Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
J Vasc Surg ; 79(3): 497-505, 2024 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37923024

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Increased angulation of the proximal aortic neck has been associated with complications following endovascular repair of infrarenal aortic aneurysms, including increased incidence of endoleaks, stent migration, secondary interventions, and conversions. However, knowledge on the impact of aortoiliac tortuosity on outcomes following fenestrated repair remains limited. This study aims to quantify the effect of aortoiliac tortuosity on outcomes following fenestrated repair. METHODS: A single-center, retrospective review of all patients who underwent a physician-modified endovascular repair for the treatment of juxtarenal aortic aneurysms under a single physician-sponsored investigation device exemption study from 2011 to 2021 was performed. Center luminal lines and geometric distances were obtained using TeraRecon software (San Mateo, CA). A tortuosity index was calculated (tortuosity index = centerline distance/geometric line distance) for each iliac vessel as well as for the infrarenal aorta according to Society for Vascular Surgery reporting standards. Aortic and iliac tortuosity were assessed independently and stratified as low and high. Demographics, comorbidities, anatomic and operative details, and outcomes were compared using univariable and multivariable analysis. RESULTS: A total of 135 patients were identified. Thirty-eight patients (28%) had high aortic tortuosity, and 55 patients (42%) had high iliac tortuosity. Patients with high tortuosity were older (aortic: 78 vs 76 years; P = .04; iliac: 78 vs 75 years; P = .01) and differed by sex. Twenty-two percent of men and 50% of women had high aortic tortuosity (P = .01). Forty-seven percent of men and 20% of women had high iliac tortuosity (P = .01). There were no differences in comorbidities based on aortic tortuosity, but coronary artery disease (high: 58% vs low: 36%; P = .01) and hypertension (high: 69% vs low: 86%; P = .02) differed based on iliac tortuosity. Aneurysm diameter was larger for patients with high iliac tortuosity (72 mm vs 64 mm; P < .01), and fluoroscopy time was longer for patients with high aortic tortuosity (41 vs 31 minutes; P = .02). When outcomes were assessed, high iliac tortuosity was associated with increased rate of reinterventions (hazard ratio, 2.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-6.0) and type 1 or 3 endoleak (hazard ratio, 5.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.7-16); however, all other outcomes were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients treated with physician-modified endovascular repair for juxtarenal aneurysms, iliac tortuosity but not aortic tortuosity, is associated with increased reinterventions and type 1 or type 3 endoleaks. Long-term follow-up is critical for patients with high iliac tortuosity to ensure that high-risk endoleaks are identified and treated early to avoid the risk of rupture.


Subject(s)
Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal , Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation , Endovascular Procedures , Male , Humans , Female , Blood Vessel Prosthesis , Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation/adverse effects , Endoleak/etiology , Endoleak/complications , Treatment Outcome , Endovascular Procedures/adverse effects , Stents , Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal/diagnostic imaging , Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal/surgery , Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal/complications , Retrospective Studies , Prosthesis Design
2.
Neurosci Biobehav Rev ; 150: 105210, 2023 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37141961

ABSTRACT

It has been established that early-life adversity impacts brain development, but the role of development itself has largely been ignored. We take a developmentally-sensitive approach to examine the neurodevelopmental sequelae of early adversity in a preregistered meta-analysis of 27,234 youth (birth to 18-years-old), providing the largest group of adversity-exposed youth to date. Findings demonstrate that early-life adversity does not have an ontogenetically uniform impact on brain volumes, but instead exhibits age-, experience-, and region-specific associations. Relative to non-exposed comparisons, interpersonal early adversity (e.g., family-based maltreatment) was associated with initially larger volumes in frontolimbic regions until ∼10-years-old, after which these exposures were linked to increasingly smaller volumes. By contrast, socioeconomic disadvantage (e.g., poverty) was associated with smaller volumes in temporal-limbic regions in childhood, which were attenuated at older ages. These findings advance ongoing debates regarding why, when, and how early-life adversity shapes later neural outcomes.


Subject(s)
Brain , Socioeconomic Disparities in Health , Adolescent , Humans , Child , Poverty , Longitudinal Studies
3.
bioRxiv ; 2023 Feb 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36824818

ABSTRACT

It has been established that early-life adversity impacts brain development, but the role of development itself has largely been ignored. We take a developmentally-sensitive approach to examine the neurodevelopmental sequelae of early adversity in a preregistered meta-analysis of 27,234 youth (birth to 18-years-old), providing the largest group of adversity-exposed youth to date. Findings demonstrate that early-life adversity does not have an ontogenetically uniform impact on brain volumes, but instead exhibits age-, experience-, and region-specific associations. Relative to non-exposed comparisons, interpersonal early adversity (e.g., family-based maltreatment) was associated with initially larger volumes in frontolimbic regions until ~10-years-old, after which these exposures were linked to increasingly smaller volumes. By contrast, socioeconomic disadvantage (e.g., poverty) was associated with smaller volumes in temporal-limbic regions in childhood, which were attenuated at older ages. These findings advance ongoing debates regarding why, when, and how early-life adversity shapes later neural outcomes.

4.
J Vasc Surg ; 77(5): 1367-1374.e2, 2023 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36626956

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Reintervention after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair is common. However, their frequency and impact on mortality after physician-modified endografts (PMEGs) is unknown. This study aims to describe reinterventions after PMEG for treatment of juxtarenal aneurysms and their effect on survival. METHODS: Data from a prospective investigational device exemption clinical trial (Identifier #NCT01538056) from 2011 to 2022 were used. Reinterventions after PMEG were categorized as open or percutaneous and major or minor by Society for Vascular Surgery reporting standards and as high or low magnitude based on physiologic impact. Reinterventions were also categorized by timing, based on whether they occurred within 30 days of PMEG as well as within 1 week of PMEG. Survival was compared between patients who did and did not undergo reintervention and between reintervention subcategories. RESULTS: A total of 170 patients underwent PMEG, 50 (29%) of whom underwent a total of 91 reinterventions (mean reinterventions/patient, 1.8). Freedom from reintervention was 84% at 1 year and 60% at 5 years. Reinterventions were most often percutaneous (80%), minor (55%), and low magnitude (77%), and the most common reintervention was renal stenting (26%). There were 10 early reinterventions within 1 week of PMEG. Two aortic-related mortalities occurred after reintervention. There were no differences in survival between patients who underwent reintervention and those who did not. However, survival differed based on the timing of reintervention. After adjusted analysis, reintervention within one week of PMEG was associated with an increased risk of mortality both compared with late reintervention (hazard ratio, 11.1; 95% confidence interval, 2.7-46.5) and no reintervention (hazard ratio, 5.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.6-16.8). CONCLUSIONS: Reinterventions after PMEG were most commonly percutaneous, minor, and low magnitude procedures, and non-detrimental to long-term survival. However, early reinterventions were associated with increased mortality risk. These data suggest that a modest frequency of reinterventions should be expected after PMEG, emphasizing the critical importance of lifelong surveillance.


Subject(s)
Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal , Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation , Endovascular Procedures , Humans , Blood Vessel Prosthesis/adverse effects , Prospective Studies , Treatment Outcome , Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal/diagnostic imaging , Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal/surgery , Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal/complications , Retrospective Studies , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Postoperative Complications/surgery , Prosthesis Design
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...