Fascial closure following percutaneous endovascular aneurysm repair.

INTRODUCTION: There are potential benefits of percutaneous over open femoral access for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Subsequent arterial closure using percutaneous devices is costly, whilst open repair risks potential wound complications and delayed discharge. The technique of fascial closure has perceived advantages but its efficacy is unclear. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and durability of fascial closure after EVAR. METHODS: Patients undergoing EVAR using devices up to 24 French were considered. Exclusion criteria included morbid obesity, high bifurcation, previous surgery, inadvertent high puncture, arteries < 5 mm and surgeon preference. The primary outcome measure was immediate technical success. All patients were followed-up clinically and with duplex at one and twelve months to determine secondary complications. RESULTS: Over a one-year period fascial closure of 69 common femoral arteries was attempted in 38 patients undergoing EVAR. Nine primary failures were due to haemorrhage in eight arteries and thrombosis in one artery; all had immediate, uncomplicated open revision. Of the 60 (87%) successful procedures, all had duplex surveillance at one month. Four pseudoaneurysms were identified, all treated conservatively. At one year, 61 fascial closures (88%) were imaged, four patients had died and two were lost to follow-up. Three of the pseudoaneurysms had resolved, the fourth patient had died (unrelated). No other complication attributable to fascial closure was found at either one or twelve months. CONCLUSION: Fascial closure is a safe, durable and cost-effective method of arterial closure following EVAR. Success and complication rates are comparable to other techniques.

Traveller's thrombosis: airlines still not giving passengers the WRIGHT advice!

INTRODUCTION: This study has examined the impact of the World Health Organization's Research into Global Hazards of Travel (WRIGHT) Project's phase 1 report on the information given by airlines to their passengers regarding traveller's thrombosis. METHODS: Official websites of all airlines flying from Heathrow (UK) and John F Kennedy (USA) were located through links on the websites of these two busy international airports. In June 2007, each site was scrutinized by three independent researchers to identify if traveller's thrombosis and its risk factors were discussed and what methods of prevention were advised. This exercise was repeated a year after the publication of the WRIGHT report. RESULTS: One hundred and nineteen international airlines were listed in 2007 (12 were excluded from analysis). A quarter (27/107) of airlines warned of the risk of traveller's thrombosis. A year later, five airlines were no longer operational and there had been no increase in the discussion of traveller's thrombosis (23/102). Additional risk factors discussed in June 2007 versus September 2008: previous venous thromboembolism (16%, 15%); thrombophilia (14%, 15%); family history (11%, 9%); malignancy (12%, 14%); recent surgery (19%, 16%); pregnancy (17%, 16%) and obesity (11%, 12%). Prophylaxis advice given in June 2007 versus September 2008: in-flight exercise (34%, 42%); Hydration (30%, 34%); medical consultation prior to flying (20%, 18%); graduated compression stockings (13%, 12%); aspirin (<1%, <1%) and heparin (5%, 7%). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of world airlines continue to fail to warn of the risk of traveller's thrombosis or offer appropriate advice. Alerting passengers at risk gives them an opportunity to seek medical advice before flying.