Search

Contains fulltext : 245652.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), BACKGROUND: Heparin is used worldwide for 70 years during all non-cardiac arterial procedures (NCAP) to reduce thrombo-embolic complications (TEC). But heparin also increases blood loss causing possible harm for the patient. Heparin has an unpredictable effect in the individual patient. The activated clotting time (ACT) can measure the effect of heparin. Currently, this ACT is not measured during NCAP as the standard of care, contrary to during cardiac interventions, open and endovascular. A RCT will evaluate if ACT-guided heparinization results in less TEC than the current standard: a single bolus of 5000 IU of heparin and no measurements at all. A goal ACT of 200-220 s should be reached during ACT-guided heparinization and this should decrease (mortality caused by) TEC, while not increasing major bleeding complications. This RCT will be executed during open abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) surgery, as this is a standardized procedure throughout Europe. METHODS: Seven hundred fifty patients, who will undergo open AAA repair of an aneurysm originating below the superior mesenteric artery, will be randomised in 2 treatment arms: 5000 IU of heparin and no ACT measurements and no additional doses of heparin, or a protocol of 100 IU/kg bolus of heparin and ACT measurements after 5 min, and then every 30 min. The goal ACT is 200-220 s. If the ACT after 5 min is < 180 s, 60 IU/kg will be administered; if the ACT is between 180 and 200 s, 30 IU/kg. If the ACT is > 220 s, no extra heparin is given, and the ACT is measured after 30 min and then the same protocol is applied. The expected incidence for the combined endpoint of TEC and mortality is 19% for the 5000 IU group and 11% for the ACT-guided group. DISCUSSION: The ACTION-1 trial is an international RCT during open AAA surgery, designed to show superiority of ACT-guided heparinization compared to the current standard of a single bolus of 5000 IU of heparin. A significant reduction in TEC and mortality, without more major

Contains fulltext : 245652.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), BACKGROUND: Heparin is used worldwide for 70 years during all non-cardiac arterial procedures (NCAP) to reduce thrombo-embolic complications (TEC). But heparin also increases blood loss causing possible harm for the patient. Heparin has an unpredictable effect in the individual patient. The activated clotting time (ACT) can measure the effect of heparin. Currently, this ACT is not measured during NCAP as the standard of care, contrary to during cardiac interventions, open and endovascular. A RCT will evaluate if ACT-guided heparinization results in less TEC than the current standard: a single bolus of 5000 IU of heparin and no measurements at all. A goal ACT of 200-220 s should be reached during ACT-guided heparinization and this should decrease (mortality caused by) TEC, while not increasing major bleeding complications. This RCT will be executed during open abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) surgery, as this is a standardized procedure throughout Europe. METHODS: Seven hundred fifty patients, who will undergo open AAA repair of an aneurysm originating below the superior mesenteric artery, will be randomised in 2 treatment arms: 5000 IU of heparin and no ACT measurements and no additional doses of heparin, or a protocol of 100 IU/kg bolus of heparin and ACT measurements after 5 min, and then every 30 min. The goal ACT is 200-220 s. If the ACT after 5 min is < 180 s, 60 IU/kg will be administered; if the ACT is between 180 and 200 s, 30 IU/kg. If the ACT is > 220 s, no extra heparin is given, and the ACT is measured after 30 min and then the same protocol is applied. The expected incidence for the combined endpoint of TEC and mortality is 19% for the 5000 IU group and 11% for the ACT-guided group. DISCUSSION: The ACTION-1 trial is an international RCT during open AAA surgery, designed to show superiority of ACT-guided heparinization compared to the current standard of a single bolus of 5000 IU of heparin. A significant reduction in TEC and mortality, without more major

Contains fulltext : 245652.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), BACKGROUND: Heparin is used worldwide for 70 years during all non-cardiac arterial procedures (NCAP) to reduce thrombo-embolic complications (TEC). But heparin also increases blood loss causing possible harm for the patient. Heparin has an unpredictable effect in the individual patient. The activated clotting time (ACT) can measure the effect of heparin. Currently, this ACT is not measured during NCAP as the standard of care, contrary to during cardiac interventions, open and endovascular. A RCT will evaluate if ACT-guided heparinization results in less TEC than the current standard: a single bolus of 5000 IU of heparin and no measurements at all. A goal ACT of 200-220 s should be reached during ACT-guided heparinization and this should decrease (mortality caused by) TEC, while not increasing major bleeding complications. This RCT will be executed during open abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) surgery, as this is a standardized procedure throughout Europe. METHODS: Seven hundred fifty patients, who will undergo open AAA repair of an aneurysm originating below the superior mesenteric artery, will be randomised in 2 treatment arms: 5000 IU of heparin and no ACT measurements and no additional doses of heparin, or a protocol of 100 IU/kg bolus of heparin and ACT measurements after 5 min, and then every 30 min. The goal ACT is 200-220 s. If the ACT after 5 min is < 180 s, 60 IU/kg will be administered; if the ACT is between 180 and 200 s, 30 IU/kg. If the ACT is > 220 s, no extra heparin is given, and the ACT is measured after 30 min and then the same protocol is applied. The expected incidence for the combined endpoint of TEC and mortality is 19% for the 5000 IU group and 11% for the ACT-guided group. DISCUSSION: The ACTION-1 trial is an international RCT during open AAA surgery, designed to show superiority of ACT-guided heparinization compared to the current standard of a single bolus of 5000 IU of heparin. A significant reduction in TEC and mortality, without more major

Background: The erosion of the early mortality advantage of elective endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) compared with open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm remains without a satisfactory explanation. Methods: An individual-patient data meta-analysis of four multicentre randomized trials of EVAR versus open repair was conducted to a prespecified analysis plan, reporting on mortality, aneurysm-related mortality and reintervention. Results: The analysis included 2783 patients, with 14 245 person-years of follow-up (median 5·5 years). Early (0–6 months after randomization) mortality was lower in the EVAR groups (46 of 1393 versus 73 of 1390 deaths; pooled hazard ratio 0·61, 95 per cent c.i. 0·42 to 0·89; P = 0·010), primarily because 30-day operative mortality was lower in the EVAR groups (16 deaths versus 40 for open repair; pooled odds ratio 0·40, 95 per cent c.i. 0·22 to 0·74). Later (within 3 years) the survival curves converged, remaining converged to 8 years. Beyond 3 years, aneurysm-related mortality was significantly higher in the EVAR groups (19 deaths versus 3 for open repair; pooled hazard ratio 5·16, 1·49 to 17·89; P = 0·010). Patients with moderate renal dysfunction or previous coronary artery disease had no early survival advantage under EVAR. Those with peripheral artery disease had lower mortality under open repair (39 deaths versus 62 for EVAR; P = 0·022) in the period from 6 months to 4 years after randomization. Conclusion: The early survival advantage in the EVAR group, and its subsequent erosion, were confirmed. Over 5 years, patients of marginal fitness had no early survival advantage from EVAR compared with open repair. Aneurysm-related mortality and patients with low ankle : brachial pressure index contributed to the erosion of the early survival advantage for the EVAR group. Trial registration numbers: EVAR-1, ISRCTN55703451; DREAM (Dutch Randomized Endovascular Aneurysm Management), NCT00421330; ACE (Anévrysme

Item does not contain fulltext, OBJECTIVE: Randomized trials have shown an initial survival benefit of endovascular over conventional open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair but no long-term difference up to 6 years after repair. Longer follow-up may be required to demonstrate the cumulative negative impact on survival of higher reintervention rates associated with endovascular repair. METHODS: We updated the results of the Dutch Randomized Endovascular Aneurysm Management (DREAM) trial, a multicenter, randomized controlled trial comparing open with endovascular aneurysm repair, up to 15 years of follow-up. Survival and reinterventions were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. Causes of death and secondary interventions were compared by use of an events per person-year analysis. RESULTS: There were 178 patients randomized to open and 173 to endovascular repair. Twelve years after randomization, the cumulative overall survival rates were 42.2% for open and 38.5% for endovascular repair, for a difference of 3.7 percentage points (95% confidence interval, -6.7 to 14.1; P = .48). The cumulative rates of freedom from reintervention were 78.9% for open repair and 62.2% for endovascular repair, for a difference of 16.7 percentage points (95% confidence interval, 5.8-27.6; P = .01). No differences were observed in causes of death. Cardiovascular and malignant disease account for the majority of deaths after prolonged follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: During 12 years of follow-up, there was no survival difference between patients who underwent open or endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, despite a continuously increasing number of reinterventions in the endovascular repair group. Endograft durability and the need for continued endograft surveillance remain key issues.

