Search

Syed Sajid Hussain Kazmi,1,2 Nathkai Safi,1,2 Simen Tveten Berge,1,2 Marryam Kazmi,1,3 Jon Otto Sundhagen,1 Kari Julien,4 Per Medbøe Thorsby,2,4 Kim Vidar Ånonsen,5 Asle Wilhelm Medhus,2,5 Jonny Hisdal1,2 1Department of Vascular Surgery, Division of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Diseases, Oslo University Hospital, Ullevål, Oslo, Norway; 2Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway; 3Faculty 2, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poznan, Poland; 4The Hormone Laboratory, Department of Medical Biochemistry, Oslo University Hospital, Aker, Oslo, Norway; 5Department of Gastroenterology, Oslo University Hospital, Ullevål, Oslo, NorwayCorrespondence: Syed Sajid Hussain Kazmi, Tel +47 92468309, Email sshkazmi@gmail.comBackground: Chronic mesenteric ischemia (CMI) due to either atherosclerosis of the mesenteric arteries or median arcuate ligament syndrome (MALS) is an underdiagnosed entity. The etiology of MALS and its existence have been debated and questioned. We aimed to identify plasma biomarkers indicating mesenteric ischemia in patients with CMI and MALS.Methods: Plasma α-glutathione S-transferase (α-GST), intestinal fatty acid-binding protein (I-FABP), citrulline, and ischemia modified albumin (IMA) were analyzed in fifty-eight patients with CMI (Group A, n=44) and MALS (Group B, n=14) before and after revascularization. The plasma levels of these potential biomarkers were compared with those of healthy individuals (Group C, n=16). Group comparison was performed with the Mann–Whitney U-test. Cross-tabulation and its derivatives were obtained. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and area under the curve (AUC) were calculated.Results: Plasma levels of α-GST were significantly raised in the patients with CMI (7.8 ng/mL, p< 0.001) and MALS (8.4 ng/mL, p< 0.001), as compared with the control Group C (3.3 ng/mL). The threshold for normal median plasma α-GST levels of 4 ng/mL yielded a sensitivity of 93%

Syed Sajid Hussain Kazmi,1,2 Nathkai Safi,1,2 Simen Tveten Berge,2,3 Marryam Kazmi,1,4 Jon Otto Sundhagen,1 Jonny Hisdal1,2 1Department of Vascular Surgery, Division of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Diseases, Oslo University Hospital, Ullevål, Oslo, Norway; 2Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway; 3Department of Vascular Surgery, Innlandet Hospital Trust, Hamar, Norway; 4Faculty 2, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poznan, PolandCorrespondence: Syed Sajid Hussain Kazmi, Department of Vascular Surgery, Division of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Diseases, Oslo University Hospital, Ullevål, Kirkeveien 166, Oslo, 0450, Norway, Tel +47 92468309, Email sshkazmi@gmail.comBackground: The selection of patients with MALS for surgical treatment depends upon the reliability of the symptom interpretation and the diagnostic work-up. We aimed to follow up the results of the laparoscopic decompression of the patients with MALS.Patients and Methods: In a single-center, 52 consecutive MALS patients were followed-up, prospectively, after transperitoneal laparoscopic decompression. MALS was diagnosed with a computed tomography angiography (CTA) verified stenosis, ≥ 50% of the celiac artery (CA), and with duplex ultrasound, a peak systolic velocity (PSV) ≥ 2.0 m/s. Postoperative, CTA, and duplex ultrasound were performed, and the patients were followed-up at 3, 6, 12 months, and yearly after that.Results: Mean age of the patients was 47 ± 21 years, and 65% were females. The patients had a mean weight loss of 8.4 ± 7.2 kg. Fifty-one patients had the laparoscopic operation with a mean operation time of 102 ± 28 minutes. Forty-seven patients (90%) achieved relief from the symptoms either completely (67%) or partially (23%) at 3– 6 months of follow-up. Significant improvement in postoperative PSV was found compared to the preoperative values, p< 0.001. Five patients (10%) with no immediate effect of the operation, but two of the

