Positive association between abdominal aortic diameter and serum collagen XVIII levels.

BACKGROUND: The identification of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) biomarker offers a perspective to determine disease progress and rupture risk. The aim of our study was to evaluate the association between selected circulating biomarkers and diameter of abdominal aorta. METHODS: One hundred and two patients (88 men and 14 women) with mean age 70.0±8.7 years were included in a single center cross-sectional study conducted between February 2016 and October, 2018. AAA was defined as subrenal aortic dilatation ≥3 cm. Serum biomarker concentrations (insulin-like growth factor-1, peroxiredoxin-1, collagen IV, collagen XVIII) were measured by an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Adjustments including variables with different baseline distribution at univariate level with P<0.1 (age, body mass index, coronary artery disease, fibrinogen) were performed in multivariate models. RESULTS: Higher collagen XVIII was found in AAA patients in comparison with the control group of patients (39.5 vs. 25.0 ng/mL; P=0.002). Diameter of abdominal aorta was positively associated with collagen XVIII levels in univariate (B=0.16; P=0.004), and in multivariate analysis (B=0.14; P=0.027), i.e. increase in collagen XVIII by 1 ng/mL corresponded to an increase in abdominal aortic diameter by 0.14 mm. Patients with serum collagen XVIII levels in the third tertile (˃47 ng/mL) had 4.23 times higher risk of AAA compared to patients with collagen XVIII levels in the first and second tertiles (OR 4.23; 95% CI 1.42-11.6; P=0.020). No association was found between other examined biomarkers and abdominal aortic diameter. CONCLUSIONS: Diameter of abdominal aorta was positively associated with serum collagen XVIII level.

Higher preprocedural fibrinogen levels are associated with aneurysm sac regression after EVAR.

Background: The aim of our study was to determine the diameter of the aneurysm sac 24 months after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR); to identify factors associated with sac regression, and to determine the impact of sac regression on all-cause mortality during long-term follow-up. Patients and methods: We conducted a retrospective review of prospectively collected data from patients treated with EVAR between January, 2010 and July, 2016. Sac regression was defined as at least 5 mm decrease in aneurysm diameter in relation to the preprocedural diameter seen on computed tomography angiography. Sociodemographic information, comorbidities, treatment, laboratory parameters, selected anatomical and genetic factors were all analysed to determine their impact on sac regression. Results: During the study period, 124 patients with mean age of 71.2 ± 7.2 years met the inclusion criteria. Sac regression was found in 45.2% of patients. Higher preprocedural fibrinogen was found in patients with sac regression in comparison with patients with stable sac or sac expansion (3.84 g/l vs 3.47 g/l; p = 0.028). In multivariate analysis after adjustment for age, hypertension, sex, smoking, dyslipidaemia, volume and percentage of intraluminal thrombus higher fibrinogen was associated with an increased probability of sac regression (OR 2.47; 95% CI 1.29-4.72; p = 0.006). Persistent type II endoleak was associated with significantly lower probability of sac regression in univariate and multivariate analysis after adjustment for age, hypertension, sex, smoking and dyslipidaemia (OR 0.26; 95% CI 0.10-0.66; p = 0.004). Higher age was a significant predictor of sac regression in multivariate analysis after adjustment for hypertension, sex, smoking and dyslipidaemia (OR 1.07; 95% CI 1.02-1.14; p = 0.012). No difference was found between patient subgroups with and without sac regression in all-cause mortality during follow-up. Conclusions: Higher preprocedural fibrinogen, absence of persistent type II endoleak and higher age were predictive factors of aneurysm sac regression post-EVAR.

Remote pre-procedural ischemic stroke as the greatest risk in carotid­stenting­associated stroke and death: a single center's experience.

BACKGROUND: The goal of carotid artery stenting (CAS) is to decrease the stroke risk in patients with carotid stenosis. This procedure carries an immediate risk of stroke and death and many patients do not benefit from it, especially asymptomatic patients. It is crucial to accurately select the patients who would benefit from carotid procedure, and to rule out those for whom the procedure might be hazardous. Remote ischemic stroke is a known risk factor for stroke recurrence during surgery. The aim of our study was to determine the periprocedural complication risk (within 30 days after CAS) associated with carotid stenting (stroke, death) in patients with and without remote pre-procedural ischemic stroke, to analyze periprocedural risk in other specific patient subgroups treated with CAS, and to determine the impact of observed variables on all-cause mortality during long-term follow-up. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of prospectively collected data from all patients treated with protected CAS between June 20, 2008 and December 31, 2015. Patient age, gender, type of carotid stenosis (symptomatic versus asymptomatic), side of stenosis (right or left carotid artery), type of cerebral protection (proximal versus distal), presence of comorbidities (remote ischemic pre-procedural ischemic stroke, coronary artery disease, diabetes mellitus, peripheral artery disease), previous ipsilateral carotid endarterectomy (CEA), contralateral carotid occlusion (CCO) and previous contralateral CAS/CEA were analyzed to identify higher CAS risk and to determine the impact of these variables on all-cause mortality during follow-up. Survival data were obtained from the Health Care Surveillance Authority registry. Mean follow-up was 1054 days (interquartile range 547.3; 1454.8). Remote pre-procedural ischemic stroke was defined as any-territory ischemic stroke >6 months prior to CAS. RESULTS: Primary periprocedural endpoint incidence (stroke/death) in 502 patients was 3.8% (N.=19) of all patients, 5.4% (N.=10) of symptomatic patients and 2.8% (N.=9) of asymptomatic patients. The risk of periprocedural stroke/death was 3.4 times higher in patients with (N.=198) compared to patients without remote ischemic stroke (N.=304) (6.6% versus 2.0% of patients without remote ischemic stroke; P=0.008). Periprocedural stroke/death in symptomatic patients (N.=186) was non-significantly higher in patients with remote ischemic stroke (N.=76) compared with patients without remote ischemic stroke (N.=110) (7.9% versus 3.6%; P=0.206). Asymptomatic patients with remote ischemic stroke (N.=122) had a 5.6-time-higher periprocedural risk of stroke/death compared with asymptomatic patients without remote ischemic stroke (N.=194) (5.7% versus 1.0%; P=0.014). Patients ≥75 years (N.=83) had a 3.0-time-higher periprocedural risk of stroke/death compared with younger patients (N.=419) (8.4% versus 2.9%; P=0.015); a non-significant increase of periprocedural stroke/death was found in both symptomatic (N.=35) and asymptomatic (N.=48) elderly patients (11.4% versus 4.0%, P=0.078; and 6.3% versus 2.4%, P=0.124, respectively). Increased periprocedural risk of stroke/death was not documented in other analyzed patient subgroups. During long-term follow-up, a 1.5-time-higher mortality risk was found in patients with remote ischemic stroke compared with patients without remote ischemic stroke in multivariable analysis; other patient subgroups (except older versus younger patients) did not differ in long-term mortality following carotid stenting. CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, all patients with remote pre-procedural any-territory ischemic stroke belong to risky subgroup for periprocedural stroke death after CAS. All asymptomatic patients with remote ischemic stroke should not be treated with CAS. Remote ischemic stroke increases all-cause mortality in long-term follow-up after carotid stenting. Patients aged ≥75 years also have increased risk of periprocedural stroke and death after CAS. These factors should help us to be more selective when planning carotid procedures.