Item does not contain fulltext, Epidemiological studies show that type 2 diabetes (T2D) is inversely associated with intracranial aneurysms (IA) and abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA). Although adiposity has not been considered a risk factor for IA, there have been inconsistent reports relating adiposity to AAA risk. We assessed whether these observations have a genetic, causal basis. To this end, we extracted genotypes of validated single-nucleotide polymorphisms associated with T2D (n=65), body mass index (BMI) (n=97) and waist-hip ratio adjusted for BMI (WHRadjBMI) (n=47) from genotype data collected in 717 IA cases and 1988 controls, and in 818 AAA cases and 3004 controls, all of Dutch descent. For each of these three traits, we computed genetic risk scores (GRS) for each individual in these case-control data sets by summing the number of risk alleles weighted by their published effect size, and tested whether these GRS were associated with risk of aneurysm. We divided the cohorts into GRS quartiles, and compared IA and AAA risk in the highest with the lowest GRS quartile using logistic regression. We found no evidence for association in IA or AAA risk between top and bottom quartiles for the genetic risk scores for T2D, BMI and WHRadjBMI. However, additional Mendelian randomization analyses suggested a trend to potentially causal associations between BMI and WHRadjBMI and risk of AAA. Overall, our results do not support epidemiological observations relating T2D to aneurysm risk, but may indicate a potential role of adiposity in AAA that requires further investigation.

Contains fulltext : 169744.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), RATIONALE: Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is a complex disease with both genetic and environmental risk factors. Together, 6 previously identified risk loci only explain a small proportion of the heritability of AAA. OBJECTIVE: To identify additional AAA risk loci using data from all available genome-wide association studies. METHODS AND RESULTS: Through a meta-analysis of 6 genome-wide association study data sets and a validation study totaling 10 204 cases and 107 766 controls, we identified 4 new AAA risk loci: 1q32.3 (SMYD2), 13q12.11 (LINC00540), 20q13.12 (near PCIF1/MMP9/ZNF335), and 21q22.2 (ERG). In various database searches, we observed no new associations between the lead AAA single nucleotide polymorphisms and coronary artery disease, blood pressure, lipids, or diabetes mellitus. Network analyses identified ERG, IL6R, and LDLR as modifiers of MMP9, with a direct interaction between ERG and MMP9. CONCLUSIONS: The 4 new risk loci for AAA seem to be specific for AAA compared with other cardiovascular diseases and related traits suggesting that traditional cardiovascular risk factor management may only have limited value in preventing the progression of aneurysmal disease.

Item does not contain fulltext, BACKGROUND: The erosion of the early mortality advantage of elective endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) compared with open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm remains without a satisfactory explanation. METHODS: An individual-patient data meta-analysis of four multicentre randomized trials of EVAR versus open repair was conducted to a prespecified analysis plan, reporting on mortality, aneurysm-related mortality and reintervention. RESULTS: The analysis included 2783 patients, with 14 245 person-years of follow-up (median 5.5 years). Early (0-6 months after randomization) mortality was lower in the EVAR groups (46 of 1393 versus 73 of 1390 deaths; pooled hazard ratio 0.61, 95 per cent c.i. 0.42 to 0.89; P = 0.010), primarily because 30-day operative mortality was lower in the EVAR groups (16 deaths versus 40 for open repair; pooled odds ratio 0.40, 95 per cent c.i. 0.22 to 0.74). Later (within 3 years) the survival curves converged, remaining converged to 8 years. Beyond 3 years, aneurysm-related mortality was significantly higher in the EVAR groups (19 deaths versus 3 for open repair; pooled hazard ratio 5.16, 1.49 to 17.89; P = 0.010). Patients with moderate renal dysfunction or previous coronary artery disease had no early survival advantage under EVAR. Those with peripheral artery disease had lower mortality under open repair (39 deaths versus 62 for EVAR; P = 0.022) in the period from 6 months to 4 years after randomization. CONCLUSION: The early survival advantage in the EVAR group, and its subsequent erosion, were confirmed. Over 5 years, patients of marginal fitness had no early survival advantage from EVAR compared with open repair. Aneurysm-related mortality and patients with low ankle : brachial pressure index contributed to the erosion of the early survival advantage for the EVAR group. Trial registration numbers: EVAR-1, ISRCTN55703451; DREAM (Dutch Randomized Endovascular Aneurysm Management), NCT00421330; ACE (Anevrysme de l'aorte abdominale, Chirurg

Item does not contain fulltext, BACKGROUND: The erosion of the early mortality advantage of elective endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) compared with open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm remains without a satisfactory explanation. METHODS: An individual-patient data meta-analysis of four multicentre randomized trials of EVAR versus open repair was conducted to a prespecified analysis plan, reporting on mortality, aneurysm-related mortality and reintervention. RESULTS: The analysis included 2783 patients, with 14 245 person-years of follow-up (median 5.5 years). Early (0-6 months after randomization) mortality was lower in the EVAR groups (46 of 1393 versus 73 of 1390 deaths; pooled hazard ratio 0.61, 95 per cent c.i. 0.42 to 0.89; P = 0.010), primarily because 30-day operative mortality was lower in the EVAR groups (16 deaths versus 40 for open repair; pooled odds ratio 0.40, 95 per cent c.i. 0.22 to 0.74). Later (within 3 years) the survival curves converged, remaining converged to 8 years. Beyond 3 years, aneurysm-related mortality was significantly higher in the EVAR groups (19 deaths versus 3 for open repair; pooled hazard ratio 5.16, 1.49 to 17.89; P = 0.010). Patients with moderate renal dysfunction or previous coronary artery disease had no early survival advantage under EVAR. Those with peripheral artery disease had lower mortality under open repair (39 deaths versus 62 for EVAR; P = 0.022) in the period from 6 months to 4 years after randomization. CONCLUSION: The early survival advantage in the EVAR group, and its subsequent erosion, were confirmed. Over 5 years, patients of marginal fitness had no early survival advantage from EVAR compared with open repair. Aneurysm-related mortality and patients with low ankle : brachial pressure index contributed to the erosion of the early survival advantage for the EVAR group. Trial registration numbers: EVAR-1, ISRCTN55703451; DREAM (Dutch Randomized Endovascular Aneurysm Management), NCT00421330; ACE (Anevrysme de l'aorte abdominale, Chirurg

Background: The erosion of the early mortality advantage of elective endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) compared with open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm remains without a satisfactory explanation. Methods: An individual-patient data meta-analysis of four multicentre randomized trials of EVAR versus open repair was conducted to a prespecified analysis plan, reporting on mortality, aneurysm-related mortality and reintervention. Results: The analysis included 2783 patients, with 14 245 person-years of follow-up (median 5·5 years). Early (0–6 months after randomization) mortality was lower in the EVAR groups (46 of 1393 versus 73 of 1390 deaths; pooled hazard ratio 0·61, 95 per cent c.i. 0·42 to 0·89; P = 0·010), primarily because 30-day operative mortality was lower in the EVAR groups (16 deaths versus 40 for open repair; pooled odds ratio 0·40, 95 per cent c.i. 0·22 to 0·74). Later (within 3 years) the survival curves converged, remaining converged to 8 years. Beyond 3 years, aneurysm-related mortality was significantly higher in the EVAR groups (19 deaths versus 3 for open repair; pooled hazard ratio 5·16, 1·49 to 17·89; P = 0·010). Patients with moderate renal dysfunction or previous coronary artery disease had no early survival advantage under EVAR. Those with peripheral artery disease had lower mortality under open repair (39 deaths versus 62 for EVAR; P = 0·022) in the period from 6 months to 4 years after randomization. Conclusion: The early survival advantage in the EVAR group, and its subsequent erosion, were confirmed. Over 5 years, patients of marginal fitness had no early survival advantage from EVAR compared with open repair. Aneurysm-related mortality and patients with low ankle : brachial pressure index contributed to the erosion of the early survival advantage for the EVAR group. Trial registration numbers: EVAR-1, ISRCTN55703451; DREAM (Dutch Randomized Endovascular Aneurysm Management), NCT00421330; ACE (Anévrysme de l'aorte abdominale, Chirurg

