Search

Objective This study aimed to describe surgical trends, survival, and infection related complications (IRC) in a Danish cohort of patients with infective native aortic aneurysms (INAAs). Methods A retrospective nationwide cohort study including all patients in Denmark who were surgically treated for abdominal INAA between 2000 and 2020 was conducted. Patients were identified through the Danish vascular registry, Karbase, which is a database registering all patients treated with vascular surgery in Denmark. Subsequent data on clinical presentation, treatment, all cause mortality, and complications were obtained from the electronic patient charts. Results Seventy-five patients were included in the study, of whom 60 (80%) were male, with a median age of 69 (IQR 64, 75) years. Open surgical repair (OSR) was performed in 54 (72%) patients and endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) in 21 (28%). Median follow up was 52 (IQR 32, 103) months. Open repair was consistently the most frequent treatment modality throughout the study period, but EVAR became more frequent over time. The 30 day survival of the total cohort was 97% (94 – 100%). Kaplan–Meier survival estimates for the cohort were 92% (95% CI 85 – 98%), 80% (95% CI 71 – 91%), 63% (95% CI 52 – 78%), and 48% (95% CI 35 – 66%) at one, three, five and 10 years, respectively. Patients treated by EVAR had comparable long term survival to patients treated by OSR, with a hazard ratio of 0.35 (95% CI 0.10 – 1.22), but was associated with better short term survival up to five years. The most common cause of death was sepsis. Five (9%) OSR patients had IRC compared with one (5%) EVAR patient. Conclusion In this nationwide study of patients treated for abdominal INAA, an increasing number of patients were surgically treated during the study period. Patients treated by EVAR demonstrated long term survival comparable to OSR. The incidence of post-operative IRC was low. These results should be in, Objective: This study aimed to describe surgical trends, survival, and infection related complications (IRC) in a Danish cohort of patients with infective native aortic aneurysms (INAAs). Methods: A retrospective nationwide cohort study including all patients in Denmark who were surgically treated for abdominal INAA between 2000 and 2020 was conducted. Patients were identified through the Danish vascular registry, Karbase, which is a database registering all patients treated with vascular surgery in Denmark. Subsequent data on clinical presentation, treatment, all cause mortality, and complications were obtained from the electronic patient charts. Results: Seventy-five patients were included in the study, of whom 60 (80%) were male, with a median age of 69 (IQR 64, 75) years. Open surgical repair (OSR) was performed in 54 (72%) patients and endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) in 21 (28%). Median follow up was 52 (IQR 32, 103) months. Open repair was consistently the most frequent treatment modality throughout the study period, but EVAR became more frequent over time. The 30 day survival of the total cohort was 97% (94 – 100%). Kaplan–Meier survival estimates for the cohort were 92% (95% CI 85 – 98%), 80% (95% CI 71 – 91%), 63% (95% CI 52 – 78%), and 48% (95% CI 35 – 66%) at one, three, five and 10 years, respectively. Patients treated by EVAR had comparable long term survival to patients treated by OSR, with a hazard ratio of 0.35 (95% CI 0.10 – 1.22), but was associated with better short term survival up to five years. The most common cause of death was sepsis. Five (9%) OSR patients had IRC compared with one (5%) EVAR patient. Conclusion: In this nationwide study of patients treated for abdominal INAA, an increasing number of patients were surgically treated during the study period. Patients treated by EVAR demonstrated long term survival comparable to OSR. The incidence of post-operative IRC was low. These results should be interpreted with caution and prospecti

Objective: Abdominal aortic graft and endograft infections (AGIs) are rare complications following aortic surgery. Radical surgery (RS) with resection of the infected graft and reconstruction with extra-anatomical bypass or in situ reconstruction is the preferred therapy. For patients unfit for RS, a semi-conservative (SC), graft preserving strategy is possible. This paper aimed to compare survival and infection outcomes between RS and SC treatment for AGI in a nationwide cohort. Methods: Patients with abdominal AGI related surgery in Sweden between January 1995 and May 2017 were identified. The Management of Aortic Graft Infection Collaboration (MAGIC) criteria were used for the definition of AGI. Multivariable regression was performed to identify factors associated with mortality. Results: One hundred and sixty-nine patients with surgically treated abdominal AGI were identified, comprising 43 SC (14 endografts; 53% with a graft enteric fistula [GEF] in total) and 126 RS (26 endografts; 50% with a GEF in total). The SC cohort was older and had a higher frequency of cardiac comorbidities. There was a non-significant trend towards lower Kaplan -Meier estimated five year survival for SC vs. RS (30.2% vs. 48.4%; p = .066). A non-significant trend was identified towards worse Kaplan -Meier estimated five year survival for SC patients with a GEF vs. without a GEF (21.7% vs. 40.1%; p = .097). There were significantly more recurrent graft infections comparing SC with RS (45.4% vs. 19.3%; p < .001). In a Cox regression model adjusting for confounders, there was no difference in five year survival comparing SC vs. RS (HR 1.0, 95% CI 0.6 -1.5). Conclusion: In this national AGI cohort, there was no mortality difference comparing SC and RS for AGI when adjusting for comorbidities. Presence of GEF probably negatively impacts survival outcomes of SC patients. Rates of recurrent infection remain high for SC treated patients.

Objective: Abdominal aortic graft and endograft infections (AGIs) are rare complications following aortic surgery. Radical surgery (RS) with resection of the infected graft and reconstruction with extra-anatomical bypass or in situ reconstruction is the preferred therapy. For patients unfit for RS, a semi-conservative (SC), graft preserving strategy is possible. This paper aimed to compare survival and infection outcomes between RS and SC treatment for AGI in a nationwide cohort. Methods: Patients with abdominal AGI related surgery in Sweden between January 1995 and May 2017 were identified. The Management of Aortic Graft Infection Collaboration (MAGIC) criteria were used for the definition of AGI. Multivariable regression was performed to identify factors associated with mortality. Results: One hundred and sixty-nine patients with surgically treated abdominal AGI were identified, comprising 43 SC (14 endografts; 53% with a graft enteric fistula [GEF] in total) and 126 RS (26 endografts; 50% with a GEF in total). The SC cohort was older and had a higher frequency of cardiac comorbidities. There was a non-significant trend towards lower Kaplan -Meier estimated five year survival for SC vs. RS (30.2% vs. 48.4%; p = .066). A non-significant trend was identified towards worse Kaplan -Meier estimated five year survival for SC patients with a GEF vs. without a GEF (21.7% vs. 40.1%; p = .097). There were significantly more recurrent graft infections comparing SC with RS (45.4% vs. 19.3%; p < .001). In a Cox regression model adjusting for confounders, there was no difference in five year survival comparing SC vs. RS (HR 1.0, 95% CI 0.6 -1.5). Conclusion: In this national AGI cohort, there was no mortality difference comparing SC and RS for AGI when adjusting for comorbidities. Presence of GEF probably negatively impacts survival outcomes of SC patients. Rates of recurrent infection remain high for SC treated patients.

Objective: Abdominal aortic graft and endograft infections (AGIs) are rare complications following aortic surgery. Radical surgery (RS) with resection of the infected graft and reconstruction with extra-anatomical bypass or in situ reconstruction is the preferred therapy. For patients unfit for RS, a semi-conservative (SC), graft preserving strategy is possible. This paper aimed to compare survival and infection outcomes between RS and SC treatment for AGI in a nationwide cohort. Methods: Patients with abdominal AGI related surgery in Sweden between January 1995 and May 2017 were identified. The Management of Aortic Graft Infection Collaboration (MAGIC) criteria were used for the definition of AGI. Multivariable regression was performed to identify factors associated with mortality. Results: One hundred and sixty-nine patients with surgically treated abdominal AGI were identified, comprising 43 SC (14 endografts; 53% with a graft enteric fistula [GEF] in total) and 126 RS (26 endografts; 50% with a GEF in total). The SC cohort was older and had a higher frequency of cardiac comorbidities. There was a non-significant trend towards lower Kaplan -Meier estimated five year survival for SC vs. RS (30.2% vs. 48.4%; p = .066). A non-significant trend was identified towards worse Kaplan -Meier estimated five year survival for SC patients with a GEF vs. without a GEF (21.7% vs. 40.1%; p = .097). There were significantly more recurrent graft infections comparing SC with RS (45.4% vs. 19.3%; p < .001). In a Cox regression model adjusting for confounders, there was no difference in five year survival comparing SC vs. RS (HR 1.0, 95% CI 0.6 -1.5). Conclusion: In this national AGI cohort, there was no mortality difference comparing SC and RS for AGI when adjusting for comorbidities. Presence of GEF probably negatively impacts survival outcomes of SC patients. Rates of recurrent infection remain high for SC treated patients.

Objective: Abdominal aortic graft and endograft infections (AGIs) are rare complications following aortic surgery. Radical surgery (RS) with resection of the infected graft and reconstruction with extra-anatomical bypass or in situ reconstruction is the preferred therapy. For patients unfit for RS, a semi-conservative (SC), graft preserving strategy is possible. This paper aimed to compare survival and infection outcomes between RS and SC treatment for AGI in a nationwide cohort. Methods: Patients with abdominal AGI related surgery in Sweden between January 1995 and May 2017 were identified. The Management of Aortic Graft Infection Collaboration (MAGIC) criteria were used for the definition of AGI. Multivariable regression was performed to identify factors associated with mortality. Results: One hundred and sixty-nine patients with surgically treated abdominal AGI were identified, comprising 43 SC (14 endografts; 53% with a graft enteric fistula [GEF] in total) and 126 RS (26 endografts; 50% with a GEF in total). The SC cohort was older and had a higher frequency of cardiac comorbidities. There was a non-significant trend towards lower Kaplan–Meier estimated five year survival for SC vs. RS (30.2% vs. 48.4%; p = .066). A non-significant trend was identified towards worse Kaplan–Meier estimated five year survival for SC patients with a GEF vs. without a GEF (21.7% vs. 40.1%; p = .097). There were significantly more recurrent graft infections comparing SC with RS (45.4% vs. 19.3%; p < .001). In a Cox regression model adjusting for confounders, there was no difference in five year survival comparing SC vs. RS (HR 1.0, 95% CI 0.6 – 1.5). Conclusion: In this national AGI cohort, there was no mortality difference comparing SC and RS for AGI when adjusting for comorbidities. Presence of GEF probably negatively impacts survival outcomes of SC patients. Rates of recurrent infection remain high for SC treated patients.

