGI) is a rare but devastating complication requiring both explant of the infected prosthesis and lower extremity revascularization. Despite a variety of methods to treat AGI, there is a paucity of evidence that describes comparative outcomes. Moreover, controversy exists surrounding what the optimal repair strategy is with limited descriptions of how these techniques should be employed in this complex group of patients. Therefore, the purpose of this analysis was to review our experience with AGI management while highlighting a practice philosophy that can achieve acceptable outcomes. METHODS: All AGI patients between 2002-2019 were reviewed. The primary end-point was 30-day mortality. Secondary end-points included complications, re-infection, unplanned re-operation and all-cause mortality. Kaplan-Meier methodology was used to estimate time to events. Cox regression models were employed to identify association between patient factors and operative strategy with survival. Subgroup analysis included outcome comparison among four different operative approaches(extra-anatomic bypass with aortic ligation [EAB] and in-situ reconstruction [ISR] using either NAIS, cryopreserved allograft [Cryo], or antibiotic-soaked prosthetic grafts [Other]). RESULTS: 142 patients (male-69%, mean age 67 ± 11 years) were reviewed. Median time to AGI presentation was 52 (IQR 16-128) months. ISR was performed in 70% (n = 99)[ISR: NAIS-49% (n = 49), Cryo, 33% (n = 33) and Other-23% (n = 23)]. EAB was used in 26% (n = 37), of which 57% (n = 21) were staged repairs[no reconstruction, 4%: intraoperative death-2, AGI removal without reconstruction-2]. A graft enteric erosion/fistula was identified in 39% (n = 55). Mean follow-up time was 14 ± 27 (median 2.2[IQR 0.1-16]) months. Overall, 30-day mortality was 21% and 69% (n = 98) experienced a complication. The most common complications were pulmonary (35%;n = 50), vascular (28%;n = 39), gastrointestinal (22%;n = 31) and renal (21%;n = 30). Freedom from re-infection at one and three years was 78 ± 5% and 73 ± 6% while freedom from unplanned re-operation was 50 ± 5% and 40 ± 6%, respectively. Corresponding one- and five-year freedom from all-cause mortality was 67 ± 4% and 53 ± 4%. When stratified by the four different repair strategies, unadjusted rates of postoperative complications and mortality were not different. However, EAB patients had more renal complications. All-cause mortality predictors included age (HR 1.04, 95%CI 1.01-1.1; P = 0.003), CHF (HR 2.7, 1.3-5.7; P = 0.01), and graft enteric erosion/fistula (HR 2.2, 1.3-3.8;P = 0.005) while total graft excision was protective (HR 0.34, 0.2-0.7; P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: AGI repair, regardless of operative strategy, results in significant early morbidity, and mortality. The need for unplanned re-operation is common; however, long-term survival is acceptable in appropriately selected patients. Re-infection risk mandates life-long surveillance and consideration of indefinite anti-microbial suppression in certain subgroups. Due to the complexity and intensity of care, all AGI should be treated, when possible, at centers performing high-volume aortic surgery.

Confluence of Challenges: A Case Report of Superior Mesenteric Artery Syndrome Coexisting With Depressive Illness, Severe Weight Loss, and an Incidental Adnexal Cyst.

In the case of a 24-year-old woman experiencing depressive illness, weight loss, vomiting, and hypoglycemia, initial suspicion of gastroenteritis shifted to reveal compensated metabolic acidosis and electrolyte imbalances. A subsequent CT scan revealed both superior mesenteric artery (SMA) syndrome and an incidental adnexal cyst, leading to treatment involving electrolyte correction and laparoscopic duodenojejunostomy, ultimately facilitating her recovery.

Enhancing maize productivity by mitigating alkaline soil challenges through acidified biochar and wastewater irrigation.

In alkaline soil conditions, the availability of essential nutrients for plant growth becomes limited, posing a significant challenge for achieving optimal maize growth and yield. Exploring the impact of biochar and waste irrigation on soil alkalinity and maize production in arid regions has received limited attention. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of three levels of acidified biochar (0, 5, and 10 Mg ha-1) in two growing seasons of maize-spring and autumn. The treatments were applied following a randomized complete block design with three replications. Biochar was applied only in the autumn season, and its residual effects were evaluated in the spring season. The study found that using acidifying biochar at a rate of 10 Mg ha-1 significantly increased maize yield by 35.8% compared to no application and by 16.4% compared to a rate of 5 Mg ha-1. In the autumn, applying acidified biochar at 10 Mg ha-1 reduced soil pH by 3.65% and 6.41% compared to 0 and 5 Mg ha-1. In the spring, the same application led to a decrease in soil pH by 5.84% and 7.37% compared to the lower rates. Additionally, using 10 Mg ha-1 of acidifying biochar increased soil phosphorus concentration by 87.6% and soil potassium concentration by 38.0% compared to not using biochar, and by 46.2% and 35.0% compared to the 5 Mg ha-1 application. These findings suggest that the reduction of soil pH by applying biochar at a rate of 10 Mg ha-1 facilitated an increase in nutrient availability in the soil, consequently leading to higher maize yield. Notably, no significant differences were observed in maize productivity and soil properties between the spring and autumn seasons. Therefore, this study paves the way for further exploration into the long-term effects of acidifying biochar on maize productivity and soil properties in similar agroecological contexts.

