Search

Objective: Complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (cAAA) pose a clinical challenge. The aim of this study was to assess the 30 day mortality and morbidity rates for open aneurysm repair (OAR) and fenestrated or branched endovascular aortic repair (F/B-EVAR), and the effect of hospital volume in patients with asymptomatic cAAA in Switzerland., Methods: Retrospective, cohort study using data from Switzerland's national registry for vascular surgery, Swissvasc, including patients treated from 1 January 2019 to 31 December 2022. All patients with asymptomatic, true, non-infected cAAA were identified. The primary outcome was 30 day mortality and morbidity rates reported using the Clavien-Dindo classification. Outcomes were compared between OAR and F/B-EVAR after propensity score weighting., Results: Of the 461 patients identified, 333 underwent OAR and 128 underwent F/B-EVAR for cAAA. At 30 days, the overall mortality rate was 3.3% after OAR and 3.1% after F/B-EVAR (p = .76). Propensity score weighted analysis indicated similar morbidity rates for both approaches: F/B-EVAR (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.45 - 1.05, p = .055); intestinal ischaemia (1.8% after OAR, 3.1% after F/B-EVAR, p = .47) and renal failure requiring dialysis (1.5% after OAR, 5.5% after F/B-EVAR, p = .024) were associated with highest morbidity and mortality rates. Treatment specific complications with high morbidity were abdominal compartment syndrome and lower limb compartment syndrome following F/B-EVAR. Overall treatment volume was low for most of the hospitals treating cAAA in Switzerland; outliers with increased mortality rates were identified among low volume hospitals., Conclusion: Comparable 30 day mortality and morbidity rates were found between OAR and F/B-EVAR for cAAA in Switzerland; lack of centralisation was also highlighted. Organ specific complications driving death were renal failure, intestinal ischaemia, and limb ischaemia, specifically after F/B-EVAR. Treatment in specialised high volume centres, alongside efforts to reduce peri-procedural kidney injury and mesenteric ischaemia, offers potential to lower morbidity and mortality rates in elective cAAA treatment., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Manuscripts submitted to the European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery (EJVES) often contain shortcomings in baseline scientific principles and incorrectly applied methodology. Consequently, the editorial team is forced to offer post hoc repair in an attempt to support the authors to improve their manuscripts. This repair could theoretically have been prevented by providing more clear definitions and reporting standards to serve researchers when planning studies and eventually writing their manuscripts. Therefore, the general principles for EJVES publication standards are summarised here., Methods: These publication standards did not follow a systematic approach but reflect the common opinion of the current Senior and Section Editors team. This team decided to only include recommendations regarding the most common pathologies in vascular surgery in this first edition of publication standards, namely carotid artery disease, abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), peripheral arterial occlusive disease (PAOD), and chronic venous disease. In future editions, the plan is to expand the areas of research., Results: Presented are (1) a common set of minimum but required publication standards applicable to every report, e.g., patient characteristics, study design, treatment environment, selection criteria, core outcomes of interventions such as 30 day death and morbidity, and measures for completeness of data including outcome information, and (2) a common set of minimum publication standards for four vascular areas., Conclusion: The editors of the EJVES propose universally accepted definitions and publication standards for carotid artery disease, AAA, PAOD, and chronic venous disease. This will enable the development of a convincing body of evidence to aid future clinical practice guidelines and drive clinical practice in the right direction. These first ever publication and reporting standards for EJVES aim to improve future research published in the journal., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

How does the brain track and process rapidly changing sensory information? Current computational accounts suggest that our sensations and decisions arise from the intricate interplay between bottom-up sensory signals and constantly changing expectations regarding the statistics of the surrounding world. A significant focus of recent research is determining which statistical properties are tracked by the brain as it monitors the rapid progression of sensory information. Here, by combining EEG (three experiments N ≥ 22 each) and computational modelling, we examined how the brain processes rapid and stochastic sound sequences that simulate key aspects of dynamic sensory environments. Passively listening participants were exposed to structured tone-pip arrangements that contained transitions between a range of stochastic patterns. Predictions were guided by a Bayesian predictive inference model. We demonstrate that listeners automatically track the statistics of unfolding sounds, even when these are irrelevant to behaviour. Transitions between sequence patterns drove a shift in the sustained EEG response. This was observed to a range of distributional statistics, and even in situations where behavioural detection of these transitions was at floor. These observations suggest that the modulation of the EEG sustained response reflects a process of belief updating within the brain. By establishing a connection between the outputs of the computational model and the observed brain responses, we demonstrate that the dynamics of these transition-related responses align with the tracking of "precision" - the confidence or reliability assigned to a predicted sensory signal - shedding light on the intricate interplay between the brain's statistical tracking mechanisms and its response dynamics., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)