QC 20230725

Objective: Abdominal aortic graft and endograft infections (AGIs) are rare complications following aortic surgery. Radical surgery (RS) with resection of the infected graft and reconstruction with extra-anatomical bypass or in situ reconstruction is the preferred therapy. For patients unfit for RS, a semi-conservative (SC), graft preserving strategy is possible. This paper aimed to compare survival and infection outcomes between RS and SC treatment for AGI in a nationwide cohort. Methods: Patients with abdominal AGI related surgery in Sweden between January 1995 and May 2017 were identified. The Management of Aortic Graft Infection Collaboration (MAGIC) criteria were used for the definition of AGI. Multivariable regression was performed to identify factors associated with mortality. Results: One hundred and sixty-nine patients with surgically treated abdominal AGI were identified, comprising 43 SC (14 endografts; 53% with a graft enteric fistula [GEF] in total) and 126 RS (26 endografts; 50% with a GEF in total). The SC cohort was older and had a higher frequency of cardiac comorbidities. There was a non-significant trend towards lower Kaplan–Meier estimated five year survival for SC vs. RS (30.2% vs. 48.4%; p = .066). A non-significant trend was identified towards worse Kaplan–Meier estimated five year survival for SC patients with a GEF vs. without a GEF (21.7% vs. 40.1%; p = .097). There were significantly more recurrent graft infections comparing SC with RS (45.4% vs. 19.3%; p < .001). In a Cox regression model adjusting for confounders, there was no difference in five year survival comparing SC vs. RS (HR 1.0, 95% CI 0.6 – 1.5). Conclusion: In this national AGI cohort, there was no mortality difference comparing SC and RS for AGI when adjusting for comorbidities. Presence of GEF probably negatively impacts survival outcomes of SC patients. Rates of recurrent infection remain high for SC treated patients.

Objective: Abdominal aortic graft and endograft infections (AGIs) are rare complications following aortic surgery. Radical surgery (RS) with resection of the infected graft and reconstruction with extra-anatomical bypass or in situ reconstruction is the preferred therapy. For patients unfit for RS, a semi-conservative (SC), graft preserving strategy is possible. This paper aimed to compare survival and infection outcomes between RS and SC treatment for AGI in a nationwide cohort. Methods: Patients with abdominal AGI related surgery in Sweden between January 1995 and May 2017 were identified. The Management of Aortic Graft Infection Collaboration (MAGIC) criteria were used for the definition of AGI. Multivariable regression was performed to identify factors associated with mortality. Results: One hundred and sixty-nine patients with surgically treated abdominal AGI were identified, comprising 43 SC (14 endografts; 53% with a graft enteric fistula [GEF] in total) and 126 RS (26 endografts; 50% with a GEF in total). The SC cohort was older and had a higher frequency of cardiac comorbidities. There was a non-significant trend towards lower Kaplan–Meier estimated five year survival for SC vs. RS (30.2% vs. 48.4%; p = .066). A non-significant trend was identified towards worse Kaplan–Meier estimated five year survival for SC patients with a GEF vs. without a GEF (21.7% vs. 40.1%; p = .097). There were significantly more recurrent graft infections comparing SC with RS (45.4% vs. 19.3%; p < .001). In a Cox regression model adjusting for confounders, there was no difference in five year survival comparing SC vs. RS (HR 1.0, 95% CI 0.6 – 1.5). Conclusion: In this national AGI cohort, there was no mortality difference comparing SC and RS for AGI when adjusting for comorbidities. Presence of GEF probably negatively impacts survival outcomes of SC patients. Rates of recurrent infection remain high for SC treated patients.

Objective: Abdominal aortic graft and endograft infections (AGIs) are rare complications following aortic surgery. Radical surgery (RS) with resection of the infected graft and reconstruction with extra-anatomical bypass or in situ reconstruction is the preferred therapy. For patients unfit for RS, a semi-conservative (SC), graft preserving strategy is possible. This paper aimed to compare survival and infection outcomes between RS and SC treatment for AGI in a nationwide cohort. Methods: Patients with abdominal AGI related surgery in Sweden between January 1995 and May 2017 were identified. The Management of Aortic Graft Infection Collaboration (MAGIC) criteria were used for the definition of AGI. Multivariable regression was performed to identify factors associated with mortality. Results: One hundred and sixty-nine patients with surgically treated abdominal AGI were identified, comprising 43 SC (14 endografts; 53% with a graft enteric fistula [GEF] in total) and 126 RS (26 endografts; 50% with a GEF in total). The SC cohort was older and had a higher frequency of cardiac comorbidities. There was a non-significant trend towards lower Kaplan -Meier estimated five year survival for SC vs. RS (30.2% vs. 48.4%; p = .066). A non-significant trend was identified towards worse Kaplan -Meier estimated five year survival for SC patients with a GEF vs. without a GEF (21.7% vs. 40.1%; p = .097). There were significantly more recurrent graft infections comparing SC with RS (45.4% vs. 19.3%; p < .001). In a Cox regression model adjusting for confounders, there was no difference in five year survival comparing SC vs. RS (HR 1.0, 95% CI 0.6 -1.5). Conclusion: In this national AGI cohort, there was no mortality difference comparing SC and RS for AGI when adjusting for comorbidities. Presence of GEF probably negatively impacts survival outcomes of SC patients. Rates of recurrent infection remain high for SC treated patients.

Objective: Abdominal aortic graft and endograft infections (AGIs) are rare complications following aortic surgery. Radical surgery (RS) with resection of the infected graft and reconstruction with extra-anatomical bypass or in situ reconstruction is the preferred therapy. For patients unfit for RS, a semi-conservative (SC), graft preserving strategy is possible. This paper aimed to compare survival and infection outcomes between RS and SC treatment for AGI in a nationwide cohort. Methods: Patients with abdominal AGI related surgery in Sweden between January 1995 and May 2017 were identified. The Management of Aortic Graft Infection Collaboration (MAGIC) criteria were used for the definition of AGI. Multivariable regression was performed to identify factors associated with mortality. Results: One hundred and sixty-nine patients with surgically treated abdominal AGI were identified, comprising 43 SC (14 endografts; 53% with a graft enteric fistula [GEF] in total) and 126 RS (26 endografts; 50% with a GEF in total). The SC cohort was older and had a higher frequency of cardiac comorbidities. There was a non-significant trend towards lower Kaplan–Meier estimated five year survival for SC vs. RS (30.2% vs. 48.4%; p = .066). A non-significant trend was identified towards worse Kaplan–Meier estimated five year survival for SC patients with a GEF vs. without a GEF (21.7% vs. 40.1%; p = .097). There were significantly more recurrent graft infections comparing SC with RS (45.4% vs. 19.3%; p < .001). In a Cox regression model adjusting for confounders, there was no difference in five year survival comparing SC vs. RS (HR 1.0, 95% CI 0.6 – 1.5). Conclusion: In this national AGI cohort, there was no mortality difference comparing SC and RS for AGI when adjusting for comorbidities. Presence of GEF probably negatively impacts survival outcomes of SC patients. Rates of recurrent infection remain high for SC treated patients.

Objective Long term differences in survival after elective repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) between open surgical repair (OSR) and endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) are unclear, and hitherto artificial intelligence has not been used for this purpose. The aim was to compare the precision of survival estimates between the Kaplan–Meier (KM) method and the artificial intelligence derived method Neural Multi-Task Logistic Regression (N-MTLR), and to compare survival estimates as a function of patient age and time since surgery between OSR and EVAR using N-MTLR. Methods All AAAs between 2003 and 2018 in Denmark were identified in the Danish vascular registry. Survival was estimated using the KM and N-MTLR methods, and prediction performance was estimated with the Brier score. Results 7 912 patients were included in the study, n = 6 569 (83%) men, median age 72 years (range 35 – 92), with a median follow-up time of 45.7 months (range 0 – 120). The two treatment cohorts, OSR n = 5 495 (69%), and EVAR n = 2 417 (31%), differed significantly in patient characteristics. The Brier score for KM increased from 0.044 to 0.244, and for N-MTLR from 0.044 to 0.206, from 90 days to 10 years. The N-MTLR method was more accurate than KM from 90 days to 10 years after surgery, p ≤ .025. N-MTLR demonstrated significant increased probability for survival for OSR in patients aged 58 – 76 years at five years, and 65 – 73 at 10 years after surgery, and the opposite was found for the benefit of EVAR in patients aged 72 – 85 years at one year, 85 – 90 years at five years, and for 85 – 90 year olds at 10 years after surgery. Conclusion N-MTLR outperforms KM for the entire post-operative follow-up time. This N-MTLR model has the potential to render more precise patient specific survival estimates and establish survival differences between subgroups of patients that KM is unable to detect, demonstrated here for different age groups., Objective: Long term differences in survival after elective repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) between open surgical repair (OSR) and endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) are unclear, and hitherto artificial intelligence has not been used for this purpose. The aim was to compare the precision of survival estimates between the Kaplan–Meier (KM) method and the artificial intelligence derived method Neural Multi-Task Logistic Regression (N-MTLR), and to compare survival estimates as a function of patient age and time since surgery between OSR and EVAR using N-MTLR. Methods: All AAAs between 2003 and 2018 in Denmark were identified in the Danish vascular registry. Survival was estimated using the KM and N-MTLR methods, and prediction performance was estimated with the Brier score. Results: 7 912 patients were included in the study, n = 6 569 (83%) men, median age 72 years (range 35 – 92), with a median follow-up time of 45.7 months (range 0 – 120). The two treatment cohorts, OSR n = 5 495 (69%), and EVAR n = 2 417 (31%), differed significantly in patient characteristics. The Brier score for KM increased from 0.044 to 0.244, and for N-MTLR from 0.044 to 0.206, from 90 days to 10 years. The N-MTLR method was more accurate than KM from 90 days to 10 years after surgery, p ≤ .025. N-MTLR demonstrated significant increased probability for survival for OSR in patients aged 58 – 76 years at five years, and 65 – 73 at 10 years after surgery, and the opposite was found for the benefit of EVAR in patients aged 72 – 85 years at one year, 85 – 90 years at five years, and for 85 – 90 year olds at 10 years after surgery. Conclusion: N-MTLR outperforms KM for the entire post-operative follow-up time. This N-MTLR model has the potential to render more precise patient specific survival estimates and establish survival differences between subgroups of patients that KM is unable to detect, demonstrated here for different age groups.

