Julian Smith

Prof. Julian Smith

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

42Years (1985-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 November 1995 in Circulation
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
JFJames I. Fann
James I. Fann
JSJulian Smith
Julian Smith
DMD. Craig Miller
D. Craig Miller
RMR. Scott Mitchell
R. Scott Mitchell
KMKathleen A. Moore
Kathleen A. Moore
NSNorman E. Shumway
Norman E. Shumway
BackgroundCertain recent studies have demonstrated improved surgical outcome in patients with aortic dissection. We analyzed the surgical survival rates of patients with acute aortic dissections and the late prognosis of those with aortic dissection during a 30-year period.Methods and ResultsBetween 1963 and 1992, 360 patients (256 men and 104 women; mean±1 SD age, 57±14 years) underwent surgery for aortic dissection: 174 patients had an acute type A (AcA), 46 an acute type B (AcB), 106 a chronic type A (ChA), and 34 a chronic type B (ChB) aortic dissection. The overall operative mortality rate was 24±8% (26±3% for AcA, 39±8% for AcB, 17±4% for ChA, and 15±6% for ChB, [±70% confidence limit]). The operative mortality rates for patients with acute aortic dissection (AcA or AcB) were assessed for five time “windows”: 1963 to 1972 (42±8%), 1973 to 1977 (37±8%), 1978 to 1982 (15±6%), 1983 to 1987 (27±6%), and 1988 to 1992 (26±6%). Logistic regression analysis suggested that the low operative mortality rate during the 1978-to-1982 interval occurred by chance. Multivariate analysis showed earlier operative year, hypertension, cardiac tamponade, renal dysfunction, and older age were independent determinants of operative death. Actuarial survival rates (including early deaths) after 5, 10, and 15 years for AcA patients were 55%, 37%, and 24%; for AcB, 48%, 29%, and 11%; for ChA, 65%, 45%, and 27%; and for ChB, 59%, 45%, and 27%. Multivariate analysis revealed that older age and previous operation were significant predictors for late death. Freedom from reoperation for all patients was 84%, 67%, and 57% at 5, 10, and 15 years, respectively.ConclusionsAlthough the operative mortality rate decreased over time for patients with aortic dissection, the risk for those with acute aortic dissection during the last 10 years (1983 to 1992) is probably more realistic than that observed in the preceding 5-year interval (1978 to 1982). The operative mortality rates for patients with chronic aortic dissection have remained relatively static. Earlier diagnosis of acute aortic dissection before development of cardiac tamponade and renal impairment is critical to improve the operative salvage rate. Long-term outcome still is not optimal, which emphasizes the need for better serial postoperative aortic imaging surveillance and medical follow-up and blood pressure control.

25 February 2016 in New England Journal of Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
PMPaul S. Myles
Paul S. Myles
JSJulian Smith
Julian Smith
AFAndrew Forbes
Andrew Forbes
BSBrendan Silbert
Brendan Silbert
MJMohandas Jayarajah
Mohandas Jayarajah
SWSophie Wallace
Sophie Wallace
Most patients with coronary artery disease receive aspirin for primary or secondary prevention of myocardial infarction, stroke, and death. Aspirin poses a risk of bleeding in patients undergoing surgery, but it is unclear whether aspirin should be stopped before coronary artery surgery. We used a 2-by-2 factorial trial design to randomly assign patients who were scheduled to undergo coronary artery surgery and were at risk for perioperative complications to receive aspirin or placebo and tranexamic acid or placebo. The results of the aspirin trial are reported here. Patients were randomly assigned to receive 100 mg of aspirin or matched placebo preoperatively. The primary outcome was a composite of death and thrombotic complications (nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, pulmonary embolism, renal failure, or bowel infarction) within 30 days after surgery. Among 5784 eligible patients, 2100 were enrolled; 1047 were randomly assigned to receive aspirin and 1053 to receive placebo. A primary outcome event occurred in 202 patients in the aspirin group (19.3%) and in 215 patients in the placebo group (20.4%) (relative risk, 0.94; 95% confidence interval, 0.80 to 1.12; P=0.55). Major hemorrhage leading to reoperation occurred in 1.8% of patients in the aspirin group and in 2.1% of patients in the placebo group (P=0.75), and cardiac tamponade occurred at rates of 1.1% and 0.4%, respectively (P=0.08). Among patients undergoing coronary artery surgery, the administration of preoperative aspirin resulted in neither a lower risk of death or thrombotic complications nor a higher risk of bleeding than that with placebo. (Funded by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council and others; Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry number, ACTRN12605000557639.)

1 September 2003 in Chest
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
GSGregory I. Snell
Gregory I. Snell
LHLynda Holsworth
Lynda Holsworth
ZBZoe L. Borrill
Zoe L. Borrill
KTKen R. Thomson
Ken R. Thomson
VKVictor Kalff
Victor Kalff
TWTrevor J. Williams
Trevor J. Williams

1 January 2012 in The American Journal of Cardiology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
ASAkshat Saxena
Akshat Saxena
DDDiem T. Dinh
Diem T. Dinh
JSJulian Smith
Julian Smith
GSGilbert C. Shardey
Gilbert C. Shardey
CRChristopher M. Reid
Christopher M. Reid
ANAndrew E. Newcomb
Andrew E. Newcomb

1 July 2007 in Sensors and Actuators A: Physical
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
HLHwee Choo Liaw
Hwee Choo Liaw
BSBijan Shirinzadeh
Bijan Shirinzadeh
JSJulian Smith
Julian Smith

1 January 2005 in The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
FRFranklin Rosenfeldt
Franklin Rosenfeldt
SMSilvana Marasco
Silvana Marasco
WLWilliam Lyon
William Lyon
MWMichelle Wowk
Michelle Wowk
FSFreya Sheeran
Freya Sheeran
SPSalvatore Pepe
Salvatore Pepe