Nathkai Safi,1,2 Kim Vidar Ånonsen,3 Simen Tveten Berge,1,2 Asle Wilhelm Medhus,3 Jon Otto Sundhagen,1 Jonny Hisdal,1,2 Syed Sajid Hussain Kazmi1,2 1Department of Vascular Surgery, Division of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Diseases, Oslo University Hospital, Ullevål, Oslo, Norway; 2Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway; 3Department of Gastroenterology, Oslo University Hospital, Ullevål, Oslo, NorwayCorrespondence: Syed Sajid Hussain Kazmi, Tel +47 92468309, Email sshkazmi@gmail.comIntroduction: Due to diagnostic delay, chronic mesenteric ischemia (CMI) is underdiagnosed. We assumed that the patients suspected of CMI of the atherosclerotic origin or median arcuate ligament syndrome (MALS) could be identified earlier with endoscopic duplex ultrasound (E-DUS).Patients and Methods: Fifty CMI patients with CTA-verified stenosis of either ≥ 50% and ≥ 70% of celiac artery (CA) and superior mesenteric artery (SMA) were examined with E-DUS and transabdominal duplex ultrasound (TA-DUS). Peak systolic velocities (PSV) of ≥ 200cm/s and ≥ 275cm/s for CA and SMA, respectively, were compared with CTA. Subgroup analysis was performed for the patients with (n=21) and without (n=29) prior revascularization treatment of CMI. The diagnostic ability of E-DUS and TA-DUS was tested with crosstabulation analysis. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve analysis was performed, and the area under the curve (AUC) was calculated to investigate the test accuracy.Results: In the patients with ≥ 70% stenosis, E-DUS had higher sensitivity than TA-DUS (91% vs 81% for CA and 100% vs 92% for SMA). AUC for SMA ≥ 70% in E-DUS was 0.75 and with TA-DUS 0.68. The sensitivity of E-DUS for CTA-verified stenosis ≥ 70% for CA was 100% in the patients without prior treatment. E-DUS demonstrated higher sensitivity than TA-DUS for both arteries with stenosis ≥ 50% and ≥ 70% in the treatment-naive patients.Conclusion: E-DUS is equally vali

Mehdi Sahba,1,2 Anne Helene Krog,1 Erik Mulder Pettersen,3 Torbjørn Wisløff,4 Jon Otto Sundhagen,5 Syed Sajid Hussain Kazmi2,5 1Department of Vascular Surgery, Østfold Central Hospital, Kalnes, Norway; 2Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway; 3Department of Vascular Surgery, Sørlandet Hospital HF, Kristiansand, Norway; 4Health Services Research Unit, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway; 5Department of Vascular Surgery, Division of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Diseases, Oslo University Hospital, Ullevål, Oslo, NorwayCorrespondence: Syed Sajid Hussain Kazmi, Tel +47 92468309, Email sshkazmi@gmail.comBackground: QoL assessment within surgical treatment is seldom investigated and sparsely reported in the medical literature. This study aimed to compare QoL in a randomized fashion in the patients treated with either a laparoscopic aortobifemoral bypass (LABFB) or an open aortobifemoral bypass (OABFB) for the treatment of AIOD.Patients and Methods: Seventy-one consecutive patients with AIOD, Trans-Atlantic Inter-Society Consensus II Type D lesions (TASC II, Type D) were randomized to LABFB or OABFB. Thirty-five patients in the LABFB and thirty-six in the OABFB groups were compared for the changes in the QoL, with the short-form health survey (SF-36), EuroQol 5 dimensions (EQ-5D), and EQ-5D visual analog scale (VAS) preoperatively, and postoperatively at 1, 3, 6, 12 and 24 months. Mann–Whitney U-Test and Wilcoxon sign-rank test were used for group comparison. Mixed model analysis was performed to examine the effect of different variables on the QoL.Results: In the patients treated with LABFB, physical component score (PCS) and mental component score (MCS) in SF-36 were significantly higher than OABFB, at 1 and 3 months postoperatively. PCS was also significantly higher in the LABFB group than OABFB at 24 months postoperatively. The preoperative QoL scores for both the laparoscopy and the open group were sign