Objective: Abdominal aortic graft and endograft infections (AGIs) are rare complications following aortic surgery. Radical surgery (RS) with resection of the infected graft and reconstruction with extra-anatomical bypass or in situ reconstruction is the preferred therapy. For patients unfit for RS, a semi-conservative (SC), graft preserving strategy is possible. This paper aimed to compare survival and infection outcomes between RS and SC treatment for AGI in a nationwide cohort. Methods: Patients with abdominal AGI related surgery in Sweden between January 1995 and May 2017 were identified. The Management of Aortic Graft Infection Collaboration (MAGIC) criteria were used for the definition of AGI. Multivariable regression was performed to identify factors associated with mortality. Results: One hundred and sixty-nine patients with surgically treated abdominal AGI were identified, comprising 43 SC (14 endografts; 53% with a graft enteric fistula [GEF] in total) and 126 RS (26 endografts; 50% with a GEF in total). The SC cohort was older and had a higher frequency of cardiac comorbidities. There was a non-significant trend towards lower Kaplan–Meier estimated five year survival for SC vs. RS (30.2% vs. 48.4%; p = .066). A non-significant trend was identified towards worse Kaplan–Meier estimated five year survival for SC patients with a GEF vs. without a GEF (21.7% vs. 40.1%; p = .097). There were significantly more recurrent graft infections comparing SC with RS (45.4% vs. 19.3%; p < .001). In a Cox regression model adjusting for confounders, there was no difference in five year survival comparing SC vs. RS (HR 1.0, 95% CI 0.6 – 1.5). Conclusion: In this national AGI cohort, there was no mortality difference comparing SC and RS for AGI when adjusting for comorbidities. Presence of GEF probably negatively impacts survival outcomes of SC patients. Rates of recurrent infection remain high for SC treated patients.

Objective: Abdominal aortic graft and endograft infections (AGIs) are rare complications following aortic surgery. Radical surgery (RS) with resection of the infected graft and reconstruction with extra-anatomical bypass or in situ reconstruction is the preferred therapy. For patients unfit for RS, a semi-conservative (SC), graft preserving strategy is possible. This paper aimed to compare survival and infection outcomes between RS and SC treatment for AGI in a nationwide cohort. Methods: Patients with abdominal AGI related surgery in Sweden between January 1995 and May 2017 were identified. The Management of Aortic Graft Infection Collaboration (MAGIC) criteria were used for the definition of AGI. Multivariable regression was performed to identify factors associated with mortality. Results: One hundred and sixty-nine patients with surgically treated abdominal AGI were identified, comprising 43 SC (14 endografts; 53% with a graft enteric fistula [GEF] in total) and 126 RS (26 endografts; 50% with a GEF in total). The SC cohort was older and had a higher frequency of cardiac comorbidities. There was a non-significant trend towards lower Kaplan -Meier estimated five year survival for SC vs. RS (30.2% vs. 48.4%; p = .066). A non-significant trend was identified towards worse Kaplan -Meier estimated five year survival for SC patients with a GEF vs. without a GEF (21.7% vs. 40.1%; p = .097). There were significantly more recurrent graft infections comparing SC with RS (45.4% vs. 19.3%; p < .001). In a Cox regression model adjusting for confounders, there was no difference in five year survival comparing SC vs. RS (HR 1.0, 95% CI 0.6 -1.5). Conclusion: In this national AGI cohort, there was no mortality difference comparing SC and RS for AGI when adjusting for comorbidities. Presence of GEF probably negatively impacts survival outcomes of SC patients. Rates of recurrent infection remain high for SC treated patients.

Objective Long term differences in survival after elective repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) between open surgical repair (OSR) and endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) are unclear, and hitherto artificial intelligence has not been used for this purpose. The aim was to compare the precision of survival estimates between the Kaplan–Meier (KM) method and the artificial intelligence derived method Neural Multi-Task Logistic Regression (N-MTLR), and to compare survival estimates as a function of patient age and time since surgery between OSR and EVAR using N-MTLR. Methods All AAAs between 2003 and 2018 in Denmark were identified in the Danish vascular registry. Survival was estimated using the KM and N-MTLR methods, and prediction performance was estimated with the Brier score. Results 7 912 patients were included in the study, n = 6 569 (83%) men, median age 72 years (range 35 – 92), with a median follow-up time of 45.7 months (range 0 – 120). The two treatment cohorts, OSR n = 5 495 (69%), and EVAR n = 2 417 (31%), differed significantly in patient characteristics. The Brier score for KM increased from 0.044 to 0.244, and for N-MTLR from 0.044 to 0.206, from 90 days to 10 years. The N-MTLR method was more accurate than KM from 90 days to 10 years after surgery, p ≤ .025. N-MTLR demonstrated significant increased probability for survival for OSR in patients aged 58 – 76 years at five years, and 65 – 73 at 10 years after surgery, and the opposite was found for the benefit of EVAR in patients aged 72 – 85 years at one year, 85 – 90 years at five years, and for 85 – 90 year olds at 10 years after surgery. Conclusion N-MTLR outperforms KM for the entire post-operative follow-up time. This N-MTLR model has the potential to render more precise patient specific survival estimates and establish survival differences between subgroups of patients that KM is unable to detect, demonstrated here for different age groups., Objective: Long term differences in survival after elective repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) between open surgical repair (OSR) and endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) are unclear, and hitherto artificial intelligence has not been used for this purpose. The aim was to compare the precision of survival estimates between the Kaplan–Meier (KM) method and the artificial intelligence derived method Neural Multi-Task Logistic Regression (N-MTLR), and to compare survival estimates as a function of patient age and time since surgery between OSR and EVAR using N-MTLR. Methods: All AAAs between 2003 and 2018 in Denmark were identified in the Danish vascular registry. Survival was estimated using the KM and N-MTLR methods, and prediction performance was estimated with the Brier score. Results: 7 912 patients were included in the study, n = 6 569 (83%) men, median age 72 years (range 35 – 92), with a median follow-up time of 45.7 months (range 0 – 120). The two treatment cohorts, OSR n = 5 495 (69%), and EVAR n = 2 417 (31%), differed significantly in patient characteristics. The Brier score for KM increased from 0.044 to 0.244, and for N-MTLR from 0.044 to 0.206, from 90 days to 10 years. The N-MTLR method was more accurate than KM from 90 days to 10 years after surgery, p ≤ .025. N-MTLR demonstrated significant increased probability for survival for OSR in patients aged 58 – 76 years at five years, and 65 – 73 at 10 years after surgery, and the opposite was found for the benefit of EVAR in patients aged 72 – 85 years at one year, 85 – 90 years at five years, and for 85 – 90 year olds at 10 years after surgery. Conclusion: N-MTLR outperforms KM for the entire post-operative follow-up time. This N-MTLR model has the potential to render more precise patient specific survival estimates and establish survival differences between subgroups of patients that KM is unable to detect, demonstrated here for different age groups.

Objective: The aim was to describe the microbiology of surgically treated infective native (mycotic) aortic aneurysms (INAAs), and associated survival and development of infection-related complications (IRCs). Methods: Data were pooled from 2 nationwide studies on surgically treated patients with INAAs in Sweden, between 1994 – 2016. Patients were grouped and analyzed according to culture results: 1) Staphylococcus aureus, 2) Streptococcus species (sp.), 3) Salmonella sp., 4) Enterococcus sp., 5) Gram-negative intestinal bacteria, 6) Other sp. (all other species found in culture), and 7) Negative cultures. Results: A sum of 182 patients were included, mean age 71 years (standard deviation; SD: 8.9). The median follow-up was 50.3 months (range 0 – 360). 128 (70.3%) patients had positive blood and/or tissue culture; Staphylococcus aureus n = 38 (20.9%), Streptococcus sp. n = 37 (20.3%), Salmonella sp. n = 19 (10.4%), Enterococcus sp. n = 16 (8.8%), Gram-negative intestinal bacteria n = 6, (3.3%), Other sp. n = 12 (6.6%) and Negative cultures n = 54 (29.7%). The estimated survival for the largest groups at 2-years after surgery was: Staphylococcus aureus 62% (95% Confidence interval 53.9 – 70.1), Streptococcus sp. 74.7% (67.4 – 82.0), Salmonella sp. 73.7% (63.6 – 83.8), Enterococcus sp. 61.9% (49.6 – 74.2), and Negative cultures 89.8% (85.5 – 94.1), P = .051. There were 37 IRCs (20.3%), and 19 (51.4%) were fatal, the frequency was insignificant between the groups. The majority of IRCs, 30/37 (81%), developed during the first postoperative year. Conclusion: In this assessment of microbiological findings of INAAs in Sweden, 50% of the pathogens were Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus sp., or Salmonella sp. The overall 20%-frequency of IRCs, and its association with high mortality, motivates long-term antibiotic treatment regardless of microbial findings.

