Upper Arm Measurements of Healthy Neonates Comparing Ultrasonography and Anthropometric Methods

Objective: To compare measurements of the upper arm cross-sectional areas (total arm area,arm muscle area, and arm fat area of healthy neonates) as calculated using anthropometry with the values obtained by ultrasonography. Materials and methods: This study was performed on 60 consecutively born healthy neonates: gestational age (mean6SD) 39.661.2 weeks, birth weight 3287.16307.7 g, 27 males (45%) and 33 females (55%). Mid-arm circumference and tricipital skinfold thickness measurements were taken on the left upper mid-arm according to the conventional anthropometric method to calculate total arm area, arm muscle area and arm fat area. The ultrasound evaluation was performed at the same arm location using a Toshiba sonolayer SSA-250AÒ, which allows the calculation of the total arm area, arm muscle area and arm fat area by the number of pixels enclosed in the plotted areas. Statistical analysis: whenever appropriate, parametric and non-parametric tests were used in order to compare measurements of paired samples and of groups of samples. Results: No significant differences between males and females were found in any evaluated measurements, estimated either by anthropometry or by ultrasound. Also the median of total arm area did not differ significantly with either method (P50.337). Although there is evidence of concordance of the total arm area measurements (r50.68, 95% CI: 0.55–0.77) the two methods of measurement differed for arm muscle area and arm fat area. The estimated median of measurements by ultrasound for arm muscle area were significantly lower than those estimated by the anthropometric method, which differed by as much as 111% (P,0.001). The estimated median ultrasound measurement of the arm fat was higher than the anthropometric arm fat area by as much as 31% (P,0.001). Conclusion: Compared with ultrasound measurements using skinfold measurements and mid-arm circumference without further correction may lead to overestimation of the cross-sectional area of muscle and underestimation of the cross-sectional fat area. The correlation between the two methods could be interpreted as an indication for further search of correction factors in the equations.

Clinical Outcome and Morphologic Determinants of Mural Thrombus in Abdominal Aortic Endografts

OBJECTIVE:Endograft mural thrombus has been associated with stent graft or limb thrombosis after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). This study aimed to identify clinical and morphologic determinants of endograft mural thrombus accumulation and its influence on thromboembolic events after EVAR. METHODS: A prospectively maintained database of patients treated by EVAR at a tertiary institution from 2000 to 2012 was analyzed. Patients treated for degenerative infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms and with available imaging for thrombus analysis were considered. All measurements were performed on three-dimensional center-lumen line computed tomography angiography (CTA) reconstructions. Patients with thrombus accumulation within the endograft's main body with a thickness >2 mm and an extension >25% of the main body's circumference were included in the study group and compared with a control group that included all remaining patients. Clinical and morphologic variables were assessed for association with significant thrombus accumulation within the endograft's main body by multivariate regression analysis. Estimates for freedom from thromboembolic events were obtained by Kaplan-Meier plots. RESULTS: Sixty-eight patients (16.4%) presented with endograft mural thrombus. Median follow-up time was 3.54 years (interquartile range, 1.99-5.47 years). In-graft mural thrombus was identified on 30-day CTA in 22 patients (32.4% of the study group), on 6-month CTA in 8 patients (11.8%), and on 1-year CTA in 17 patients (25%). Intraprosthetic thrombus progressively accumulated during the study period in 40 patients of the study group (55.8%). Overall, 17 patients (4.1%) presented with endograft or limb occlusions, 3 (4.4%) in the thrombus group and 14 (4.1%) in the control group (P = .89). Thirty-one patients (7.5%) received an aortouni-iliac (AUI) endograft. Two endograft occlusions were identified among AUI devices (6.5%; overall, 0.5%). None of these patients showed thrombotic deposits in the main body, nor were any outflow abnormalities identified on the immediately preceding CTA. Estimated freedom from thromboembolic events at 5 years was 95% in both groups (P = .97). Endograft thrombus accumulation was associated with >25% proximal aneurysm neck thrombus coverage at baseline (odds ratio [OR], 1.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-3.3), neck length ≤ 15 mm (OR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.3-4.2), proximal neck diameter ≥ 30 mm (OR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.3-4.6), AUI (OR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.8-5.5), or polyester-covered stent grafts (OR, 4.0; 95% CI, 2.2-7.3) and with main component "barrel-like" configuration (OR, 6.9; 95% CI, 1.7-28.3). CONCLUSIONS: Mural thrombus formation within the main body of the endograft is related to different endograft configurations, main body geometry, and device fabric but appears to have no association with the occurrence of thromboembolic events over time.