Objective Randomized trials have shown an initial survival benefit of endovascular over conventional open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair but no long-term difference up to 6 years after repair. Longer follow-up may be required to demonstrate the cumulative negative impact on survival of higher reintervention rates associated with endovascular repair. Methods We updated the results of the Dutch Randomized Endovascular Aneurysm Management (DREAM) trial, a multicenter, randomized controlled trial comparing open with endovascular aneurysm repair, up to 15 years of follow-up. Survival and reinterventions were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. Causes of death and secondary interventions were compared by use of an events per person-year analysis. Results There were 178 patients randomized to open and 173 to endovascular repair. Twelve years after randomization, the cumulative overall survival rates were 42.2% for open and 38.5% for endovascular repair, for a difference of 3.7 percentage points (95% confidence interval, −6.7 to 14.1; P =.48). The cumulative rates of freedom from reintervention were 78.9% for open repair and 62.2% for endovascular repair, for a difference of 16.7 percentage points (95% confidence interval, 5.8-27.6; P =.01). No differences were observed in causes of death. Cardiovascular and malignant disease account for the majority of deaths after prolonged follow-up. Conclusions During 12 years of follow-up, there was no survival difference between patients who underwent open or endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm

Item does not contain fulltext, OBJECTIVE: Randomized trials have shown an initial survival benefit of endovascular over conventional open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair but no long-term difference up to 6 years after repair. Longer follow-up may be required to demonstrate the cumulative negative impact on survival of higher reintervention rates associated with endovascular repair. METHODS: We updated the results of the Dutch Randomized Endovascular Aneurysm Management (DREAM) trial, a multicenter, randomized controlled trial comparing open with endovascular aneurysm repair, up to 15 years of follow-up. Survival and reinterventions were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. Causes of death and secondary interventions were compared by use of an events per person-year analysis. RESULTS: There were 178 patients randomized to open and 173 to endovascular repair. Twelve years after randomization, the cumulative overall survival rates were 42.2% for open and 38.5% for endovascular repair, for a difference of 3.7 percentage points (95% confidence interval, -6.7 to 14.1; P = .48). The cumulative rates of freedom from reintervention were 78.9% for open repair and 62.2% for endovascular repair, for a difference of 16.7 percentage points (95% confidence interval, 5.8-27.6; P = .01). No differences were observed in causes of death. Cardiovascular and malignant disease account for the majority of deaths after prolonged follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: During 12 years of follow-up, there was no survival difference between patients who underwent open or endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, despite a continuously increasing number of reinterventions in the endovascular repair group. Endograft durability and the need for continued endograft surveillance remain key issues.

Item does not contain fulltext, Epidemiological studies show that type 2 diabetes (T2D) is inversely associated with intracranial aneurysms (IA) and abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA). Although adiposity has not been considered a risk factor for IA, there have been inconsistent reports relating adiposity to AAA risk. We assessed whether these observations have a genetic, causal basis. To this end, we extracted genotypes of validated single-nucleotide polymorphisms associated with T2D (n=65), body mass index (BMI) (n=97) and waist-hip ratio adjusted for BMI (WHRadjBMI) (n=47) from genotype data collected in 717 IA cases and 1988 controls, and in 818 AAA cases and 3004 controls, all of Dutch descent. For each of these three traits, we computed genetic risk scores (GRS) for each individual in these case-control data sets by summing the number of risk alleles weighted by their published effect size, and tested whether these GRS were associated with risk of aneurysm. We divided the cohorts into GRS quartiles, and compared IA and AAA risk in the highest with the lowest GRS quartile using logistic regression. We found no evidence for association in IA or AAA risk between top and bottom quartiles for the genetic risk scores for T2D, BMI and WHRadjBMI. However, additional Mendelian randomization analyses suggested a trend to potentially causal associations between BMI and WHRadjBMI and risk of AAA. Overall, our results do not support epidemiological observations relating T2D to aneurysm risk, but may indicate a potential role of adiposity in AAA that requires further investigation.

Contains fulltext : 169744.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), RATIONALE: Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is a complex disease with both genetic and environmental risk factors. Together, 6 previously identified risk loci only explain a small proportion of the heritability of AAA. OBJECTIVE: To identify additional AAA risk loci using data from all available genome-wide association studies. METHODS AND RESULTS: Through a meta-analysis of 6 genome-wide association study data sets and a validation study totaling 10 204 cases and 107 766 controls, we identified 4 new AAA risk loci: 1q32.3 (SMYD2), 13q12.11 (LINC00540), 20q13.12 (near PCIF1/MMP9/ZNF335), and 21q22.2 (ERG). In various database searches, we observed no new associations between the lead AAA single nucleotide polymorphisms and coronary artery disease, blood pressure, lipids, or diabetes mellitus. Network analyses identified ERG, IL6R, and LDLR as modifiers of MMP9, with a direct interaction between ERG and MMP9. CONCLUSIONS: The 4 new risk loci for AAA seem to be specific for AAA compared with other cardiovascular diseases and related traits suggesting that traditional cardiovascular risk factor management may only have limited value in preventing the progression of aneurysmal disease.

Item does not contain fulltext, BACKGROUND: The erosion of the early mortality advantage of elective endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) compared with open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm remains without a satisfactory explanation. METHODS: An individual-patient data meta-analysis of four multicentre randomized trials of EVAR versus open repair was conducted to a prespecified analysis plan, reporting on mortality, aneurysm-related mortality and reintervention. RESULTS: The analysis included 2783 patients, with 14 245 person-years of follow-up (median 5.5 years). Early (0-6 months after randomization) mortality was lower in the EVAR groups (46 of 1393 versus 73 of 1390 deaths; pooled hazard ratio 0.61, 95 per cent c.i. 0.42 to 0.89; P = 0.010), primarily because 30-day operative mortality was lower in the EVAR groups (16 deaths versus 40 for open repair; pooled odds ratio 0.40, 95 per cent c.i. 0.22 to 0.74). Later (within 3 years) the survival curves converged, remaining converged to 8 years. Beyond 3 years, aneurysm-related mortality was significantly higher in the EVAR groups (19 deaths versus 3 for open repair; pooled hazard ratio 5.16, 1.49 to 17.89; P = 0.010). Patients with moderate renal dysfunction or previous coronary artery disease had no early survival advantage under EVAR. Those with peripheral artery disease had lower mortality under open repair (39 deaths versus 62 for EVAR; P = 0.022) in the period from 6 months to 4 years after randomization. CONCLUSION: The early survival advantage in the EVAR group, and its subsequent erosion, were confirmed. Over 5 years, patients of marginal fitness had no early survival advantage from EVAR compared with open repair. Aneurysm-related mortality and patients with low ankle : brachial pressure index contributed to the erosion of the early survival advantage for the EVAR group. Trial registration numbers: EVAR-1, ISRCTN55703451; DREAM (Dutch Randomized Endovascular Aneurysm Management), NCT00421330; ACE (Anevrysme de l'aorte abdominale, Chirurg