Objective The objective of this systematic literature review was to explore the value of positron emission tomography combined with low-dose computed tomography (18F-FDG-PET-CT) in the diagnostics of infective native aortic aneurysm (INAA). Methods A systematic literature review was performed using the search terms mycotic- and infected aortic aneurysms in Medline and Sciencedirect databases, published between 1 January 2000 and 1 January 2020. Using the PRISMA statement, articles were scrutinized according to a predefined protocol including: timing of 18F-FDG-PET-CT examination, the maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax), additional findings on examination, and findings on repeated scanning of 18F-FDG-PET-CT. Results Four studies were included in the analysis, comprising a total of 11 patients. Two studies were single case reports, and two were small case series, all were graded to be of low quality with high risk of bias. All patients were examined with a preoperative 18F-FDG-PET-CT, and 10 (91%) had increased 18F-FDG uptakes. The median SUVmax value was 6.53, range 4.46-9.23. The mean duration of antibiotic therapy prior to 18F-FDG-PET-CT was not known. Two patients were examined with repeated 18F-FDG-PET-CT examinations after treatment, where a decrease in SUVmax values could be demonstrated after successful treatment. Conclusion The literature on 18F-FDF-PET/CT for diagnosing infective native aortic aneurysms is scarce. However, there might be a role for 18F-FDF-PET/CT in the management of the disease, in particular for patients with clinical suspicion of INAA without convincing findings on CT. SUVmax values ranging from 4.5 to 6.5 could be guiding and suggestive of metabolic activity in agreement of INAA. However, further conclusions on its usefulness, robustness and specific SUVmax values are premature, and a definitive cut-off value is probably not attainable.

OBJECTIVE: Abdominal aortic graft and endograft infection (AGI) is primarily treated by resection of the infected graft and restoration of distal perfusion through extra-anatomic bypass (EAB) or in situ reconstruction/repair (ISR). The aim of this study was to compare these surgical strategies in a nationwide multicentre retrospective cohort study. METHODS: The Swedish Vascular Registry (Swedvasc) was used to identify surgically treated abdominal AGIs in Sweden between January 1995 and May 2017. The primary aim was to compare short and long term survival, as well as complications for EAB and ISR. RESULTS: Some 126 radically surgically treated AGI patients were identified - 102 graft infections and 24 endograft infections - treated by EAB: 71 and ISR: 55 (23 neo-aorto-iliac systems, NAISs). No differences in early 30 day (EAB 81.7% vs. ISR 76.4%, p = .46), or long term five year survival (48.2% vs. 49.9%, p = .87) were identified. There was no survival difference comparing NAIS to other ISR strategies. The frequency of recurrent graft infection during follow up was similar: EAB 20.3% vs. ISR 17.0% (p = .56). Survival and re-infection rates of the new conduit did not differ between NAIS and other ISR strategies. Age ≥ 75 years (odds ratio [OR] 4.0, confidence interval [CI] 1.1 - 14.8), coronary artery disease (OR 4.2, CI 1.2 - 15.1) and post-operative circulatory complications (OR 5.2, CI 1.2 - 22.5) were associated with early death. Prolonged antimicrobial therapy (> 3 months) was associated with reduced long term mortality (HR 0.3, CI 0.1 - 0.9). CONCLUSION: In this nationwide multicentre study comparing outcomes of radically treated AGI, no differences in survival or re-infection rate could be identified comparing EAB and ISR.

Objective: Abdominal aortic graft and endograft infection (AGI) is primarily treated by resection of the infected graft and restoration of distal perfusion through extra-anatomic bypass (EAB) or in situ reconstruction/repair (ISR). The aim of this study was to compare these surgical strategies in a nationwide multicentre retrospective cohort study. Methods: The Swedish Vascular Registry (Swedvasc) was used to identify surgically treated abdominal AGIs in Sweden between January 1995 and May 2017. The primary aim was to compare short and long term survival, as well as complications for EAB and ISR. Results: Some 126 radically surgically treated AGI patients were identified – 102 graft infections and 24 endograft infections – treated by EAB: 71 and ISR: 55 (23 neo-aorto-iliac systems, NAISs). No differences in early 30 day (EAB 81.7% vs. ISR 76.4%, p =.46), or long term five year survival (48.2% vs. 49.9%, p =.87) were identified. There was no survival difference comparing NAIS to other ISR strategies. The frequency of recurrent graft infection during follow up was similar: EAB 20.3% vs. ISR 17.0% (p =.56). Survival and re-infection rates of the new conduit did not differ between NAIS and other ISR strategies. Age ≥ 75 years (odds ratio [OR] 4.0, confidence interval [CI] 1.1 – 14.8), coronary artery disease (OR 4.2, CI 1.2 – 15.1) and post-operative circulatory complications (OR 5.2, CI 1.2 – 22.5) were associated with early death. Prolonged antimicrobial therapy (> 3 months) was associated with reduced long term mortality (HR 0.3, CI 0.1 – 0.9). Conclusion: In this nationwide multicentre study comparing outcomes of radically treated AGI, no differences in survival or re-infection rate could be identified comparing EAB and ISR.

Objective: Abdominal aortic graft and endograft infection (AGI) is primarily treated by resection of the infected graft and restoration of distal perfusion through extra-anatomic bypass (EAB) or in situ reconstruction/repair (ISR). The aim of this study was to compare these surgical strategies in a nationwide multicentre retrospective cohort study. Methods: The Swedish Vascular Registry (Swedvasc) was used to identify surgically treated abdominal AGIs in Sweden between January 1995 and May 2017. The primary aim was to compare short and long term survival, as well as complications for EAB and ISR. Results: Some 126 radically surgically treated AGI patients were identified – 102 graft infections and 24 endograft infections – treated by EAB: 71 and ISR: 55 (23 neo-aorto-iliac systems, NAISs). No differences in early 30 day (EAB 81.7% vs. ISR 76.4%, p =.46), or long term five year survival (48.2% vs. 49.9%, p =.87) were identified. There was no survival difference comparing NAIS to other ISR strategies. The frequency of recurrent graft infection during follow up was similar: EAB 20.3% vs. ISR 17.0% (p =.56). Survival and re-infection rates of the new conduit did not differ between NAIS and other ISR strategies. Age ≥ 75 years (odds ratio [OR] 4.0, confidence interval [CI] 1.1 – 14.8), coronary artery disease (OR 4.2, CI 1.2 – 15.1) and post-operative circulatory complications (OR 5.2, CI 1.2 – 22.5) were associated with early death. Prolonged antimicrobial therapy (> 3 months) was associated with reduced long term mortality (HR 0.3, CI 0.1 – 0.9). Conclusion: In this nationwide multicentre study comparing outcomes of radically treated AGI, no differences in survival or re-infection rate could be identified comparing EAB and ISR.

OBJECTIVE: Abdominal aortic graft and endograft infection (AGI) is primarily treated by resection of the infected graft and restoration of distal perfusion through extra-anatomic bypass (EAB) or in situ reconstruction/repair (ISR). The aim of this study was to compare these surgical strategies in a nationwide multicentre retrospective cohort study. METHODS: The Swedish Vascular Registry (Swedvasc) was used to identify surgically treated abdominal AGIs in Sweden between January 1995 and May 2017. The primary aim was to compare short and long term survival, as well as complications for EAB and ISR. RESULTS: Some 126 radically surgically treated AGI patients were identified - 102 graft infections and 24 endograft infections - treated by EAB: 71 and ISR: 55 (23 neo-aorto-iliac systems, NAISs). No differences in early 30 day (EAB 81.7% vs. ISR 76.4%, p = .46), or long term five year survival (48.2% vs. 49.9%, p = .87) were identified. There was no survival difference comparing NAIS to other ISR strategies. The frequency of recurrent graft infection during follow up was similar: EAB 20.3% vs. ISR 17.0% (p = .56). Survival and re-infection rates of the new conduit did not differ between NAIS and other ISR strategies. Age ≥ 75 years (odds ratio [OR] 4.0, confidence interval [CI] 1.1 - 14.8), coronary artery disease (OR 4.2, CI 1.2 - 15.1) and post-operative circulatory complications (OR 5.2, CI 1.2 - 22.5) were associated with early death. Prolonged antimicrobial therapy (> 3 months) was associated with reduced long term mortality (HR 0.3, CI 0.1 - 0.9). CONCLUSION: In this nationwide multicentre study comparing outcomes of radically treated AGI, no differences in survival or re-infection rate could be identified comparing EAB and ISR.

Objective: Abdominal aortic graft and endograft infection (AGI) is primarily treated by resection of the infected graft and restoration of distal perfusion through extra-anatomic bypass (EAB) or in situ reconstruction/repair (ISR). The aim of this study was to compare these surgical strategies in a nationwide multicentre retrospective cohort study. Methods: The Swedish Vascular Registry (Swedvasc) was used to identify surgically treated abdominal AGIs in Sweden between January 1995 and May 2017. The primary aim was to compare short and long term survival, as well as complications for EAB and ISR. Results: Some 126 radically surgically treated AGI patients were identified – 102 graft infections and 24 endograft infections – treated by EAB: 71 and ISR: 55 (23 neo-aorto-iliac systems, NAISs). No differences in early 30 day (EAB 81.7% vs. ISR 76.4%, p =.46), or long term five year survival (48.2% vs. 49.9%, p =.87) were identified. There was no survival difference comparing NAIS to other ISR strategies. The frequency of recurrent graft infection during follow up was similar: EAB 20.3% vs. ISR 17.0% (p =.56). Survival and re-infection rates of the new conduit did not differ between NAIS and other ISR strategies. Age ≥ 75 years (odds ratio [OR] 4.0, confidence interval [CI] 1.1 – 14.8), coronary artery disease (OR 4.2, CI 1.2 – 15.1) and post-operative circulatory complications (OR 5.2, CI 1.2 – 22.5) were associated with early death. Prolonged antimicrobial therapy (> 3 months) was associated with reduced long term mortality (HR 0.3, CI 0.1 – 0.9). Conclusion: In this nationwide multicentre study comparing outcomes of radically treated AGI, no differences in survival or re-infection rate could be identified comparing EAB and ISR.