Toril Rabben,1 Saira Mauland Mansoor,1 Dag Bay,2 Jon Otto Sundhagen,1 Cecilia Guevara,1 Jorgen Joakim Jorgensen1,3,4 1Department of Vascular Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway; 2Department of Radiology and Interventional Radiology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway; 3Department of Traumatology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway; 4Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, NorwayCorrespondence: Toril RabbenDepartment of Vascular Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, P.O. Box 4950 Nydalen, Oslo, 0424, NorwayTel +47 97190981Email torabb@ous-hf.noPurpose: To investigate the prevalence of and risk factors for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) in 65-year-old men in Oslo, Norway.Materials and Methods: From May 2011, until September 2019, the annual population of 65-year-old men living in Oslo were invited to an ultrasonographic screening of the abdominal aorta. Candidates received a one-time invitation by mail, including a questionnaire on possible risk factors and comorbidities. Abdominal aortic outer-to-outer diameter and ankle-brachial index were measured by the screening team. Participants were allocated into three groups: non-, sub- and aneurysmal aorta. Written information on recommended follow-up regime was given to participants with an aortic diameter ≥ 25 mm. Univariate and multivariate analyses of potential risk factors were performed, in addition to descriptive analyses and significance testing.Results: In total, 19,328 were invited, 13,215 men were screened, of which 12,822 accepted inclusion in the study. Aortic diameter was registered for 12,810 participants and 330 men had aortic diameter ≥ 30 mm, giving a prevalence of AAA of 2.6% (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.31– 2.86). We identified 4 independent risk factors for AAA: smoking (OR = 3.64, 95% CI 2.90– 4.58), hypertension (OR = 1.87, 95% CI 1.49– 2.35), BMI > 30 (OR = 1.02, 95% CI 1.00– 1.03), and diabetes mellitus (OR = 0.52, 95% CI 0.3

Syed Sajid Hussain Kazmi,1,2 Simen Tveten Berge,1,2 Mehdi Sahba,2,3 Asle Wilhelm Medhus,4 Jon Otto Sundhagen1 1Department of Vascular Surgery, Heart, Lung and Vascular Clinic, Oslo University Hospital Aker, Oslo, Norway; 2Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway; 3Department of Vascular Surgery, Ostfold Central Hospital, Kalnes, Norway; 4Department of Gastroenterology, Oslo University Hospital, Ullevål, NorwayCorrespondence: Syed Sajid Hussain KazmiDepartment of Vascular Surgery, Heart, Lung and Vascular Clinic, Oslo University Hospital Aker, Oslo, NorwayEmail sshkazmi@gmail.comBackground: Laparoscopic aortomesenteric bypass may be performed to treat the chronic mesenteric ischemia patients who are not suitable for endovascular treatment. This study presents an initial experience with a limited series of laparoscopic mesenteric artery revascularization for the treatment of mesenteric ischemia.Methods: Chronic mesenteric ischemia (CMI) patients with previous unsuccessful endovascular treatment or with arterial occlusion and extensive calcification precluding safe endovascular treatment were offered laparoscopic mesenteric revascularization. From October 2015 until November 2018, nine patients with CMI underwent laparoscopic revascularization. In addition to demographic data and perioperative results of the treatment, graft patency was assessed with Duplex ultrasound at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months, and annually thereafter. A descriptive analysis of the data was performed.Results: All bypasses were constructed with an 8 mm ring enforced expanded polytetrafluoroethylene graft in a retrograde fashion (from infrarenal aorta or iliac artery) to either superior mesenteric artery or splenic artery (2 cases). Median operation time was 356 mins (range 247– 492 mins). Five patients had a history of unsuccessful endovascular treatment. Laparoscopic technical success was 78%, and the primary open conversion rate was 22%. All laparoscop

Anne Helene Krog,1,2 Mehdi Sahba,3 Erik M Pettersen,4 Torbjørn Wisløff,5,6 Jon O Sundhagen,2 Syed SH Kazmi2 1Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, 2Department of Vascular Surgery, Division of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Diseases, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, 3Department of Vascular Surgery, Østfold Central Hospital, Kalnes, 4Department of Vascular Surgery, Sørlandet Hospital HF, Kristiansand, 5Department of Health Management and Health Economics, University of Oslo, 6Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway Objectives: Laparoscopic aortobifemoral bypass has become an established treatment option for symptomatic aortoiliac obstructive disease at dedicated centers. Minimally invasive surgical techniques like laparoscopic surgery have often been shown to reduce expenses and increase patients’ health-related quality of life. The main objective of our study was to measure quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs after totally laparoscopic and open aortobifemoral bypass. Patients and methods: This was a within trial analysis in a larger ongoing randomized controlled prospective multicenter trial, Norwegian Laparoscopic Aortic Surgery Trial. Fifty consecutive patients suffering from symptomatic aortoiliac occlusive disease suitable for aortobifemoral bypass surgery were randomized to either totally laparoscopic (n=25) or open surgical procedure (n=25). One patient dropped out of the study before surgery. We measured health-related quality of life using the EuroQol (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire at 4 different time points, before surgery and for 6 months during follow-up. We calculated the QALYs gained by using the area under the curve for both groups. Costs were calculated based on prices for surgical equipment, vascular prosthesis and hospital stay. Results: We found a significantly higher increase in QALYs after laparoscopic vs open aortobifemoral bypass surgery, with a