Item does not contain fulltext, BACKGROUND: The erosion of the early mortality advantage of elective endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) compared with open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm remains without a satisfactory explanation. METHODS: An individual-patient data meta-analysis of four multicentre randomized trials of EVAR versus open repair was conducted to a prespecified analysis plan, reporting on mortality, aneurysm-related mortality and reintervention. RESULTS: The analysis included 2783 patients, with 14 245 person-years of follow-up (median 5.5 years). Early (0-6 months after randomization) mortality was lower in the EVAR groups (46 of 1393 versus 73 of 1390 deaths; pooled hazard ratio 0.61, 95 per cent c.i. 0.42 to 0.89; P = 0.010), primarily because 30-day operative mortality was lower in the EVAR groups (16 deaths versus 40 for open repair; pooled odds ratio 0.40, 95 per cent c.i. 0.22 to 0.74). Later (within 3 years) the survival curves converged, remaining converged to 8 years. Beyond 3 years, aneurysm-related mortality was significantly higher in the EVAR groups (19 deaths versus 3 for open repair; pooled hazard ratio 5.16, 1.49 to 17.89; P = 0.010). Patients with moderate renal dysfunction or previous coronary artery disease had no early survival advantage under EVAR. Those with peripheral artery disease had lower mortality under open repair (39 deaths versus 62 for EVAR; P = 0.022) in the period from 6 months to 4 years after randomization. CONCLUSION: The early survival advantage in the EVAR group, and its subsequent erosion, were confirmed. Over 5 years, patients of marginal fitness had no early survival advantage from EVAR compared with open repair. Aneurysm-related mortality and patients with low ankle : brachial pressure index contributed to the erosion of the early survival advantage for the EVAR group. Trial registration numbers: EVAR-1, ISRCTN55703451; DREAM (Dutch Randomized Endovascular Aneurysm Management), NCT00421330; ACE (Anevrysme de l'aorte abdominale, Chirurg

Item does not contain fulltext, Epidemiological studies show that type 2 diabetes (T2D) is inversely associated with intracranial aneurysms (IA) and abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA). Although adiposity has not been considered a risk factor for IA, there have been inconsistent reports relating adiposity to AAA risk. We assessed whether these observations have a genetic, causal basis. To this end, we extracted genotypes of validated single-nucleotide polymorphisms associated with T2D (n=65), body mass index (BMI) (n=97) and waist-hip ratio adjusted for BMI (WHRadjBMI) (n=47) from genotype data collected in 717 IA cases and 1988 controls, and in 818 AAA cases and 3004 controls, all of Dutch descent. For each of these three traits, we computed genetic risk scores (GRS) for each individual in these case-control data sets by summing the number of risk alleles weighted by their published effect size, and tested whether these GRS were associated with risk of aneurysm. We divided the cohorts into GRS quartiles, and compared IA and AAA risk in the highest with the lowest GRS quartile using logistic regression. We found no evidence for association in IA or AAA risk between top and bottom quartiles for the genetic risk scores for T2D, BMI and WHRadjBMI. However, additional Mendelian randomization analyses suggested a trend to potentially causal associations between BMI and WHRadjBMI and risk of AAA. Overall, our results do not support epidemiological observations relating T2D to aneurysm risk, but may indicate a potential role of adiposity in AAA that requires further investigation.

Contains fulltext : 171496.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access), BACKGROUND: Intracranial aneurysms (IAs), abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs), and thoracic aortic aneurysms (TAAs) all have a familial predisposition. Given that aneurysm types are known to co-occur, we hypothesized that there may be shared genetic risk factors for IAs, AAAs, and TAAs. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a mega-analysis of 1000 Genomes Project-imputed genome-wide association study (GWAS) data of 4 previously published aneurysm cohorts: 2 IA cohorts (in total 1516 cases, 4305 controls), 1 AAA cohort (818 cases, 3004 controls), and 1 TAA cohort (760 cases, 2212 controls), and observed associations of 4 known IA, AAA, and/or TAA risk loci (9p21, 18q11, 15q21, and 2q33) with consistent effect directions in all 4 cohorts. We calculated polygenic scores based on IA-, AAA-, and TAA-associated SNPs and tested these scores for association to case-control status in the other aneurysm cohorts; this revealed no shared polygenic effects. Similarly, linkage disequilibrium-score regression analyses did not show significant correlations between any pair of aneurysm subtypes. Last, we evaluated the evidence for 14 previously published aneurysm risk single-nucleotide polymorphisms through collaboration in extended aneurysm cohorts, with a total of 6548 cases and 16 843 controls (IA) and 4391 cases and 37 904 controls (AAA), and found nominally significant associations for IA risk locus 18q11 near RBBP8 to AAA (odds ratio [OR]=1.11; P=4.1x10(-5)) and for TAA risk locus 15q21 near FBN1 to AAA (OR=1.07; P=1.1x10(-3)). CONCLUSIONS: Although there was no evidence for polygenic overlap between IAs, AAAs, and TAAs, we found nominally significant effects of two established risk loci for IAs and TAAs in AAAs. These two loci will require further replication.

Contains fulltext : 171496.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access), BACKGROUND: Intracranial aneurysms (IAs), abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs), and thoracic aortic aneurysms (TAAs) all have a familial predisposition. Given that aneurysm types are known to co-occur, we hypothesized that there may be shared genetic risk factors for IAs, AAAs, and TAAs. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a mega-analysis of 1000 Genomes Project-imputed genome-wide association study (GWAS) data of 4 previously published aneurysm cohorts: 2 IA cohorts (in total 1516 cases, 4305 controls), 1 AAA cohort (818 cases, 3004 controls), and 1 TAA cohort (760 cases, 2212 controls), and observed associations of 4 known IA, AAA, and/or TAA risk loci (9p21, 18q11, 15q21, and 2q33) with consistent effect directions in all 4 cohorts. We calculated polygenic scores based on IA-, AAA-, and TAA-associated SNPs and tested these scores for association to case-control status in the other aneurysm cohorts; this revealed no shared polygenic effects. Similarly, linkage disequilibrium-score regression analyses did not show significant correlations between any pair of aneurysm subtypes. Last, we evaluated the evidence for 14 previously published aneurysm risk single-nucleotide polymorphisms through collaboration in extended aneurysm cohorts, with a total of 6548 cases and 16 843 controls (IA) and 4391 cases and 37 904 controls (AAA), and found nominally significant associations for IA risk locus 18q11 near RBBP8 to AAA (odds ratio [OR]=1.11; P=4.1x10(-5)) and for TAA risk locus 15q21 near FBN1 to AAA (OR=1.07; P=1.1x10(-3)). CONCLUSIONS: Although there was no evidence for polygenic overlap between IAs, AAAs, and TAAs, we found nominally significant effects of two established risk loci for IAs and TAAs in AAAs. These two loci will require further replication.

Item does not contain fulltext, BACKGROUND: Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is a common cardiovascular disease among older people and demonstrates significant heritability. In contrast to similar complex diseases, relatively few genetic associations with AAA have been confirmed. We reanalyzed our genome-wide study and carried through to replication suggestive discovery associations at a lower level of significance. METHODS AND RESULTS: A genome-wide association study was conducted using 1830 cases from the United Kingdom, New Zealand, and Australia with infrarenal aorta diameter>/=30 mm or ruptured AAA and 5435 unscreened controls from the 1958 Birth Cohort and National Blood Service cohort from the Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium. Eight suggestive associations with P<1x10(-4) were carried through to in silico replication in 1292 AAA cases and 30,503 controls. One single-nucleotide polymorphism associated with P<0.05 after Bonferroni correction in the in silico study underwent further replication (706 AAA cases and 1063 controls from the United Kingdom, 507 AAA cases and 199 controls from Denmark, and 885 AAA cases and 1000 controls from New Zealand). Low-density lipoprotein receptor (LDLR) rs6511720 A was significantly associated overall and in 3 of 5 individual replication studies. The full study showed an association that reached genome-wide significance (odds ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.70-0.83; P=2.08x10(-10)). CONCLUSIONS: LDLR rs6511720 is associated with AAA. This finding is consistent with established effects of this variant on coronary artery disease. Shared causal pathways with other cardiovascular diseases may present novel opportunities for preventative and therapeutic strategies for AAA.

Contains fulltext : 119257.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), This study investigated the prevalence of carotid artery stenosis (CS) and the association with various risk factors in male patients (>65 years) diagnosed with cardiovascular diseases. Duplex sonography of the carotid arteries was performed in 434 of 473 eligible patients of whom 118 (27.8%) patients had significant CS >/=50%. The prevalence and severity of CS did not differ between patients who presented with neurological symptoms or acute coronary syndrome/peripheral artery disease (30.8% vs 25.9%, respectively). Among patients with CS, a higher rate of current smoking, a higher systolic blood pressure, and a lower glomerular filtration rate were observed compared with patients without CS. A history of coronary artery bypass graft was a significant predictor of the presence of CS (P = .003, odds ratio [OR] = 2.70 [1.40-5.19]). The prevalence of CS in elderly males with manifest atherosclerotic disease is high, irrespective of presenting clinical manifestation.