OBJECTIVE: Abdominal aortic graft and endograft infection (AGI) is primarily treated by resection of the infected graft and restoration of distal perfusion through extra-anatomic bypass (EAB) or in situ reconstruction/repair (ISR). The aim of this study was to compare these surgical strategies in a nationwide multicentre retrospective cohort study. METHODS: The Swedish Vascular Registry (Swedvasc) was used to identify surgically treated abdominal AGIs in Sweden between January 1995 and May 2017. The primary aim was to compare short and long term survival, as well as complications for EAB and ISR. RESULTS: Some 126 radically surgically treated AGI patients were identified - 102 graft infections and 24 endograft infections - treated by EAB: 71 and ISR: 55 (23 neo-aorto-iliac systems, NAISs). No differences in early 30 day (EAB 81.7% vs. ISR 76.4%, p = .46), or long term five year survival (48.2% vs. 49.9%, p = .87) were identified. There was no survival difference comparing NAIS to other ISR strategies. The frequency of recurrent graft infection during follow up was similar: EAB 20.3% vs. ISR 17.0% (p = .56). Survival and re-infection rates of the new conduit did not differ between NAIS and other ISR strategies. Age ≥ 75 years (odds ratio [OR] 4.0, confidence interval [CI] 1.1 - 14.8), coronary artery disease (OR 4.2, CI 1.2 - 15.1) and post-operative circulatory complications (OR 5.2, CI 1.2 - 22.5) were associated with early death. Prolonged antimicrobial therapy (> 3 months) was associated with reduced long term mortality (HR 0.3, CI 0.1 - 0.9). CONCLUSION: In this nationwide multicentre study comparing outcomes of radically treated AGI, no differences in survival or re-infection rate could be identified comparing EAB and ISR.

Background: Groin wounds occurring after vascular surgical site infection, oncologic resection, or occasionally orthopedic surgery and trauma may represent a surgical challenge. Reconstruction of these defects by the usual workhorse flaps may be contraindicated following previous surgery and in patients with lower limb lymphedema or extreme morbidity. Methods: This study included 15 consecutive patients presenting with inguinal wounds after vascular or general surgery that required debridement and soft tissue coverage. All cases had absolute or relative contraindications to conventional reconstructive techniques, including a compromised deep femoral artery network, limb lymphedema, scarring of potential flap harvesting sites, or poor overall condition. Abdominal adipocutaneous excess enabled the performance of adipocutaneous advancement flaps in an abdominoplasty-like fashion. Immediate and long-term outcomes were analyzed. Results: Soft tissue coverage was effective in all cases. Two patients required re-intervention due to flap-related complications (venous congestion and partial flap necrosis). All patients fully recovered over a mean +/- standard deviation follow-up of 2.4 +/- 1.5 years. Conclusions: Abdominal flaps can be an effective and simple alternative technique for inguinal coverage with reproducible outcomes. In our experience, the main indications are a compromised deep femoral artery network and poor thigh tissue quality. Relative contraindications, such as previous open abdominal surgery, should be considered.

Background: Groin wounds occurring after vascular surgical site infection, oncologic resection, or occasionally orthopedic surgery and trauma may represent a surgical challenge. Reconstruction of these defects by the usual workhorse flaps may be contraindicated following previous surgery and in patients with lower limb lymphedema or extreme morbidity. Methods: This study included 15 consecutive patients presenting with inguinal wounds after vascular or general surgery that required debridement and soft tissue coverage. All cases had absolute or relative contraindications to conventional reconstructive techniques, including a compromised deep femoral artery network, limb lymphedema, scarring of potential flap harvesting sites, or poor overall condition. Abdominal adipocutaneous excess enabled the performance of adipocutaneous advancement flaps in an abdominoplasty-like fashion. Immediate and long-term outcomes were analyzed. Results: Soft tissue coverage was effective in all cases. Two patients required re-intervention due to flap-related complications (venous congestion and partial flap necrosis). All patients fully recovered over a mean +/- standard deviation follow-up of 2.4 +/- 1.5 years. Conclusions: Abdominal flaps can be an effective and simple alternative technique for inguinal coverage with reproducible outcomes. In our experience, the main indications are a compromised deep femoral artery network and poor thigh tissue quality. Relative contraindications, such as previous open abdominal surgery, should be considered.

BACKGROUND: The reliability of the registered ligation level of the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) in the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry has been questioned. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate this parameter in the registry by comparing the registered ligation levels with a postoperative computed tomography angiography (CT-angiography) in patients operated for rectal cancer. METHODS: Patients operated for rectal cancer at two Swedish university hospitals were prospectively included between December 2016 and December 2019. At the 1-year postoperative follow-up, an additional CT-angiography was performed and independently examined by two radiologists. The radiological assessment of the ligation level was compared to registry data, using different measures of agreement. RESULTS: A total of 94 patients were included, 55 (59%) were men and 39 (41%) women. All patients underwent abdominal resection: conventional or robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery, n=56 (60%), or open resection, n=38 (40%). The ligation level as assessed on CT-angiography was high in 29 (31%) patients and low in 65 (69%). The registered level of ligation of the IMA and the radiological assessment of the CT-angiographies were consistent in 77/94 cases, demonstrating an 82% agreement and a sensitivity and specificity of 86% and 72%, respectively. The estimated Kappa value was 0.58, reaching 0.64 after prevalence bias adjustment. CONCLUSION: This study showed that CT-angiography can be used to evaluate the reliability of the registered ligation level in the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry. The demonstrated agreement between the registry and postoperative CT-angiography was moderate to good. This discrepancy impacts registry-based research using IMA ligation data and may ultimately influence surgical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials identifier NCT03875612.

BACKGROUND: The reliability of the registered ligation level of the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) in the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry has been questioned. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate this parameter in the registry by comparing the registered ligation levels with a postoperative computed tomography angiography (CT-angiography) in patients operated for rectal cancer. METHODS: Patients operated for rectal cancer at two Swedish university hospitals were prospectively included between December 2016 and December 2019. At the 1-year postoperative follow-up, an additional CT-angiography was performed and independently examined by two radiologists. The radiological assessment of the ligation level was compared to registry data, using different measures of agreement. RESULTS: A total of 94 patients were included, 55 (59%) were men and 39 (41%) women. All patients underwent abdominal resection: conventional or robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery, n=56 (60%), or open resection, n=38 (40%). The ligation level as assessed on CT-angiography was high in 29 (31%) patients and low in 65 (69%). The registered level of ligation of the IMA and the radiological assessment of the CT-angiographies were consistent in 77/94 cases, demonstrating an 82% agreement and a sensitivity and specificity of 86% and 72%, respectively. The estimated Kappa value was 0.58, reaching 0.64 after prevalence bias adjustment. CONCLUSION: This study showed that CT-angiography can be used to evaluate the reliability of the registered ligation level in the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry. The demonstrated agreement between the registry and postoperative CT-angiography was moderate to good. This discrepancy impacts registry-based research using IMA ligation data and may ultimately influence surgical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials identifier NCT03875612.

Background: Groin wounds occurring after vascular surgical site infection, oncologic resection, or occasionally orthopedic surgery and trauma may represent a surgical challenge. Reconstruction of these defects by the usual workhorse flaps may be contraindicated following previous surgery and in patients with lower limb lymphedema or extreme morbidity. Methods: This study included 15 consecutive patients presenting with inguinal wounds after vascular or general surgery that required debridement and soft tissue coverage. All cases had absolute or relative contraindications to conventional reconstructive techniques, including a compromised deep femoral artery network, limb lymphedema, scarring of potential flap harvesting sites, or poor overall condition. Abdominal adipocutaneous excess enabled the performance of adipocutaneous advancement flaps in an abdominoplasty-like fashion. Immediate and long-term outcomes were analyzed. Results: Soft tissue coverage was effective in all cases. Two patients required re-intervention due to flap-related complications (venous congestion and partial flap necrosis). All patients fully recovered over a mean +/- standard deviation follow-up of 2.4 +/- 1.5 years. Conclusions: Abdominal flaps can be an effective and simple alternative technique for inguinal coverage with reproducible outcomes. In our experience, the main indications are a compromised deep femoral artery network and poor thigh tissue quality. Relative contraindications, such as previous open abdominal surgery, should be considered.

BACKGROUND: The reliability of the registered ligation level of the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) in the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry has been questioned. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate this parameter in the registry by comparing the registered ligation levels with a postoperative computed tomography angiography (CT-angiography) in patients operated for rectal cancer. METHODS: Patients operated for rectal cancer at two Swedish university hospitals were prospectively included between December 2016 and December 2019. At the 1-year postoperative follow-up, an additional CT-angiography was performed and independently examined by two radiologists. The radiological assessment of the ligation level was compared to registry data, using different measures of agreement. RESULTS: A total of 94 patients were included, 55 (59%) were men and 39 (41%) women. All patients underwent abdominal resection: conventional or robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery, n=56 (60%), or open resection, n=38 (40%). The ligation level as assessed on CT-angiography was high in 29 (31%) patients and low in 65 (69%). The registered level of ligation of the IMA and the radiological assessment of the CT-angiographies were consistent in 77/94 cases, demonstrating an 82% agreement and a sensitivity and specificity of 86% and 72%, respectively. The estimated Kappa value was 0.58, reaching 0.64 after prevalence bias adjustment. CONCLUSION: This study showed that CT-angiography can be used to evaluate the reliability of the registered ligation level in the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry. The demonstrated agreement between the registry and postoperative CT-angiography was moderate to good. This discrepancy impacts registry-based research using IMA ligation data and may ultimately influence surgical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials identifier NCT03875612.

