Search

Introduction Following the initial COVID-19 surge in the UK, there was a national incentive for elective vascular surgery to be restricted to ‘clean’ sites to reduce perioperative cross-infection and subsequent mortality. We assessed the risk of dying from perioperatively acquired COVID-19 during the peak of the London outbreak. Methods Forty-three consecutive patients who had vascular (n=48) procedures in March and April 2020 at a regional hub serving five London hospitals were analysed. The patients were screened for COVID-19 in the 30-day postoperative period and the main outcome measure was mortality from COVID-19. A comparison was then made with patients who underwent minimally invasive procedures in our integrated interventional radiology department. Median follow-up was 41 days (interquartile range 8–58) overall. Results Three patients (7%) in the vascular group (median age 61 years, all diabetic, two male) died from COVID-19, all of whom tested positive postoperatively. Two others became positive but recovered. In comparison, two patients (2%) in the interventional radiology group died from COVID-19; however, one was positive prior to their procedure. Conclusion Only urgent vascular cases should be performed during a COVID-19 surge. However, with growing waiting lists for elective surgery following the pandemic’s second wave, further restrictions may not be a viable long-term solution. When prevalence of the disease is lower and if resources allow, resumption of care at ‘hot’ sites should be considered, if safety measures can be implemented. The advantages of minimally invasive surgery may also reduce risk.

Introduction Following the initial COVID-19 surge in the United Kingdom, there was a national incentive for elective vascular surgery to be restricted to clean sites in order to reduce perioperative cross infection and subsequent mortality. We assessed the risk of dying from perioperatively acquired COVID-19 during the peak of the London outbreak. Materials and Methods 43 consecutive patients who had vascular (n = 48) procedures in March and April 2020 at a regional hub serving five London hospitals were analysed. The patients were screened for COVID-19 in the 30-day postoperative period and the main outcome measure was mortality from COVID-19. A comparison was then made with patients who underwent minimally invasive procedures from our integrated interventional radiology department. Median follow-up was 41 days (IQR 8–58 days). Result Three patients (7%) in the vascular group (median age 61 years, all diabetic, two male) died from COVID-19, all of whom tested positive postoperatively. Two others became positive but recovered. In comparison, two patients (2%) in the interventional radiology group died from COVID-19, however one was positive prior to their procedure. Conclusion Only urgent vascular cases should be performed during a COVID-19 surge, with elective work delayed or continued at clean sites. However, with growing waiting lists for elective surgery currently, further restrictions may not be a viable long-term solution. Resumption of care at hot sites should be considered, if resources allow for it and if safety measures can be implemented. The advantages of minimally invasive surgery may inherently reduce risk as well. Take-home Message Only urgent vascular cases should be performed during a peak outbreak of COVID-19, however we cannot continue to postpone elective procedures indefinitely or restrict all cases to solely clean sites. The resumption of care at hot sites encompasses a fine balance of risks versus benefits.

Endovascular aneurysm repair is an established treatment for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm. Primary aortocaval fistula is an exceedingly rare finding in ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm, with a reported incidence of less than 1%. The presence of an aortocaval fistula used to be an unexpected finding in open surgical repair which often resulted in massive haemorrhage and caval injury. We present a case of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm with an aortocaval fistula that was successfully treated with percutaneous endovascular aneurysm repair under local anaesthesia. Despite a persistent type 2 endoleak the aneurysm sack shrank from 8.4cm to 4.8cm in 12 months. The presence of an aortocaval fistula may have depressurised the aneurysm, resulting in less bleeding retroperitoneally and may have promoted rapid shrinkage of the sac despite the presence of a persistent type 2 endoleak.

Aims The standard technique for endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) for varicose veins due to great saphenous vein (GSV) reflux involves obliteration of the above-knee (AK) GSV. This study assesses the significance of persistent below-knee (BK) GSV reflux following such therapy. Methods Sixty-nine limbs (64 patients) with varicosities and GSV reflux underwent AK-EVLA. Post treatment, GSV reflux (ultrasound: six, 12 weeks) and Aberdeen varicose vein severity scores (AVVSS, 12 weeks) were assessed, and residual varicosities treated with foam sclerotherapy (six weeks). Results The untreated BK-GSV remained patent in all limbs. Ultrasound showed normal antegrade flow in 34/69 (49%, Group A), flash reflux 1 s reflux in 28/69 (41%, Group C). Although AVVSS improved in all groups ( P < 0.001): A: 14.6 (8.4–19.3) versus 2.8 (0.5–4.4), B: 13.9 (7.5–20.1) versus 3.7 (2.1–6.8), C: 15.1 (8.9–22.5) versus 8.1 (5.3–12.6) the improvement was less in Group C ( P < 0.001 versus A and B) and was associated with a greater requirement (A: 4/34 [12%]; B: 1/7 [14%]; C: 25/28 [89%]) for sclerotherapy (persisting varicosities) ( P < 0.001). Conclusion Although AK-GSV EVLA improves symptoms regardless of persisting BK reflux, the latter appears responsible for residual symptoms and a greater need for sclerotherapy for residual varicosities.

Background Benign tumors are a rare cause of gastrointestinal hemorrhage of which angioleiomyomas constitute a very small minority. They have been reported in literature to present with volvulus, bleeding or intussusceptions. Case presentation An interesting case of a patient presenting with gastrointestinal bleeding from an underlying angioleiomyoma is discussed along with its management options. Conclusion Angioleiomyoma though rare can be managed successfully by surgical and/or minimally invasive endovascular procedures.