Item does not contain fulltext, BACKGROUND: Expansive remodelling is the process of compensatory arterial enlargement in response to atherosclerotic stimuli. The genetic determinants of this process are poorly characterized. METHODS: Genetic association analyses of inter-adventitial common carotid artery diameter (ICCAD) in the IMPROVE study (n = 3427) using the Illumina 200k Metabochip was performed. Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that met array-wide significance were taken forward for analysis in three further studies (n = 5704), and tested for association with Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm (AAA). RESULTS: rs3768445 on Chromosome 1q24.3, in a cluster of protein coding genes (DNM3, PIGC, C1orf105) was associated with larger ICCAD in the IMPROVE study. For each copy of the rare allele carried, ICCAD was on average 0.13 mm greater (95% CI 0.08-0.18 mm, P = 8.2 x 10(-8)). A proxy SNP (rs4916251, R(2) = 0.99) did not, however, show association with ICCAD in three follow-up studies (P for replication = 0.29). There was evidence of interaction between carotid intima-media thickness (CIMT) and rs4916251 on ICCAD in two of the cohorts studies suggesting that it plays a role in the remodelling response to atherosclerosis. In meta-analysis of 5 case-control studies pooling data from 5007 cases and 43,630 controls, rs4916251 was associated with presence of AAA 1.10, 95% CI 1.03-1.17, p = 2.8 x 10(-3), I(2) = 18.8, Q = 0.30). A proxy SNP, rs4916251 was also associated with increased expression of PIGC in aortic tissue, suggesting that this may the mechanism by which this locus affects vascular remodelling. CONCLUSIONS: Common variation at 1q24.3 is associated with expansive vascular remodelling and risk of AAA. These findings support a hypothesis that pathways involved in systemic vascular remodelling play a role in AAA development.

MethodsWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting circulating IL-6 in AAA, and new investigations of the association between a common non-synonymous functional variant (Asp358Ala) in the IL-6R gene (IL6R) and AAA, followed the analysis of the variant both in vitro and in vivo.Inflammation may play a role in the development of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA). Interleukin-6 (IL-6) signalling through its receptor (IL-6R) is one pathway that could be exploited pharmacologically. We investigated this using a Mendelian randomization approach.ResultsUp to October 2011, we identified seven studies (869 cases, 851 controls). Meta-analysis demonstrated that AAA cases had higher levels of IL-6 than controls [standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.46 SD, 95% CI = 0.25-0.66, I2 = 70%, P = 1.1 × 10-5 random effects]. Meta-analysis of five studies (4524 cases/15 710 controls) demonstrated that rs7529229 (which tags the non-synonymous variant Asp358Ala, rs2228145) was associated with a lower risk of AAA, per Ala358 allele odds ratio 0.84, 95% CI: 0.80-0.89, I2 = 0%, P = 2.7 × 10-11). In vitro analyses in lymphoblastoid cell lines demonstrated a reduction in the expression of downstream targets (STAT3, MYC and ICAM1) in response to IL-6 stimulation in Ala358 carriers.Conclusi

Item does not contain fulltext, BACKGROUND: Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is a common cardiovascular disease among older people and demonstrates significant heritability. In contrast to similar complex diseases, relatively few genetic associations with AAA have been confirmed. We reanalyzed our genome-wide study and carried through to replication suggestive discovery associations at a lower level of significance. METHODS AND RESULTS: A genome-wide association study was conducted using 1830 cases from the United Kingdom, New Zealand, and Australia with infrarenal aorta diameter>/=30 mm or ruptured AAA and 5435 unscreened controls from the 1958 Birth Cohort and National Blood Service cohort from the Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium. Eight suggestive associations with P<1x10(-4) were carried through to in silico replication in 1292 AAA cases and 30,503 controls. One single-nucleotide polymorphism associated with P<0.05 after Bonferroni correction in the in silico study underwent further replication (706 AAA cases and 1063 controls from the United Kingdom, 507 AAA cases and 199 controls from Denmark, and 885 AAA cases and 1000 controls from New Zealand). Low-density lipoprotein receptor (LDLR) rs6511720 A was significantly associated overall and in 3 of 5 individual replication studies. The full study showed an association that reached genome-wide significance (odds ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.70-0.83; P=2.08x10(-10)). CONCLUSIONS: LDLR rs6511720 is associated with AAA. This finding is consistent with established effects of this variant on coronary artery disease. Shared causal pathways with other cardiovascular diseases may present novel opportunities for preventative and therapeutic strategies for AAA.

Contains fulltext : 119257.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), This study investigated the prevalence of carotid artery stenosis (CS) and the association with various risk factors in male patients (>65 years) diagnosed with cardiovascular diseases. Duplex sonography of the carotid arteries was performed in 434 of 473 eligible patients of whom 118 (27.8%) patients had significant CS >/=50%. The prevalence and severity of CS did not differ between patients who presented with neurological symptoms or acute coronary syndrome/peripheral artery disease (30.8% vs 25.9%, respectively). Among patients with CS, a higher rate of current smoking, a higher systolic blood pressure, and a lower glomerular filtration rate were observed compared with patients without CS. A history of coronary artery bypass graft was a significant predictor of the presence of CS (P = .003, odds ratio [OR] = 2.70 [1.40-5.19]). The prevalence of CS in elderly males with manifest atherosclerotic disease is high, irrespective of presenting clinical manifestation.

Item does not contain fulltext, BACKGROUND: Expansive remodelling is the process of compensatory arterial enlargement in response to atherosclerotic stimuli. The genetic determinants of this process are poorly characterized. METHODS: Genetic association analyses of inter-adventitial common carotid artery diameter (ICCAD) in the IMPROVE study (n = 3427) using the Illumina 200k Metabochip was performed. Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that met array-wide significance were taken forward for analysis in three further studies (n = 5704), and tested for association with Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm (AAA). RESULTS: rs3768445 on Chromosome 1q24.3, in a cluster of protein coding genes (DNM3, PIGC, C1orf105) was associated with larger ICCAD in the IMPROVE study. For each copy of the rare allele carried, ICCAD was on average 0.13 mm greater (95% CI 0.08-0.18 mm, P = 8.2 x 10(-8)). A proxy SNP (rs4916251, R(2) = 0.99) did not, however, show association with ICCAD in three follow-up studies (P for replication = 0.29). There was evidence of interaction between carotid intima-media thickness (CIMT) and rs4916251 on ICCAD in two of the cohorts studies suggesting that it plays a role in the remodelling response to atherosclerosis. In meta-analysis of 5 case-control studies pooling data from 5007 cases and 43,630 controls, rs4916251 was associated with presence of AAA 1.10, 95% CI 1.03-1.17, p = 2.8 x 10(-3), I(2) = 18.8, Q = 0.30). A proxy SNP, rs4916251 was also associated with increased expression of PIGC in aortic tissue, suggesting that this may the mechanism by which this locus affects vascular remodelling. CONCLUSIONS: Common variation at 1q24.3 is associated with expansive vascular remodelling and risk of AAA. These findings support a hypothesis that pathways involved in systemic vascular remodelling play a role in AAA development.