OBJECTIVE: Abdominal aortic graft and endograft infection (AGI) is primarily treated by resection of the infected graft and restoration of distal perfusion through extra-anatomic bypass (EAB) or in situ reconstruction/repair (ISR). The aim of this study was to compare these surgical strategies in a nationwide multicentre retrospective cohort study. METHODS: The Swedish Vascular Registry (Swedvasc) was used to identify surgically treated abdominal AGIs in Sweden between January 1995 and May 2017. The primary aim was to compare short and long term survival, as well as complications for EAB and ISR. RESULTS: Some 126 radically surgically treated AGI patients were identified - 102 graft infections and 24 endograft infections - treated by EAB: 71 and ISR: 55 (23 neo-aorto-iliac systems, NAISs). No differences in early 30 day (EAB 81.7% vs. ISR 76.4%, p = .46), or long term five year survival (48.2% vs. 49.9%, p = .87) were identified. There was no survival difference comparing NAIS to other ISR strategies. The frequency of recurrent graft infection during follow up was similar: EAB 20.3% vs. ISR 17.0% (p = .56). Survival and re-infection rates of the new conduit did not differ between NAIS and other ISR strategies. Age ≥ 75 years (odds ratio [OR] 4.0, confidence interval [CI] 1.1 - 14.8), coronary artery disease (OR 4.2, CI 1.2 - 15.1) and post-operative circulatory complications (OR 5.2, CI 1.2 - 22.5) were associated with early death. Prolonged antimicrobial therapy (> 3 months) was associated with reduced long term mortality (HR 0.3, CI 0.1 - 0.9). CONCLUSION: In this nationwide multicentre study comparing outcomes of radically treated AGI, no differences in survival or re-infection rate could be identified comparing EAB and ISR.

Background: Groin wounds occurring after vascular surgical site infection, oncologic resection, or occasionally orthopedic surgery and trauma may represent a surgical challenge. Reconstruction of these defects by the usual workhorse flaps may be contraindicated following previous surgery and in patients with lower limb lymphedema or extreme morbidity. Methods: This study included 15 consecutive patients presenting with inguinal wounds after vascular or general surgery that required debridement and soft tissue coverage. All cases had absolute or relative contraindications to conventional reconstructive techniques, including a compromised deep femoral artery network, limb lymphedema, scarring of potential flap harvesting sites, or poor overall condition. Abdominal adipocutaneous excess enabled the performance of adipocutaneous advancement flaps in an abdominoplasty-like fashion. Immediate and long-term outcomes were analyzed. Results: Soft tissue coverage was effective in all cases. Two patients required re-intervention due to flap-related complications (venous congestion and partial flap necrosis). All patients fully recovered over a mean +/- standard deviation follow-up of 2.4 +/- 1.5 years. Conclusions: Abdominal flaps can be an effective and simple alternative technique for inguinal coverage with reproducible outcomes. In our experience, the main indications are a compromised deep femoral artery network and poor thigh tissue quality. Relative contraindications, such as previous open abdominal surgery, should be considered.

Objective: Abdominal aortic graft and endograft infection (AGI) is primarily treated by resection of the infected graft and restoration of distal perfusion through extra-anatomic bypass (EAB) or in situ reconstruction/repair (ISR). The aim of this study was to compare these surgical strategies in a nationwide multicentre retrospective cohort study. Methods: The Swedish Vascular Registry (Swedvasc) was used to identify surgically treated abdominal AGIs in Sweden between January 1995 and May 2017. The primary aim was to compare short and long term survival, as well as complications for EAB and ISR. Results: Some 126 radically surgically treated AGI patients were identified – 102 graft infections and 24 endograft infections – treated by EAB: 71 and ISR: 55 (23 neo-aorto-iliac systems, NAISs). No differences in early 30 day (EAB 81.7% vs. ISR 76.4%, p =.46), or long term five year survival (48.2% vs. 49.9%, p =.87) were identified. There was no survival difference comparing NAIS to other ISR strategies. The frequency of recurrent graft infection during follow up was similar: EAB 20.3% vs. ISR 17.0% (p =.56). Survival and re-infection rates of the new conduit did not differ between NAIS and other ISR strategies. Age ≥ 75 years (odds ratio [OR] 4.0, confidence interval [CI] 1.1 – 14.8), coronary artery disease (OR 4.2, CI 1.2 – 15.1) and post-operative circulatory complications (OR 5.2, CI 1.2 – 22.5) were associated with early death. Prolonged antimicrobial therapy (> 3 months) was associated with reduced long term mortality (HR 0.3, CI 0.1 – 0.9). Conclusion: In this nationwide multicentre study comparing outcomes of radically treated AGI, no differences in survival or re-infection rate could be identified comparing EAB and ISR.

Objective: Abdominal aortic graft and endograft infection (AGI) is primarily treated by resection of the infected graft and restoration of distal perfusion through extra-anatomic bypass (EAB) or in situ reconstruction/repair (ISR). The aim of this study was to compare these surgical strategies in a nationwide multicentre retrospective cohort study. Methods: The Swedish Vascular Registry (Swedvasc) was used to identify surgically treated abdominal AGIs in Sweden between January 1995 and May 2017. The primary aim was to compare short and long term survival, as well as complications for EAB and ISR. Results: Some 126 radically surgically treated AGI patients were identified – 102 graft infections and 24 endograft infections – treated by EAB: 71 and ISR: 55 (23 neo-aorto-iliac systems, NAISs). No differences in early 30 day (EAB 81.7% vs. ISR 76.4%, p =.46), or long term five year survival (48.2% vs. 49.9%, p =.87) were identified. There was no survival difference comparing NAIS to other ISR strategies. The frequency of recurrent graft infection during follow up was similar: EAB 20.3% vs. ISR 17.0% (p =.56). Survival and re-infection rates of the new conduit did not differ between NAIS and other ISR strategies. Age ≥ 75 years (odds ratio [OR] 4.0, confidence interval [CI] 1.1 – 14.8), coronary artery disease (OR 4.2, CI 1.2 – 15.1) and post-operative circulatory complications (OR 5.2, CI 1.2 – 22.5) were associated with early death. Prolonged antimicrobial therapy (> 3 months) was associated with reduced long term mortality (HR 0.3, CI 0.1 – 0.9). Conclusion: In this nationwide multicentre study comparing outcomes of radically treated AGI, no differences in survival or re-infection rate could be identified comparing EAB and ISR.

BACKGROUND: The reliability of the registered ligation level of the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) in the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry has been questioned. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate this parameter in the registry by comparing the registered ligation levels with a postoperative computed tomography angiography (CT-angiography) in patients operated for rectal cancer. METHODS: Patients operated for rectal cancer at two Swedish university hospitals were prospectively included between December 2016 and December 2019. At the 1-year postoperative follow-up, an additional CT-angiography was performed and independently examined by two radiologists. The radiological assessment of the ligation level was compared to registry data, using different measures of agreement. RESULTS: A total of 94 patients were included, 55 (59%) were men and 39 (41%) women. All patients underwent abdominal resection: conventional or robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery, n=56 (60%), or open resection, n=38 (40%). The ligation level as assessed on CT-angiography was high in 29 (31%) patients and low in 65 (69%). The registered level of ligation of the IMA and the radiological assessment of the CT-angiographies were consistent in 77/94 cases, demonstrating an 82% agreement and a sensitivity and specificity of 86% and 72%, respectively. The estimated Kappa value was 0.58, reaching 0.64 after prevalence bias adjustment. CONCLUSION: This study showed that CT-angiography can be used to evaluate the reliability of the registered ligation level in the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry. The demonstrated agreement between the registry and postoperative CT-angiography was moderate to good. This discrepancy impacts registry-based research using IMA ligation data and may ultimately influence surgical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials identifier NCT03875612.

OBJECTIVE: Abdominal aortic graft and endograft infection (AGI) is primarily treated by resection of the infected graft and restoration of distal perfusion through extra-anatomic bypass (EAB) or in situ reconstruction/repair (ISR). The aim of this study was to compare these surgical strategies in a nationwide multicentre retrospective cohort study. METHODS: The Swedish Vascular Registry (Swedvasc) was used to identify surgically treated abdominal AGIs in Sweden between January 1995 and May 2017. The primary aim was to compare short and long term survival, as well as complications for EAB and ISR. RESULTS: Some 126 radically surgically treated AGI patients were identified - 102 graft infections and 24 endograft infections - treated by EAB: 71 and ISR: 55 (23 neo-aorto-iliac systems, NAISs). No differences in early 30 day (EAB 81.7% vs. ISR 76.4%, p = .46), or long term five year survival (48.2% vs. 49.9%, p = .87) were identified. There was no survival difference comparing NAIS to other ISR strategies. The frequency of recurrent graft infection during follow up was similar: EAB 20.3% vs. ISR 17.0% (p = .56). Survival and re-infection rates of the new conduit did not differ between NAIS and other ISR strategies. Age ≥ 75 years (odds ratio [OR] 4.0, confidence interval [CI] 1.1 - 14.8), coronary artery disease (OR 4.2, CI 1.2 - 15.1) and post-operative circulatory complications (OR 5.2, CI 1.2 - 22.5) were associated with early death. Prolonged antimicrobial therapy (> 3 months) was associated with reduced long term mortality (HR 0.3, CI 0.1 - 0.9). CONCLUSION: In this nationwide multicentre study comparing outcomes of radically treated AGI, no differences in survival or re-infection rate could be identified comparing EAB and ISR.

