Editor's Choice - Infra-Renal Aortic Diameter and Cardiovascular Risk: Making Better Use of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Screening Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Aortic diameter (AD), used traditionally for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) screening may have a role in assessing cardiovascular risk. Unfortunately, AD estimates for those without AAA are underutilised, whilst cardiovascular risk is sub-optimally managed in those with AAA. Our objective was to examine the association between AD measurements and future cardiovascular risk. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of three databases of male participants screened for aortic aneurysm disease. Imaging and clinical data were obtained from three independent sources: 1) the Multi-centre Aneurysm Screening Study (MASS) trial (n = 26 882 men); 2) the 2013/14 cohort of the English NHS AAA Screening Programme (NAAASP) (n = 237 441 men) linked with NHS hospital admission and death registry data; and 3) the Framingham Heart Study (FHS) offspring cohort (n = 649). Associations between maximal aortic diameter, as measured on ultrasound or computed tomography, and cardiovascular outcomes were examined. RESULTS: Cardiovascular mortality in the MASS trial, was higher in men with AAA at 13 years of follow up, compared to those without (Hazard Ratio [HR] 2.22, 95% CI 1.97-2.50, p < .001). Contemporary risk of major adverse cardiovascular events in the NAAASP was highest in those with an AAA (HR 2.91, 95% CI 2.00-4.25), whilst, extremes of aortic diameter were associated with increased risk for cardiovascular events. Aortic diameter was an independent risk factor for cardiovascular events in the FHS dataset. CONCLUSION: Irrespective of the diagnosis of AAA, men attending for AAA screening who are found to have an abnormal aortic diameter are at high risk of future cardiovascular events. This currently unutilised data from AAA screening programmes has the potential to improve preventative management of cardiovascular risk.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the association between markers of hemostasis and abdominal aortic aneurysm presence and size.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to summarize the current evidence of the association between markers of hemostasis and both the presence and size of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines by use of the search terms "aneurysm AND abdominal AND aortic AND coagulation" NOT "thoracic." Outcome data including concentration of hemostatic marker, number of patients, and significance level were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 22 nonrandomized studies were included in the analysis, with a total of 9862 patients. Fibrinogen mean difference (MD) (0.43 g/L; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.28-0.58 g/L; P ≤ .00001), D-dimer MD (325.82 ng/mL; 95% CI, 199.74-451.89 ng/mL; P ≤ .00001), and thrombin-antithrombin III complex MD (5.58 g/L; 95% CI, 3.34-7.83 g/L; P ≤ .0001) were significantly elevated in the presence of AAAs. Tissue plasminogen activator, prothrombin fragments F1+F2, and platelet count were not shown to be significantly different between patients with and those without AAAs. Meta-regression of studies reporting plasma D-dimer concentration and aneurysm diameter suggests a strong and significant association (r(2) = 0.94; P ≤ .0001). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that the presence of AAAs is associated with increased fibrin turnover, fibrinolysis, and thrombin generation, as shown by increased levels of fibrinogen, D-dimer, and thrombin-antithrombin III complex. This is clinically relevant because markers of hemostasis are independent risk factors for cardiovascular events, highlighting the necessity of addressing all modifiable cardiovascular risk factors in patients with AAAs. Furthermore, the finding that plasma D-dimer concentration appears to have a linear relationship with aneurysm diameter may be useful as a future biomarker of AAAs.

Type II endoleaks: challenges and solutions.

Type II endoleaks are the most common endovascular complications of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR); however, there has been a divided opinion regarding their significance in EVAR. Some advocate a conservative approach unless there is clear evidence of sac expansion, while others maintain early intervention is best to prevent adverse late outcomes such as rupture. There is a lack of level-one evidence in this challenging group of patients, and due to a low event rate of complications, large numbers of patients would be required in well-designed trials to fully understand the natural history of type II endoleak. This review will discuss the imaging, management, and outcome of patients with isolated type II endoleaks following infra-renal EVAR.