Item does not contain fulltext, BACKGROUND: Expansive remodelling is the process of compensatory arterial enlargement in response to atherosclerotic stimuli. The genetic determinants of this process are poorly characterized. METHODS: Genetic association analyses of inter-adventitial common carotid artery diameter (ICCAD) in the IMPROVE study (n = 3427) using the Illumina 200k Metabochip was performed. Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that met array-wide significance were taken forward for analysis in three further studies (n = 5704), and tested for association with Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm (AAA). RESULTS: rs3768445 on Chromosome 1q24.3, in a cluster of protein coding genes (DNM3, PIGC, C1orf105) was associated with larger ICCAD in the IMPROVE study. For each copy of the rare allele carried, ICCAD was on average 0.13 mm greater (95% CI 0.08-0.18 mm, P = 8.2 x 10(-8)). A proxy SNP (rs4916251, R(2) = 0.99) did not, however, show association with ICCAD in three follow-up studies (P for replication = 0.29). There was evidence of interaction between carotid intima-media thickness (CIMT) and rs4916251 on ICCAD in two of the cohorts studies suggesting that it plays a role in the remodelling response to atherosclerosis. In meta-analysis of 5 case-control studies pooling data from 5007 cases and 43,630 controls, rs4916251 was associated with presence of AAA 1.10, 95% CI 1.03-1.17, p = 2.8 x 10(-3), I(2) = 18.8, Q = 0.30). A proxy SNP, rs4916251 was also associated with increased expression of PIGC in aortic tissue, suggesting that this may the mechanism by which this locus affects vascular remodelling. CONCLUSIONS: Common variation at 1q24.3 is associated with expansive vascular remodelling and risk of AAA. These findings support a hypothesis that pathways involved in systemic vascular remodelling play a role in AAA development.

Contains fulltext : 97601.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is a common cause of morbidity and mortality and has a significant heritability. We carried out a genome-wide association discovery study of 1866 patients with AAA and 5435 controls and replication of promising signals (lead SNP with a p value < 1 x 10(-5)) in 2871 additional cases and 32,687 controls and performed further follow-up in 1491 AAA and 11,060 controls. In the discovery study, nine loci demonstrated association with AAA (p < 1 x 10(-5)). In the replication sample, the lead SNP at one of these loci, rs1466535, located within intron 1 of low-density-lipoprotein receptor-related protein 1 (LRP1) demonstrated significant association (p = 0.0042). We confirmed the association of rs1466535 and AAA in our follow-up study (p = 0.035). In a combined analysis (6228 AAA and 49182 controls), rs1466535 had a consistent effect size and direction in all sample sets (combined p = 4.52 x 10(-10), odds ratio 1.15 [1.10-1.21]). No associations were seen for either rs1466535 or the 12q13.3 locus in independent association studies of coronary artery disease, blood pressure, diabetes, or hyperlipidaemia, suggesting that this locus is specific to AAA. Gene-expression studies demonstrated a trend toward increased LRP1 expression for the rs1466535 CC genotype in arterial tissues; there was a significant (p = 0.029) 1.19-fold (1.04-1.36) increase in LRP1 expression in CC homozygotes compared to TT homozygotes in aortic adventitia. Functional studies demonstrated that rs1466535 might alter a SREBP-1 binding site and influence enhancer activity at the locus. In conclusion, this study has identified a biologically plausible genetic variant associated specifically with AAA, and we suggest that this variant has a possible functional role in LRP1 expression.

The costs and efforts for sample preparation of hundreds of individuals, their genomic enrichment for regions of interest, and sufficient deep sequencing bring a significant burden to next-generation sequencing-based experiments. We investigated whether pooling of samples at the level of genomic DNA would be a more versatile strategy for lowering the costs and efforts for common disease-associated rare variant detection in candidate genes or associated loci in a substantial patient cohort. We performed a pilot experiment using five pools of 20 abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) patients that were enriched on separate microarrays for the reported 9p21.3 associated locus and 42 additional AAA candidate genes, and sequenced on the SOLiD platform. Here, we discuss challenges and limitations connected to this approach and show that the high number of novel variants detected per pool and allele frequency deviations to the usually highly false positive cut-off region for variant detection in non-pooled samples can be limiting factors for successful variant prioritization and confirmation. We conclude that barcode indexing of individual samples before pooling followed by a multiplexed enrichment strategy should be preferred for detection of rare genetic variants in larger sample sets rather than a genomic DNA pooling strategy., The costs and efforts for sample preparation of hundreds of individuals, their genomic enrichment for regions of interest, and sufficient deep sequencing bring a significant burden to next-generation sequencing-based experiments. We investigated whether pooling of samples at the level of genomic DNA would be a more versatile strategy for lowering the costs and efforts for common disease-associated rare variant detection in candidate genes or associated loci in a substantial patient cohort. We performed a pilot experiment using five pools of 20 abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) patients that were enriched on separate microarrays for the reported 9p21.3 associated locus and 42 additional AAA candidate genes, and sequenced on the SOLiD platform. Here, we discuss challenges and limitations connected to this approach and show that the high number of novel variants detected per pool and allele frequency deviations to the usually highly false positive cut-off region for variant detection in non-pooled samples can be limiting factors for successful variant prioritization and confirmation. We conclude that barcode indexing of individual samples before pooling followed by a multiplexed enrichment strategy should be preferred for detection of rare genetic variants in larger sample sets rather than a genomic DNA pooling strategy.

Contains fulltext : 97601.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is a common cause of morbidity and mortality and has a significant heritability. We carried out a genome-wide association discovery study of 1866 patients with AAA and 5435 controls and replication of promising signals (lead SNP with a p value < 1 x 10(-5)) in 2871 additional cases and 32,687 controls and performed further follow-up in 1491 AAA and 11,060 controls. In the discovery study, nine loci demonstrated association with AAA (p < 1 x 10(-5)). In the replication sample, the lead SNP at one of these loci, rs1466535, located within intron 1 of low-density-lipoprotein receptor-related protein 1 (LRP1) demonstrated significant association (p = 0.0042). We confirmed the association of rs1466535 and AAA in our follow-up study (p = 0.035). In a combined analysis (6228 AAA and 49182 controls), rs1466535 had a consistent effect size and direction in all sample sets (combined p = 4.52 x 10(-10), odds ratio 1.15 [1.10-1.21]). No associations were seen for either rs1466535 or the 12q13.3 locus in independent association studies of coronary artery disease, blood pressure, diabetes, or hyperlipidaemia, suggesting that this locus is specific to AAA. Gene-expression studies demonstrated a trend toward increased LRP1 expression for the rs1466535 CC genotype in arterial tissues; there was a significant (p = 0.029) 1.19-fold (1.04-1.36) increase in LRP1 expression in CC homozygotes compared to TT homozygotes in aortic adventitia. Functional studies demonstrated that rs1466535 might alter a SREBP-1 binding site and influence enhancer activity at the locus. In conclusion, this study has identified a biologically plausible genetic variant associated specifically with AAA, and we suggest that this variant has a possible functional role in LRP1 expression.

Contains fulltext : 97601.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is a common cause of morbidity and mortality and has a significant heritability. We carried out a genome-wide association discovery study of 1866 patients with AAA and 5435 controls and replication of promising signals (lead SNP with a p value < 1 x 10(-5)) in 2871 additional cases and 32,687 controls and performed further follow-up in 1491 AAA and 11,060 controls. In the discovery study, nine loci demonstrated association with AAA (p < 1 x 10(-5)). In the replication sample, the lead SNP at one of these loci, rs1466535, located within intron 1 of low-density-lipoprotein receptor-related protein 1 (LRP1) demonstrated significant association (p = 0.0042). We confirmed the association of rs1466535 and AAA in our follow-up study (p = 0.035). In a combined analysis (6228 AAA and 49182 controls), rs1466535 had a consistent effect size and direction in all sample sets (combined p = 4.52 x 10(-10), odds ratio 1.15 [1.10-1.21]). No associations were seen for either rs1466535 or the 12q13.3 locus in independent association studies of coronary artery disease, blood pressure, diabetes, or hyperlipidaemia, suggesting that this locus is specific to AAA. Gene-expression studies demonstrated a trend toward increased LRP1 expression for the rs1466535 CC genotype in arterial tissues; there was a significant (p = 0.029) 1.19-fold (1.04-1.36) increase in LRP1 expression in CC homozygotes compared to TT homozygotes in aortic adventitia. Functional studies demonstrated that rs1466535 might alter a SREBP-1 binding site and influence enhancer activity at the locus. In conclusion, this study has identified a biologically plausible genetic variant associated specifically with AAA, and we suggest that this variant has a possible functional role in LRP1 expression.