Stress, job satisfaction and work hours in medical and surgical residency programmes in private sector teaching hospitals of Karachi, Pakistan.

OBJECTIVE: To assess stress levels, job satisfaction and working hours of the residents in Medicine and Surgery and to explore a correlation among the three factors. METHODS: The questionnaire-based. Cross-sectional study was conducted in 2011 at two tertiary level teaching hospitals in Karachi, Pakistan (Ziauddin University Hospital and Aga Khan University Hospital, Karachi, Pakistan). The study population comprised 176 residents, General Health Questionnaire-12 was used to assess the mental health of the residents and a standardised Job Satisfaction Survey tool was used to assess their work satisfaction. RESULTS: A total of 176 residents participated in the study; 115 (65%) from Medicine, and 61 (35%) from surgery. Of the total residents, 99 (56.3%) were under stress, and there was no significant difference in stress between Medicine and Surgery residents. Besides, 133 (75.6%) residents reported to be satisfied with their jobs. There was a statistically significant difference in job satisfaction between Medicine and Surgery residents (p < 0.001). Mean number of working hours per week reported by Medicine and Surgery residents were 74.82 +/- 15.95 and 92.07 +/- 15.91 respectively (p < 0.001). A positive correlation of mean working hours with both stress (p = 0.009) and job satisfaction (p = 0.029) was found. CONCLUSIONS: Medicine and Surgery residents tend to differ on mean working hours and job satisfaction. The greater mean working hours of the residents could be a possible reason for increased stress and decreased job satisfaction among the residents.

Endovascular Repair of Descending Thoracic Aortic Aneurysms.

Descending thoracic aortic aneurysms (DTAAs) are an important cause of morbidity and mortality in the elderly. Once diagnosed, they should be surveilled and then repaired at a diameter of 5.5 to 6 cm, depending on the individual patient's physiologic and anatomic risk of repair. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is the preferred approach for repair and there are multiple procedural adjuncts that can expand indications for and use of TEVAR. Spinal cord injuries are an important and highly morbid complication after TEVAR and it is imperative to mitigate this risk.

Rescue therapy for symptomatic spinal cord ischemia after thoracic endovascular aortic repair.

OBJECTIVE: Spinal cord ischemia (SCI) after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) can cause permanent neurologic deficits and poor long-term survival. Targeted treatment of new SCI symptoms after TEVAR (rescue therapy [RT]) might improve/resolve neurologic symptoms but few data characterize the association of specific interventions with SCI outcomes. We evaluated the effectiveness of post-TEVAR RT at our tertiary aortic center. METHODS: Our institutional TEVAR database was reviewed for SCI incidence and details of RT. This included cerebrospinal fluid drainage (CSFD), medical therapy, and optimization of spinal cord oxygen delivery. SCI outcomes were categorized at discharge as paralysis/paraparesis and temporary/permanent. RESULTS: Nine hundred forty-three TEVAR procedures were performed in 869 patients from 2011 to 2020. Post-TEVAR SCI occurred in 7.8% (n = 74) with permanent paraplegia in 1.5%. Older patient age, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and previous abdominal aortic surgery were predictive of SCI. Half (n = 37) of SCI episodes resulted in only temporary paralysis/paraparesis. Rescue postoperative cerebrospinal fluid drains were implanted in 3.7% (n = 35) of procedures and was predicted by higher American Society of Anesthesiologists class, lower serum hemoglobin level, elevated international normalized ratio, bilateral iliac artery occlusion, nonelective procedures, and penetrating atherosclerotic ulcer/intramural hematoma indication. The most commonly used RTs were emergent placement of or increased drainage from an existing cerebrospinal fluid drain (87.8%), induced/permissive hypertension (77.0%), corticosteroid bolus (36.5%), and naloxone infusion (33.8%). Neurologic improvement occurred in 68.9% (n = 51/74). New/increased drainage was associated with improved SCI outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Permanent paraplegia from post-TEVAR SCI is rare (1.5%). Older patients with comorbidities carry greater post-TEVAR SCI risk. SCI symptoms improved/resolved with CSFD and multimodal RT in 68.9% of patients, but no intervention was independently associated with improvement. TEVAR centers should have robust protocols for timely and safe CSFD placement to augment RT strategies for SCI.

