This study was to analyze the outcomes of left subclavian artery (LSA) revascularization during thoracic endovascular repair (TEVAR) for type B aortic dissections (TBAD). From 2011 to 2017, TBAD patients who underwent LSA revascularization during TEVAR were enrolled. Technical success, endoleaks, mortality, complication, reintervention, and patency of target vessels were analyzed. 38 patients were included, 14 underwent carotid-subclavian bypass (CSB), and 24 underwent chimney graft (CG) implantation. Technical success rates were 92.9% and 100% in CSB and CG group. Eleven immediate type I endoleak (EL-I) was detected, including one from CSB group and ten from CG group. Three immediate type II endoleak (EL-II) was detected in CSB group. Perioperative complications showed no difference, but CSB group had longer intensive care unit (ICU) stay time. Median follow-up time was 26.2 months, and overall mortality was 14.3% and 0% in each group. Three EL-I and one EL-II underwent reintervention. All the LSA showed good patency, except one suffered from CG collapse. Both CSB and CG were feasible strategies to preserve the antegrade blood flow of LSA, and each strategy had its advantages and disadvantages. Based on our current experience, we preferred CG for high-risk patients. However, the evidence was still not strong enough, further well-designed studies are necessary to identify the criteria for LSA revascularization strategy during TEVAR.

Predictive value of frailty in the mortality of hospitalized patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis Yupei Zou, Maonan Han, Jiarong Wang, Jichun Zhao, Huatian Gan, Yi Yang

Objective: To evaluate the effect of malnutrition assessed by the Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) on major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) in the elderly patients after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR).Materials and methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of elderly patients who underwent EVAR in a tertiary hospital. Malnutrition status was assessed by the GNRI. The primary outcome was MACCE. The predictive ability of the GNRI was compared with both the Revised Cardiac Risk Index (RCRI) and the modified Frailty Index (mFI) using Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.Result: A total of 453 patients underwent EVAR November 2015 and January 2020 was retrospectively analyzed, equally divided into three (low/medium/high) groups according to GNRI values which ranked from low to high. Five (1.10%) patients were lost in follow-up after surgery, and the median length of follow-up was 28.00 (15.00–47.00) months. The high GNRI values reduced length of hospital stay following EVAR in comparison to patients in low GNRI values group (β 9.67, 95% CI 4.01–23.32, p = 0.0113; adjusted β −1.96, 95% CI −3.88, −0.05, p = 0.0454). GNRI status was associated with a significantly increased risk of long-term mortality after EVAR (Medium GNRI, unadjusted HR 0.40, 95%CI 0.23–0.70, p = 0.0014; adjusted HR 0.47, 95%CI 0.26–0.84, p = 0.0107; high GNRI, 0.27 95%CI 0.14–0.55; p = 0.0003; adjusted HR 0.32 95%CI 0.15–0.68, p = 0.0029). Both medium and high GNRI values were linked to significantly reduced risks of MACCE compared to low GNRI score patients (Medium GNRI, unadjusted HR 0.34, 95%CI 0.13–0.88, p = 0.00265; adjusted HR 0.37, 95%CI 0.14–0.96, p = 0.0408; High GNRI, 0.26 95%CI 0.09–0.78; p = 0.0168; adjusted HR 0.21 95%CI 0.06–0.73, p = 0.0029). Compared with the RCRI and mFI, the GNRI had better discrimination in predicting long-term MACCE. An area under the curve (AUC) for GNRI mFI, and RCRI is 0.707, 0.614 and 0.588, respectively. (Z statistic, GNRI vs. mFI, p = 0.0475; GNRI vs. RCRI, p = 0.0017).Conclusion: Malnutrition assessed by the GNRI may serve as a useful predictor of long-term MACCE in elderly patients after EVAR, with preferable discrimination abilities compared with both RCRI and mFI.

Consideration for oversizing the proximal stent graft is suggested in endovascular aortic repair. However, a special recommendation for the proximal oversizing ratio (OSR) in patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) is ambiguous. This study aims to evaluate the effect of different degrees of the proximal oversizing ratio (OSR) on risk of type IA endoleak (TIAEL) in hemodynamically stable and unstable patients with rAAA undergoing emergency endovascular aortic repair (EVAR). Our study included 134 rAAA patients undergoing emergent EVAR, and we did not observe a significant association between hemodynamic instability and risk of T1AEL (HR 3.89, 95%CI 0.40–37.75, p = 0.24). All three T1AELs in the hemodynamically unstable subgroup were observed in patients with OSR ≤ 30%, but no significant difference was found regarding T1AEL between patients with OSR > 30% and OSR ≤ 30% (0.00% vs. 11.11%, p = 0.19). As for hemodynamically stable patients, OSR > 20% was associated with a significantly decreased risk of T1AEL (HR 0.03, 95%CI 0.01–0.53, p = 0.016). In conclusion, a proximal OSR > 20% is associated with a decreased risk of T1AEL in hemodynamically stable patients, while an OSR > 30% did not add an additional advantage of lowering the risk of T1AEL in hemodynamically unstable patients.

Background: Wide-spread concerns have been raised about possible bias in published surgical non-inferiority trials. Therefore, we performed a comprehensive bibliometric analysis to identify the existence of bias, and provided recommendations for future non-inferiority trials. Methods: Databases including MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched (last update on 27 April 2020) to include published phase II and phase III non-inferiority surgical trials. We collected general information and parameters associated with trial design. The association between extracted factors and establishment of non-inferiority was then analyzed. Results: A total of 347 trials were included in this study. Only 13 (3.7%) trials reported the pre-specified non-inferiority margin in registration, and 99 (28.5%) trials justified margin selection in ultimate trial publications. A significant association was found between industry funding and increased odds of achieving non-inferiority [odds ratio (OR): 1.17, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.06 to 1.30, P=0.001]. Moreover, trials which had been presented in conferences were less likely to claim non-inferiority (OR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.69 to 0.99, P=0.035). Conclusions: Our study was the first quantitative analysis revealing the presence of biases in findings of existing surgical non-inferiority trials, which could possibly mislead surgeons’ clinical decision making. We suggest improving reporting of detailed study design especially funding sources as well as margin justification for future trials. We also encourage conference presentation of ongoing trials prior to the ultimate publication.