The costs and efforts for sample preparation of hundreds of individuals, their genomic enrichment for regions of interest, and sufficient deep sequencing bring a significant burden to next-generation sequencing-based experiments. We investigated whether pooling of samples at the level of genomic DNA would be a more versatile strategy for lowering the costs and efforts for common disease-associated rare variant detection in candidate genes or associated loci in a substantial patient cohort. We performed a pilot experiment using five pools of 20 abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) patients that were enriched on separate microarrays for the reported 9p21.3 associated locus and 42 additional AAA candidate genes, and sequenced on the SOLiD platform. Here, we discuss challenges and limitations connected to this approach and show that the high number of novel variants detected per pool and allele frequency deviations to the usually highly false positive cut-off region for variant detection in non-pooled samples can be limiting factors for successful variant prioritization and confirmation. We conclude that barcode indexing of individual samples before pooling followed by a multiplexed enrichment strategy should be preferred for detection of rare genetic variants in larger sample sets rather than a genomic DNA pooling strategy., The costs and efforts for sample preparation of hundreds of individuals, their genomic enrichment for regions of interest, and sufficient deep sequencing bring a significant burden to next-generation sequencing-based experiments. We investigated whether pooling of samples at the level of genomic DNA would be a more versatile strategy for lowering the costs and efforts for common disease-associated rare variant detection in candidate genes or associated loci in a substantial patient cohort. We performed a pilot experiment using five pools of 20 abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) patients that were enriched on separate microarrays for the reported 9p21.3 associated locus and 42 additional AAA candidate genes, and sequenced on the SOLiD platform. Here, we discuss challenges and limitations connected to this approach and show that the high number of novel variants detected per pool and allele frequency deviations to the usually highly false positive cut-off region for variant detection in non-pooled samples can be limiting factors for successful variant prioritization and confirmation. We conclude that barcode indexing of individual samples before pooling followed by a multiplexed enrichment strategy should be preferred for detection of rare genetic variants in larger sample sets rather than a genomic DNA pooling strategy.

Contains fulltext : 88112.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), BACKGROUND: Stents are an alternative treatment to carotid endarterectomy for symptomatic carotid stenosis, but previous trials have not established equivalent safety and efficacy. We compared the safety of carotid artery stenting with that of carotid endarterectomy. METHODS: The International Carotid Stenting Study (ICSS) is a multicentre, international, randomised controlled trial with blinded adjudication of outcomes. Patients with recently symptomatic carotid artery stenosis were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive carotid artery stenting or carotid endarterectomy. Randomisation was by telephone call or fax to a central computerised service and was stratified by centre with minimisation for sex, age, contralateral occlusion, and side of the randomised artery. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment assignment. Patients were followed up by independent clinicians not directly involved in delivering the randomised treatment. The primary outcome measure of the trial is the 3-year rate of fatal or disabling stroke in any territory, which has not been analysed yet. The main outcome measure for the interim safety analysis was the 120-day rate of stroke, death, or procedural myocardial infarction. Analysis was by intention to treat (ITT). This study is registered, number ISRCTN25337470. FINDINGS: The trial enrolled 1713 patients (stenting group, n=855; endarterectomy group, n=858). Two patients in the stenting group and one in the endarterectomy group withdrew immediately after randomisation, and were not included in the ITT analysis. Between randomisation and 120 days, there were 34 (Kaplan-Meier estimate 4.0%) events of disabling stroke or death in the stenting group compared with 27 (3.2%) events in the endarterectomy group (hazard ratio [HR] 1.28, 95% CI 0.77-2.11). The incidence of stroke, death, or procedural myocardial infarction was 8.5% in the stenting group compared with 5.2% in the endarterectomy group (72 vs 44 events; HR 1.69, 1.16-2

1 april 2010, Item does not contain fulltext, AIM: Endovascular skills are an integral part of modern-day vascular surgery. The STRESS machine has been developed to test these skills in vascular surgeons. This study aims to define an optimal pass/fail cutoff value for the STRESS test score. METHODS: The STRESS machine consists of a dry glass model of the abdominal aorta and its tributaries with various stenotic lesions, elongations, and tortuosities. A camera and computer software are used to simulate plain fluoroscopy-mode. The test subjects are given two assignments after which two reviewers use a combination of the ICEPS and MRS to produce the final total score; 43 subjects were tested. According to previous endovascular experience, subjects were classified into four groups: novice-low (no experience, less than 11 performed procedures, less than 50 assisted procedures), novice-high (11-25 performed procedures, more than 50 assisted procedures), intermediate (1-10 performed and >11-25 assisted procedures, 11-25 performed and >1-10 assisted procedures or 25-50 performed procedures) and advanced (more than 50 performed procedures). RESULTS: Test-score and noted experience showed a correlation of 0.794. All intermediate and advanced test subjects scored more than 50 points compared to 4 out of 15 novices. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated that it is possible to determine an optimal cut-off value for competence testing with the STRESS machine.

Background: Stents are an alternative treatment to carotid endarterectomy for symptomatic carotid stenosis, but previous trials have not established equivalent safety and efficacy. We compared the safety of carotid artery stenting with that of carotid endarterectomy. Method(s): The International Carotid Stenting Study (ICSS) is a multicentre, international, randomised controlled trial with blinded adjudication of outcomes. Patients with recently symptomatic carotid artery stenosis were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive carotid artery stenting or carotid endarterectomy. Randomisation was by telephone call or fax to a central computerised service and was stratified by centre with minimisation for sex, age, contralateral occlusion, and side of the randomised artery. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment assignment. Patients were followed up by independent clinicians not directly involved in delivering the randomised treatment. The primary outcome measure of the trial is the 3-year rate of fatal or disabling stroke in any territory, which has not been analysed yet. The main outcome measure for the interim safety analysis was the 120-day rate of stroke, death, or procedural myocardial infarction. Analysis was by intention to treat (ITT). This study is registered, number ISRCTN25337470. Finding(s): The trial enrolled 1713 patients (stenting group, n=855; endarterectomy group, n=858). Two patients in the stenting group and one in the endarterectomy group withdrew immediately after randomisation, and were not included in the ITT analysis. Between randomisation and 120 days, there were 34 (Kaplan-Meier estimate 4.0%) events of disabling stroke or death in the stenting group compared with 27 (3.2%) events in the endarterectomy group (hazard ratio [HR] 1.28, 95% CI 0.77-2.11). The incidence of stroke, death, or procedural myocardial infarction was 8.5% in the stenting group compared with 5.2% in the endarterectomy group (72 vs 44 events; HR 1.69, 1.

Background: Stents are an alternative treatment to carotid endarterectomy for symptomatic carotid stenosis, but previous trials have not established equivalent safety and efficacy. We compared the safety of carotid artery stenting with that of carotid endarterectomy. Methods: The International Carotid Stenting Study (ICSS) is a multicentre, international, randomised controlled trial with blinded adjudication of outcomes. Patients with recently symptomatic carotid artery stenosis were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive carotid artery stenting or carotid endarterectomy. Randomisation was by telephone call or fax to a central computerised service and was stratified by centre with minimisation for sex, age, contralateral occlusion, and side of the randomised artery. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment assignment. Patients were followed up by independent clinicians not directly involved in delivering the randomised treatment. The primary outcome measure of the trial is the 3-year rate of fatal or disabling stroke in any territory, which has not been analysed yet. The main outcome measure for the interim safety analysis was the 120-day rate of stroke, death, or procedural myocardial infarction. Analysis was by intention to treat (ITT). This study is registered, number ISRCTN25337470. Findings: The trial enrolled 1713 patients (stenting group, n=855; endarterectomy group, n=858). Two patients in the stenting group and one in the endarterectomy group withdrew immediately after randomisation, and were not included in the ITT analysis. Between randomisation and 120 days, there were 34 (Kaplan-Meier estimate 4·0%) events of disabling stroke or death in the stenting group compared with 27 (3·2%) events in the endarterectomy group (hazard ratio [HR] 1·28, 95% CI 0·77-2·11). The incidence of stroke, death, or procedural myocardial infarction was 8·5% in the stenting group compared with 5·2% in the endarterectomy group (72 vs 44 events; HR 1·69, 1·16-2