BACKGROUND: The reliability of the registered ligation level of the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) in the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry has been questioned. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate this parameter in the registry by comparing the registered ligation levels with a postoperative computed tomography angiography (CT-angiography) in patients operated for rectal cancer. METHODS: Patients operated for rectal cancer at two Swedish university hospitals were prospectively included between December 2016 and December 2019. At the 1-year postoperative follow-up, an additional CT-angiography was performed and independently examined by two radiologists. The radiological assessment of the ligation level was compared to registry data, using different measures of agreement. RESULTS: A total of 94 patients were included, 55 (59%) were men and 39 (41%) women. All patients underwent abdominal resection: conventional or robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery, n=56 (60%), or open resection, n=38 (40%). The ligation level as assessed on CT-angiography was high in 29 (31%) patients and low in 65 (69%). The registered level of ligation of the IMA and the radiological assessment of the CT-angiographies were consistent in 77/94 cases, demonstrating an 82% agreement and a sensitivity and specificity of 86% and 72%, respectively. The estimated Kappa value was 0.58, reaching 0.64 after prevalence bias adjustment. CONCLUSION: This study showed that CT-angiography can be used to evaluate the reliability of the registered ligation level in the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry. The demonstrated agreement between the registry and postoperative CT-angiography was moderate to good. This discrepancy impacts registry-based research using IMA ligation data and may ultimately influence surgical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials identifier NCT03875612.

OBJECTIVE: Abdominal aortic graft and endograft infection (AGI) is primarily treated by resection of the infected graft and restoration of distal perfusion through extra-anatomic bypass (EAB) or in situ reconstruction/repair (ISR). The aim of this study was to compare these surgical strategies in a nationwide multicentre retrospective cohort study. METHODS: The Swedish Vascular Registry (Swedvasc) was used to identify surgically treated abdominal AGIs in Sweden between January 1995 and May 2017. The primary aim was to compare short and long term survival, as well as complications for EAB and ISR. RESULTS: Some 126 radically surgically treated AGI patients were identified - 102 graft infections and 24 endograft infections - treated by EAB: 71 and ISR: 55 (23 neo-aorto-iliac systems, NAISs). No differences in early 30 day (EAB 81.7% vs. ISR 76.4%, p = .46), or long term five year survival (48.2% vs. 49.9%, p = .87) were identified. There was no survival difference comparing NAIS to other ISR strategies. The frequency of recurrent graft infection during follow up was similar: EAB 20.3% vs. ISR 17.0% (p = .56). Survival and re-infection rates of the new conduit did not differ between NAIS and other ISR strategies. Age ≥ 75 years (odds ratio [OR] 4.0, confidence interval [CI] 1.1 - 14.8), coronary artery disease (OR 4.2, CI 1.2 - 15.1) and post-operative circulatory complications (OR 5.2, CI 1.2 - 22.5) were associated with early death. Prolonged antimicrobial therapy (> 3 months) was associated with reduced long term mortality (HR 0.3, CI 0.1 - 0.9). CONCLUSION: In this nationwide multicentre study comparing outcomes of radically treated AGI, no differences in survival or re-infection rate could be identified comparing EAB and ISR.

Background: Groin wounds occurring after vascular surgical site infection, oncologic resection, or occasionally orthopedic surgery and trauma may represent a surgical challenge. Reconstruction of these defects by the usual workhorse flaps may be contraindicated following previous surgery and in patients with lower limb lymphedema or extreme morbidity. Methods: This study included 15 consecutive patients presenting with inguinal wounds after vascular or general surgery that required debridement and soft tissue coverage. All cases had absolute or relative contraindications to conventional reconstructive techniques, including a compromised deep femoral artery network, limb lymphedema, scarring of potential flap harvesting sites, or poor overall condition. Abdominal adipocutaneous excess enabled the performance of adipocutaneous advancement flaps in an abdominoplasty-like fashion. Immediate and long-term outcomes were analyzed. Results: Soft tissue coverage was effective in all cases. Two patients required re-intervention due to flap-related complications (venous congestion and partial flap necrosis). All patients fully recovered over a mean +/- standard deviation follow-up of 2.4 +/- 1.5 years. Conclusions: Abdominal flaps can be an effective and simple alternative technique for inguinal coverage with reproducible outcomes. In our experience, the main indications are a compromised deep femoral artery network and poor thigh tissue quality. Relative contraindications, such as previous open abdominal surgery, should be considered.

BACKGROUND: The reliability of the registered ligation level of the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) in the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry has been questioned. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate this parameter in the registry by comparing the registered ligation levels with a postoperative computed tomography angiography (CT-angiography) in patients operated for rectal cancer. METHODS: Patients operated for rectal cancer at two Swedish university hospitals were prospectively included between December 2016 and December 2019. At the 1-year postoperative follow-up, an additional CT-angiography was performed and independently examined by two radiologists. The radiological assessment of the ligation level was compared to registry data, using different measures of agreement. RESULTS: A total of 94 patients were included, 55 (59%) were men and 39 (41%) women. All patients underwent abdominal resection: conventional or robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery, n=56 (60%), or open resection, n=38 (40%). The ligation level as assessed on CT-angiography was high in 29 (31%) patients and low in 65 (69%). The registered level of ligation of the IMA and the radiological assessment of the CT-angiographies were consistent in 77/94 cases, demonstrating an 82% agreement and a sensitivity and specificity of 86% and 72%, respectively. The estimated Kappa value was 0.58, reaching 0.64 after prevalence bias adjustment. CONCLUSION: This study showed that CT-angiography can be used to evaluate the reliability of the registered ligation level in the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry. The demonstrated agreement between the registry and postoperative CT-angiography was moderate to good. This discrepancy impacts registry-based research using IMA ligation data and may ultimately influence surgical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials identifier NCT03875612., Funding Agencies:Cancer Research Foundation in Northern Sweden Umeå University

Background: The absence of recommendations for the systematic collection of microbiological specimens to help determine the management of infective native aortic aneurysms (INAAs) may lead to diagnostic difficulty and suboptimal antibiotic treatment. In this review, we attempt to establish recommendations in the field by identifying current strategies for the diagnosis and management of INAA and comparing them with those for infective endocarditis (IE). Methods: A systematic literature review of Medline and ScienceDirect databases was performed using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses)methodology to identify guidelines for the management of INAA. These guidelines were scrutinized for recommendations concerning the procurement of microbiological specimens according to a defined protocol and involvement of specialists in infectious diseases and compared with current practice for IE. Results: Three guidelines were found to have sections dedicated to INAA. Of these, none provided any recommendations concerning the procurement of microbiological specimens for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes. The guidelines from the American Heart Association recommend that patients with INAA should be managed by a team of specialists (including representation from the fields of infectious diseases and/or microbiology). Current guidelines for the investigation and management of IE provide detailed recommendations concerning the procurement of microbiological specimens for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes, as well as the involvement of specialists in infectious medicine in multidisciplinary management. Conclusion: This article emphasizes the absence of recommendations for the optimal diagnosis and management of patients with INAAs. While specific research is required to create evidence-based recommendations, application of strategies to identify microorganisms and multidisciplinary team management derived from the management of IE may be bo

Document recommendation systems for locating relevant literature have mostly relied on methods developed a decade ago. This is largely due to the lack of a large offline gold-standard benchmark of relevant documents that cover a variety of research fields such that newly developed literature search techniques can be compared, improved and translated into practice. To overcome this bottleneck, we have established the RElevant LIterature SearcH consortium consisting of more than 1500 scientists from 84 countries, who have collectively annotated the relevance of over 180 000 PubMed-listed articles with regard to their respective seed (input) article/s. The majority of annotations were contributed by highly experienced, original authors of the seed articles. The collected data cover 76% of all unique PubMed Medical Subject Headings descriptors. No systematic biases were observed across different experience levels, research fields or time spent on annotations. More importantly, annotations of the same document pairs contributed by different scientists were highly concordant. We further show that the three representative baseline methods used to generate recommended articles for evaluation (Okapi Best Matching 25, Term Frequency-Inverse Document Frequency and PubMed Related Articles) had similar overall performances. Additionally, we found that these methods each tend to produce distinct collections of recommended articles, suggesting that a hybrid method may be required to completely capture all relevant articles. The established database server located at https://relishdb.ict.griffith.edu.au is freely available for the downloading of annotation data and the blind testing of new methods. We expect that this benchmark will be useful for stimulating the development of new powerful techniques for title and title/abstract-based search engines for relevant articles in biomedical science.

Document recommendation systems for locating relevant literature have mostly relied on methods developed a decade ago. This is largely due to the lack of a large offline gold-standard benchmark of relevant documents that cover a variety of research fields such that newly developed literature search techniques can be compared, improved and translated into practice. To overcome this bottleneck, we have established the RElevant LIterature SearcH consortium consisting of more than 1500 scientists from 84 countries, who have collectively annotated the relevance of over 180 000 PubMed-listed articles with regard to their respective seed (input) article/s. The majority of annotations were contributed by highly experienced, original authors of the seed articles. The collected data cover 76% of all unique PubMed Medical Subject Headings descriptors. No systematic biases were observed across different experience levels, research fields or time spent on annotations. More importantly, annotations of the same document pairs contributed by different scientists were highly concordant. We further show that the three representative baseline methods used to generate recommended articles for evaluation (Okapi Best Matching 25, Term Frequency-Inverse Document Frequency and PubMed Related Articles) had similar overall performances. Additionally, we found that these methods each tend to produce distinct collections of recommended articles, suggesting that a hybrid method may be required to completely capture all relevant articles. The established database server located at https://relishdb.ict.griffith.edu.au is freely available for the downloading of annotation data and the blind testing of new methods. We expect that this benchmark will be useful for stimulating the development of new powerful techniques for title and title/abstract-based search engines for relevant articles in biomedical research., For complete list of authors see http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/database/baz085