Krog AH, Sahba M, Pettersen EM, et al. Vasc Health Risk Manag. 2016;12:371–378.On page 371, author list, the author “Syed SS Kazmi” should have read “Syed SH Kazmi”.Read the original article

Anne H Krog,1,2 Mehdi Sahba,3 Erik M Pettersen,4 Irene Sandven,5 Per M Thorsby,1,6 Jørgen J Jørgensen,1,2 Jon O Sundhagen,2 Syed SS Kazmi2 1Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, 2Department of Vascular Surgery, Division of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Diseases, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, 3Department of Vascular Surgery, Østfold Central Hospital, Fredrikstad, 4Department of Vascular Surgery, Sørlandet Hospital HF, Kristiansand, 5Oslo Center for Biostatistics and Epidemiology (OCBE), 6Hormone Laboratory, Department of Medical Biochemistry, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway Purpose: Minimally invasive surgical techniques have been shown to reduce the inflammatory response related to a surgical procedure. The main objective of our study was to measure the inflammatory response in patients undergoing a totally laparoscopic versus open aortobifemoral bypass surgery. This is the first randomized trial on subjects in this population.Patients and methods: This is a substudy of a larger randomized controlled multicenter trial (Norwegian Laparoscopic Aortic Surgery Trial). Thirty consecutive patients with severe aortoiliac occlusive disease eligible for aortobifemoral bypass surgery were randomized to either a totally laparoscopic (n=14) or an open surgical procedure (n=16). The inflammatory response was measured by perioperative monitoring of serum interleukin-6 (IL-6), IL-8, and C-reactive protein (CRP) at six different time points.Results: The inflammatory reaction caused by the laparoscopic procedure was reduced compared with open surgery. IL-6 was significantly lower after the laparoscopic procedure, measured by comparing area under the curve (AUC), and after adjusting for the confounding effect of coronary heart disease (P=0.010). The differences in serum levels of IL-8 and CRP did not reach statistical significance.Conclusion: In this substudy of a randomized controlled trial comparing laparoscopic and

Syed SH Kazmi,1 Jørgen Junkichi Jørgensen,1,2 Jon Otto Sundhagen,1 Anne Helene Krog,1,2 Tor L Flørenes,1 Dagfinn Kollerøs,3 Michael Abdelnoor2,4,5 1Department of Vascular Surgery, Heart, Lung and Vascular Disease Clinic, Oslo University Hospital, 2Faculty of Medicine, Oslo University, 3Department of Anaesthesiology, Oslo University Hospital, 4Unit of Epidemiology and Biological Statistics, 5Centre for Clinical Heart Research, Faculty of Medicine, Oslo University, Oslo, Norway Background: Totally laparoscopic aortobifemoral bypass (LABF) procedure has been shown to be feasible for the treatment of advanced aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD). This study compares the LABF with the open aortobifemoral bypass (OABF) operation. Methods: In this prospective comparative cohort study, 50 consecutive patients with type D atherosclerotic lesions in the aortoiliac segment were treated with an LABF operation. The group was compared with 30 patients who were operated on with the OABF procedure for the same disease and time period. We had an explanatory strategy, and our research hypothesis was to compare the two surgical procedures based on a composite event (all-cause mortality, graft occlusion, and systemic morbidity). Stratification analysis was performed by using the Mantel–Haenszel method with the patient–time model. Cox multivariate regression method was used to adjust for confounding effect after considering the proportional hazard assumption. Cox proportional cause-specific hazard regression model was used for competing risk endpoint. Results: There was a higher frequency of comorbidity in the OABF group. A significant reduction of composite event, 82% (hazard ratio 0.18; 95% CI 0.08–0.42, P=0.0001) was found in the LABF group when compared with OABF group, during a median follow-up time period of 4.12 years (range from 1 day to 9.32 years). In addition, less operative bleeding and shorter length o