BACKGROUND: For patients with large abdominal aortic aneurysms, randomized trials have shown an initial overall survival benefit for elective endovascular repair over conventional open repair. This survival difference, however, was no longer significant in the second year after the procedure. Information regarding the comparative outcome more than 2 years after surgery is important for clinical decision making. METHODS: We conducted a long-term, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial comparing open repair with endovascular repair in 351 patients with an abdominal aortic aneurysm of at least 5 cm in diameter who were considered suitable candidates for both techniques. The primary outcomes were rates of death from any cause and reintervention. Survival was calculated with the use of Kaplan-Meier methods on an intentionto-treat basis. RESULTS: We randomly assigned 178 patients to undergo open repair and 173 to undergo endovascular repair. Six years after randomization, the cumulative survival rates were 69.9% for open repair and 68.9% for endovascular repair (difference, 1.0 percentage point; 95% confidence interval [CI], -8.8 to 10.8; P=0.97). The cumulative rates of freedom from secondary interventions were 81.9% for open repair and 70.4% for endovasc

Background: Stents are an alternative treatment to carotid endarterectomy for symptomatic carotid stenosis, but previous trials have not established equivalent safety and efficacy. We compared the safety of carotid artery stenting with that of carotid endarterectomy. Method(s): The International Carotid Stenting Study (ICSS) is a multicentre, international, randomised controlled trial with blinded adjudication of outcomes. Patients with recently symptomatic carotid artery stenosis were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive carotid artery stenting or carotid endarterectomy. Randomisation was by telephone call or fax to a central computerised service and was stratified by centre with minimisation for sex, age, contralateral occlusion, and side of the randomised artery. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment assignment. Patients were followed up by independent clinicians not directly involved in delivering the randomised treatment. The primary outcome measure of the trial is the 3-year rate of fatal or disabling stroke in any territory, which has not been analysed yet. The main outcome measure for the interim safety analysis was the 120-day rate of stroke, death, or procedural myocardial infarction. Analysis was by intention to treat (ITT). This study is registered, number ISRCTN25337470. Finding(s): The trial enrolled 1713 patients (stenting group, n=855; endarterectomy group, n=858). Two patients in the stenting group and one in the endarterectomy group withdrew immediately after randomisation, and were not included in the ITT analysis. Between randomisation and 120 days, there were 34 (Kaplan-Meier estimate 4.0%) events of disabling stroke or death in the stenting group compared with 27 (3.2%) events in the endarterectomy group (hazard ratio [HR] 1.28, 95% CI 0.77-2.11). The incidence of stroke, death, or procedural myocardial infarction was 8.5% in the stenting group compared with 5.2% in the endarterectomy group (72 vs 44 events; HR 1.69, 1.

Contains fulltext : 88507.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)

Contains fulltext : 87282.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access), BACKGROUND: For patients with large abdominal aortic aneurysms, randomized trials have shown an initial overall survival benefit for elective endovascular repair over conventional open repair. This survival difference, however, was no longer significant in the second year after the procedure. Information regarding the comparative outcome more than 2 years after surgery is important for clinical decision making. METHODS: We conducted a long-term, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial comparing open repair with endovascular repair in 351 patients with an abdominal aortic aneurysm of at least 5 cm in diameter who were considered suitable candidates for both techniques. The primary outcomes were rates of death from any cause and reintervention. Survival was calculated with the use of Kaplan-Meier methods on an intention-to-treat basis. RESULTS: We randomly assigned 178 patients to undergo open repair and 173 to undergo endovascular repair. Six years after randomization, the cumulative survival rates were 69.9% for open repair and 68.9% for endovascular repair (difference, 1.0 percentage point; 95% confidence interval [CI], -8.8 to 10.8; P=0.97). The cumulative rates of freedom from secondary interventions were 81.9% for open repair and 70.4% for endovascular repair (difference, 11.5 percentage points; 95% CI, 2.0 to 21.0; P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Six years after randomization, endovascular and open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm resulted in similar rates of survival. The rate of secondary interventions was significantly higher for endovascular repair. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00421330.)

Contains fulltext : 88112.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), BACKGROUND: Stents are an alternative treatment to carotid endarterectomy for symptomatic carotid stenosis, but previous trials have not established equivalent safety and efficacy. We compared the safety of carotid artery stenting with that of carotid endarterectomy. METHODS: The International Carotid Stenting Study (ICSS) is a multicentre, international, randomised controlled trial with blinded adjudication of outcomes. Patients with recently symptomatic carotid artery stenosis were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive carotid artery stenting or carotid endarterectomy. Randomisation was by telephone call or fax to a central computerised service and was stratified by centre with minimisation for sex, age, contralateral occlusion, and side of the randomised artery. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment assignment. Patients were followed up by independent clinicians not directly involved in delivering the randomised treatment. The primary outcome measure of the trial is the 3-year rate of fatal or disabling stroke in any territory, which has not been analysed yet. The main outcome measure for the interim safety analysis was the 120-day rate of stroke, death, or procedural myocardial infarction. Analysis was by intention to treat (ITT). This study is registered, number ISRCTN25337470. FINDINGS: The trial enrolled 1713 patients (stenting group, n=855; endarterectomy group, n=858). Two patients in the stenting group and one in the endarterectomy group withdrew immediately after randomisation, and were not included in the ITT analysis. Between randomisation and 120 days, there were 34 (Kaplan-Meier estimate 4.0%) events of disabling stroke or death in the stenting group compared with 27 (3.2%) events in the endarterectomy group (hazard ratio [HR] 1.28, 95% CI 0.77-2.11). The incidence of stroke, death, or procedural myocardial infarction was 8.5% in the stenting group compared with 5.2% in the endarterectomy group (72 vs 44 events; HR 1.69, 1.16-2

01 april 2010, Item does not contain fulltext, AIM: Endovascular skills are an integral part of modern-day vascular surgery. The STRESS machine has been developed to test these skills in vascular surgeons. This study aims to define an optimal pass/fail cutoff value for the STRESS test score. METHODS: The STRESS machine consists of a dry glass model of the abdominal aorta and its tributaries with various stenotic lesions, elongations, and tortuosities. A camera and computer software are used to simulate plain fluoroscopy-mode. The test subjects are given two assignments after which two reviewers use a combination of the ICEPS and MRS to produce the final total score; 43 subjects were tested. According to previous endovascular experience, subjects were classified into four groups: novice-low (no experience, less than 11 performed procedures, less than 50 assisted procedures), novice-high (11-25 performed procedures, more than 50 assisted procedures), intermediate (1-10 performed and >11-25 assisted procedures, 11-25 performed and >1-10 assisted procedures or 25-50 performed procedures) and advanced (more than 50 performed procedures). RESULTS: Test-score and noted experience showed a correlation of 0.794. All intermediate and advanced test subjects scored more than 50 points compared to 4 out of 15 novices. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated that it is possible to determine an optimal cut-off value for competence testing with the STRESS machine.

Contains fulltext : 88507.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)

Contains fulltext : 87282.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access), BACKGROUND: For patients with large abdominal aortic aneurysms, randomized trials have shown an initial overall survival benefit for elective endovascular repair over conventional open repair. This survival difference, however, was no longer significant in the second year after the procedure. Information regarding the comparative outcome more than 2 years after surgery is important for clinical decision making. METHODS: We conducted a long-term, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial comparing open repair with endovascular repair in 351 patients with an abdominal aortic aneurysm of at least 5 cm in diameter who were considered suitable candidates for both techniques. The primary outcomes were rates of death from any cause and reintervention. Survival was calculated with the use of Kaplan-Meier methods on an intention-to-treat basis. RESULTS: We randomly assigned 178 patients to undergo open repair and 173 to undergo endovascular repair. Six years after randomization, the cumulative survival rates were 69.9% for open repair and 68.9% for endovascular repair (difference, 1.0 percentage point; 95% confidence interval [CI], -8.8 to 10.8; P=0.97). The cumulative rates of freedom from secondary interventions were 81.9% for open repair and 70.4% for endovascular repair (difference, 11.5 percentage points; 95% CI, 2.0 to 21.0; P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Six years after randomization, endovascular and open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm resulted in similar rates of survival. The rate of secondary interventions was significantly higher for endovascular repair. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00421330.)

Contains fulltext : 88507.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)