Current Trends in Training in the Surgical Management of Acute Appendicitis at a Veteran Affairs Hospital.

INTRODUCTION: An open appendectomy used to be one of the most common cases performed by interns and physical exam dictated operative intervention. We hypothesized that the management of acute appendicitis has drastically changed from these previous practices. METHODS: A retrospective, single institution study was performed at the VA North Texas Health Care System between July 2005 to June 2017 for all patients who underwent an appendectomy. Using postgraduate year (PGY)-level (PGY 1-3 and PGY 4-5) as a dependent variable, univariate analyses, and multiple logistic regression analyses were performed. All statistical tests were 2-sided, and the statistical significance level was set at a p ≤ 0.05. RESULTS: Only patients with acute appendicitis were included (n = 257; male = 90.7%; age = 45.4 ± 15.6 year old; body mass index = 30.3 ± 6.3 Kg/m2). Of these, only 8 were performed by interns, 25 by PGY-2, 147 by PGY-3, 22 by PGY-4, and 55 by PGY-5. On presentation, 92.2% of patients had a computed tomography scan and 90.7% underwent a laparoscopic appendectomy. Conversion rate was 4.7%. There were 20 complications (7.8%) and length of hospital stay was 2.2±3.7 days. Comparing patients operated by senior (PGY-4 and 5) to junior (PGY-1 to -3) residents: patients were of similar age, gender, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA), and had similar WBC and blood pressure on initial presentation (all p's > 0.05); but were more likely to have diabetes mellitus, hypertension or pulmonary disease. Complication rate was the same (7.8%) for both senior and junior residents. CONCLUSIONS: At the VA North Texas Health Care System, most patients presenting with suspected appendicitis undergo a computed tomography scan. Most cases are performed laparoscopically mainly by PGY ≥ 3 residents. The rate of post-operative complications was similar between junior and senior residents.

Outcomes of appendectomy in elderly veteran patients.

BACKGROUND: Some studies indicate that noncomplicated acute appendicitis might be treated exclusively with antibiotics instead of an appendectomy. This study was undertaken to assess outcomes in elderly veterans and to determine if operative intervention would lead to substantial complications such that a nonoperative strategy should be investigated. METHODS: A retrospective, single-institution analysis was conducted of patients who underwent an appendectomy at the VA North Texas Health Care System over a period of 12 years (from July 2005 to June 2017). Patients who underwent an appendectomy for cancer, interval appendectomy, exploratory laparotomy for perforated appendicitis, or appendectomy as part of another major operation were excluded from the study. Patients were then grouped as elderly (≥60 years old) and young (<60 years old), and differences in outcome were assessed. Univariate and multivariate analyses were also performed to determine if age and comorbid conditions were independent predictors of complications in both cohorts. RESULTS: Of patients who underwent an appendectomy for acute appendicitis (n = 257, male = 90.7%, age = 45.4 ± standard deviation 15.6 years, body mass index = 30.3 ± 6.3 kg/m2), 195 were young (38.7 ± 11.2 years old) and 62 elderly (66 ± 5 years old). More patients were male in the elderly cohort (98.4% vs 88%; P = .01). The incidence of gangrenous and perforated appendicitis was greater in elderly patients (11.3% and 14.4% vs 24 % and 40%, P < .01 each). Diabetes and hypertension, as well as a history of cardiac, pulmonary, and renal diseases, were more than 2-fold greater in older patients. Complications and 30-day readmission rates were similar in both groups (young vs elderly: 7.2% and 9% vs 9.7% and 11%, P > .5 each). Logistic regression analysis showed that age and American Society of Anesthesia level were not independent predictors of complications. A history of cardiac disease and open operation independently predicted complications regardless of age. Unexpected malignancy was 3% in the elderly and 1.5% in the young cohort (P = .6) CONCLUSION: Complicated appendicitis is more common in elderly patients. Appendectomy in elderly veteran patients has a low rate of complications similar to younger patients and the private sector. Operative intervention in this group of patients is not prohibitive. Further studies are needed to determine if nonoperative intervention is noninferior to an appendectomy in this high-risk patient population.