Objectives: The aim of this systematic literature review was to compile an updated overview of mycotic aortic aneurysm (MAA) treatment and outcomes. Methods: A systematic literature review was performed using the search terms mycotic and infected aortic aneurysms in the MEDLINE and ScienceDirect databases, published between January 2000 and September 2018. Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, articles were scrutinised regarding surgical technique, aortic segment involved, pre- and post-operative antibiotic regimens, survival and infection related complications (IRCs), and factors associated with adverse or favourable outcomes. Results: Twenty-eight studies, with a total of 963 patients, were included. All publications were observational, retrospective studies. Patient and study heterogeneity, along with missing data, precluded meta-analyses. Overall treatment consisted of open surgical repair (OSR; n = 556 [58%]), endovascular aortic repair (EVAR; n = 373 [39%]), and medical treatment alone (n = 34 [3%]). OSR was the dominant surgical technique prior to 2010, shifting to EVAR thereafter. For MAAs located in the abdominal aorta, EVAR was associated with better short term survival than OSR. Antibiotic treatment for more than six months post-operatively was associated with better survival, but there was no consensus on the length of treatment. MAAs were complicated by IRCs in 21%, irrespective of surgical technique, of which 46%-70% were fatal. The most consistently reported factors associated with adverse outcomes were increasing age, rupture, suprarenal abdominal aneurysm location, and non-Salmonella positive culture. Conclusions: With few exceptions, the literature mainly consists of small, retrospective single centre studies. Standardised reporting is needed to increase comparability of studies. EVAR appears to be associated with superior short term survival without late disadvantages, compared with OSR. T

Aim The incidence of mesenteric ischaemia after resection for rectal cancer has not been investigated in a population‐based setting. The use of high ligation of the inferior mesenteric artery might cause such ischaemia, as the bowel left in situ depends on collateral blood supply after a high tie. Method The Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry was used to identify all patients subjected to an abdominal resection for rectal cancer during the years 2007–2017 inclusive. Mesenteric ischaemia within the first 30 postoperative days was recorded, classified as either stoma necrosis or colonic necrosis. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for mesenteric ischaemia in relation to high tie, with adjustment for confounding. Results Some 14 657 patients were included, of whom 59 (0.40%) had a reoperation for any type of mesenteric ischaemia, divided into 34 and 25 cases of stoma necrosis and colonic necrosis, respectively. Compared with patients who did not require reoperation for mesenteric ischaemia following rectal cancer surgery, the proportion having high tie was greater (54.2% vs 38.5%; P = 0.032). The adjusted OR for reoperation due to any mesenteric ischaemia with high tie was 2.26 (95% CI 1.34–3.79), while the corresponding estimates for stoma and colonic necrosis, respectively, were 1.60 (95% CI 0.81–3.17) and 3.69 (95% CI 1.57–8.66). Conclusion The incidence of reoperation for mesenteric ischaemia after abdominal resection for rectal cancer is low, but the use of a high tie might increase the risk of colonic necrosis demanding surgery.

Objective: Mycotic aortic aneurysms are rare, life threatening, and complex. This nationwide study aimed to assess outcome after repair of mycotic thoracic aortic aneurysms (MTAAs). Methods: Patients treated in Sweden for MTAAs between 2000 and 2016 were identified in the Swedish vascular registry (2010-16) and local patient registries (2000-09). Primary outcome was survival, and secondary outcomes included surgical strategy, rate of infection related complications (IRC), and re-operations. Results: Fifty-two patients (median age 71 +/- 8.1 years; 28 [54%] men, 13 [25%] ruptured) were identified (3.6% of all thoracic aortic aneurysm repairs in Sweden). Aneurysm location was aortic arch (n = 6; 11%), descending aorta (n = 42; 81%), and multiple locations (n = 4; 8%). Twenty-nine (56%) patients had positive cultures; the most prevalent agent was Staphylococcus aureus (n = 16; 31%). Operative techniques included thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR; n = 35 [67%]), fenestrated/branched TEVAR (n = 8; 15%), hybrid repair (n = 7; 14%), and open patch repair (n = 2; 4%). Survival was 92% (95% confidence interval [CI] 88-96) at 30 days, 88% (95% CI 84-93) at three months, 78% (73-84) at one year, and 71% (64-77) at five years. The mean follow up among survivors (> 90 days) was 45 months (range 4-216 months). Antibiotics were administered for a median of 15 weeks (range 0-220 weeks). IRCs occurred in nine patients (17%): sepsis (n = 3), graft infection (n = 3), recurrent mycotic aneurysm (n = 1), aorto-oesophageal/bronchial fistula (n = 2). Six (67%) IRCs were fatal; 80% occurred within the first year. Re-operations were performed in nine patients (17%). Conclusions: TEVAR was often used as treatment for MTAAs, with acceptable short- and long-term survival when compared with open cohorts in the literature. IRCs are of concern and warrant follow up and long-term antibiotic treatment.

Background/Aim: This study aimed to evaluate the literature regarding surgical etiology demanding inguinal reconstructive surgery, associated reconstructive techniques and outcomes. Materials and Methods: A systematic literature search was performed according to the PRISMA statement between 1996-2016. Results: A total of 64 articles were included, comprising 816 patients. Two main subgroups of patients were identified: Oncological resections (n = 255, 31%), and vascular surgery (n = 538, 66%). Oncological resection inguinal defects were treated with pedicled myocutaneous flaps (n = 166, 65%), fasciocutaneous flaps (77, 31%), muscle flaps (7, 3%) and direct closure (3, 1%). Vascular surgery complications were treated with muscle flaps (n = 513, 95%). Complications for the respective subgroup (oncological resections, vascular surgery) were: infection (24%, 14%), seroma (34%, 7.5%), flap dehiscence/delayed healing (20.6%, 40.8%,). The total reintervention rate was 20%. Conclusion: Reconstruction of inguinal defects should be addressed on a case-by-case basis. Myocutaneous flaps were favoured after oncological resections, while muscle flaps were preferred after vascular surgery., Karl Sörelius and Luigi Schiraldi contributed equally to this study.

Objective: Mycotic aortic aneurysms are rare, life threatening, and complex. This nationwide study aimed to assess outcome after repair of mycotic thoracic aortic aneurysms (MTAAs). Methods: Patients treated in Sweden for MTAAs between 2000 and 2016 were identified in the Swedish vascular registry (2010–16) and local patient registries (2000–09). Primary outcome was survival, and secondary outcomes included surgical strategy, rate of infection related complications (IRC), and re-operations. Results: Fifty-two patients (median age 71 ± 8.1 years; 28 [54%] men, 13 [25%] ruptured) were identified (3.6% of all thoracic aortic aneurysm repairs in Sweden). Aneurysm location was aortic arch (n = 6; 11%), descending aorta (n = 42; 81%), and multiple locations (n = 4; 8%). Twenty-nine (56%) patients had positive cultures; the most prevalent agent was Staphylococcus aureus (n = 16; 31%). Operative techniques included thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR; n = 35 [67%]), fenestrated/branched TEVAR (n = 8; 15%), hybrid repair (n = 7; 14%), and open patch repair (n = 2; 4%). Survival was 92% (95% confidence interval [CI] 88–96) at 30 days, 88% (95% CI 84–93) at three months, 78% (73–84) at one year, and 71% (64–77) at five years. The mean follow up among survivors (> 90 days) was 45 months (range 4–216 months). Antibiotics were administered for a median of 15 weeks (range 0–220 weeks). IRCs occurred in nine patients (17%): sepsis (n = 3), graft infection (n = 3), recurrent mycotic aneurysm (n = 1), aorto-oesophageal/bronchial fistula (n = 2). Six (67%) IRCs were fatal; 80% occurred within the first year. Re-operations were performed in nine patients (17%). Conclusions: TEVAR was often used as treatment for MTAAs, with acceptable short- and long-term survival when compared with open cohorts in the literature. IRCs are of concern and warrant follow up and long-term antibiotic treatment.

Document recommendation systems for locating relevant literature have mostly relied on methods developed a decade ago. This is largely due to the lack of a large offline gold-standard benchmark of relevant documents that cover a variety of research fields such that newly developed literature search techniques can be compared, improved and translated into practice. To overcome this bottleneck, we have established the RElevant LIterature SearcH consortium consisting of more than 1500 scientists from 84 countries, who have collectively annotated the relevance of over 180 000 PubMed-listed articles with regard to their respective seed (input) article/s. The majority of annotations were contributed by highly experienced, original authors of the seed articles. The collected data cover 76% of all unique PubMed Medical Subject Headings descriptors. No systematic biases were observed across different experience levels, research fields or time spent on annotations. More importantly, annotations of the same document pairs contributed by different scientists were highly concordant. We further show that the three representative baseline methods used to generate recommended articles for evaluation (Okapi Best Matching 25, Term Frequency-Inverse Document Frequency and PubMed Related Articles) had similar overall performances. Additionally, we found that these methods each tend to produce distinct collections of recommended articles, suggesting that a hybrid method may be required to completely capture all relevant articles. The established database server located at https://relishdb.ict.griffith.edu.au is freely available for the downloading of annotation data and the blind testing of new methods. We expect that this benchmark will be useful for stimulating the development of new powerful techniques for title and title/abstract-based search engines for relevant articles in biomedical research., For complete list of authors see http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/database/baz085

Document recommendation systems for locating relevant literature have mostly relied on methods developed a decade ago. This is largely due to the lack of a large offline gold-standard benchmark of relevant documents that cover a variety of research fields such that newly developed literature search techniques can be compared, improved and translated into practice. To overcome this bottleneck, we have established the RElevant LIterature SearcH consortium consisting of more than 1500 scientists from 84 countries, who have collectively annotated the relevance of over 180 000 PubMed-listed articles with regard to their respective seed (input) article/s. The majority of annotations were contributed by highly experienced, original authors of the seed articles. The collected data cover 76% of all unique PubMed Medical Subject Headings descriptors. No systematic biases were observed across different experience levels, research fields or time spent on annotations. More importantly, annotations of the same document pairs contributed by different scientists were highly concordant. We further show that the three representative baseline methods used to generate recommended articles for evaluation (Okapi Best Matching 25, Term Frequency-Inverse Document Frequency and PubMed Related Articles) had similar overall performances. Additionally, we found that these methods each tend to produce distinct collections of recommended articles, suggesting that a hybrid method may be required to completely capture all relevant articles. The established database server located at https://relishdb.ict.griffith.edu.au is freely available for the downloading of annotation data and the blind testing of new methods. We expect that this benchmark will be useful for stimulating the development of new powerful techniques for title and title/abstract-based search engines for relevant articles in biomedical research., For complete list of authors see http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/database/baz085