CX 2015 Presentations

CX37
Vascular and Endovascular Controversies update Tuesday 28 April

Chairman Cliff Shearman, Southampton, United Kingdom 08:00 to 09:45

Essential management for every patient with intermittent claudication before consideration of intervention Frans Moll, Utrecht, Netherlands 08:00 to 08:10
Discussion 08:10 to 08:15
3D lower limb perfusion during critical limb ischaemia Andrew Holden, Auckland, New Zealand 08:15 to 08:25
Discussion 08:25 to 08:30
Debate: IVUS is worth the cost for peripheral arterial disease Fabrizio Fanelli, Rome, Italy 08:45 to 08:55
Debate: IVUS is worth the cost for peripheral arterial disease Patrick Peeters, Bonheiden, Belgium 08:45 to 08:55
Discussion and vote 08:55 to 09:00
There is no advantage using heparin with intra-arterial thrombolysis Anders Wanhainen, Uppsala, Sweden 09:00 to 09:10
Discussion 09:10 to 09:15
Definition of success of superficial femoral artery interventions Peter Schneider, Honolulu, United States 09:15 to 09:25
Discussion 09:25 to 09:30
Early clinical outcomes with a new flexible endoluminal stent graft for iliac artery disease Andrew Holden, Auckland, New Zealand 09:30 to 09:40
Discussion 09:40 to 09:45
Debate: Endovascular beats open surgery for TASC C & D SFA lesions irrespective of lesion location Thomas Zeller, Bad Krozingen, Germany 09:45 to 09:55
Debate: Endovascular beats open surgery for TASC C & D SFA lesions irrespective of lesion location Malcolm Simms, Birmingham, United Kingdom 09:45 to 09:55
Discussion and vote 09:55 to 10:00
Chairman Michael Jaff, Boston, United States 10:00 to 10:28
My stent rate for the superficial femoral artery rate is increasing Andrew Holden, Auckland, New Zealand 10:03 to 10:09
The European clinical experience of SUPERA Iris Baumgartner, Bern, Switzerland 10:12 to 10:18
Discussion 10:18 to 10:21
The "Leaving nothing behind" controversy Iris Baumgartner, Bern, Switzerland 10:30 to 13:30
Chairman Greenhalgh Greenhalgh, London, United Kingdom 10:30 to 13:30
Biosorbable stent - 480┬░ Biomedical Andrew Holden, Auckland, New Zealand 10:30 to 10:37
DEFINITIVE AR atherectomy and drug-coated balloons at one year Thomas Zeller, Bad Krozingen, Germany 10:37 to 10:44
EverFlex - Seven-year data Giovanni Torsello, Muenster, Germany 10:44 to 10:51
The FREEDOM trial ? a one-handed delivery system for same-day discharge Yann Goueffic, Nantes, France 10:51 to 10:58
Shockwave Lithoplasty for calcified artery Andrew Holden, Auckland, New Zealand 10:58 to 11:05
Panel discussion 11:05 to 11:22
Current status of drug eluting balloon use in the superficial femoral artery Fabrizio Fanelli, Rome, Italy 11:22 to 11:30
Update on Lutonix drug eluting balloon Dierk Scheinert, Leipzig, Germany 11:30 to 11:38
ILLUMENATE study - 24-month results Stephan Duda, Berlin, Germany 11:38 to 11:06
IN.PACT SFA update Gunnar Tepe, Rosenheim, Germany 11:46 to 11:54
Cost-effectiveness of drug-coated balloons Michael Jaff, Boston, United States 11:54 to 12:02
Methodology differences Thomas Zeller, Bad Krozingen, Germany 12:02 to 12:10
Panel discussion on drug coated balloons and algorithm of care 12:10 to 12:30
Paradigms and importance of lesion length and type William Gray, New York, United States 13:30 to 13:38

Chairman Roger Greenhalgh, London, United Kingdom 13:30 to 15:30
Discussion 13:38 to 13:41
Lower profile robotic catheter use for internal prosthetic bypasses Alan B Lumsden, Houston, United States 13:41 to 13:49
Discussion 13:49 to 13:52
Zilver PTX ? final results at five years Michael Dake, Stanford, United States 13:52 to 14:00
Discussion 14:00 to 14:03
The value of drug elution on a new bare metal stent - SuperNova to Majestic Richard Powell, Lebanon, United States 14:03 to 14:11
Discussion 14:11 to 14:14
The SUPERA stent for superficial femoral artery lesions even with calcification Firas Mussa, New York, United States 14:25 to 14:33
Discussion 14:33 to 14:36
The value of Smart Flex for femoropopliteal disease Peter Goverde, Antwerp, Belgium 14:36 to 14:44
Discussion 14:44 to 14:47
Stent graft and double stent graft for very long lesions in the SFA Daniele Savio, Turin, Italy 14:47 to 14:55
Discussion 14:55 to 14:58
Long-term results of laser and drug-eluting balloon for in-stent restenosis Jos van den Berg, Lugano, Switzerland 14:58 to 15:06
Panel discussion on stent usage and longer lesions 15:09 to 15:30

Chairman Paul Blair, Belfast, United Kingdom 16:00 to 16:20
Debate: Heparin bonding benefits superficial femoral artery PTFE bypass results Russell Samson, Sarasota, United States 16:00 to 16:10
Debate: Heparin bonding benefits superficial femoral artery PTFE bypass results Jonathan Beard, Sheffield, United Kingdom 16:00 to 16:10
Discussion and vote 16:10 to 16:20
Debate: Popliteal aneurysm should be treated by endovascular means Martin Bjorck, Uppsala, Sweden 16:20 to 16:30
Debate: Popliteal aneurysm should be treated by endovascular means Michele Antonello, Padua, Italy 16:20 to 16:30
Discussion and vote 16:30 to 16:40
Definition of critical limb ischaemia Jim Reekers, Amsterdam, Netherlands 16:40 to 16:48
Chairman Frans Moll, Utrecht, Netherlands 16:40 to 18:00
Below the knee Michael Edmonds, London, United Kingdom 16:40 to 18:00
Appraisal of rotational atherectomy in calcified infrapopliteal lesions Fabrizio Fanelli, Rome, Italy 16:48 to 16:56
Current status of below-the-knee interventions Thomas Zeller, Bad Krozingen, Germany 17:04 to 17:12
Influence of steroid on chronic limb ischaemia ? similar in severity to the nephropathic foot Iris Baumgartner, Bern, Switzerland 17:12 to 17:30
PADI trial one-year results ? drug-eluting stents vs. PTA Hans van Overhagen, Den Haag, Netherlands 17:20 to 17:28
Panel discussion on effectiveness of treatment options 17:36 to 18:00
Wednesday 29 April

Life style other than smoking and the risk for abdominal aortic aneurysm Frank Lederle, Minneapolis, United States 08:00 to 08:08
Chairman Andrew Holden, Auckland, New Zealand 08:00 to 08:44
Discussion 08:08 to 08:11
Factors associated with abdominal aortic aneurysm expansion and rupture Janet Powell, London, United Kingdom 08:11 to 08:19
Discussion 08:19 to 08:22
Threshold for elective intervention Kevin Mani, Uppsala, Sweden 08:22 to 08:30
Discussion 08:30 to 08:33
Endovascular indications for embolising aortic lesions Michel Makaroun, Pittsburgh, United States 08:33 to 08:41
Discussion 08:41 to 08:44
Intraoperative CT in EVAR is also helpful in ruptured cases Dittmar Boeckler, Heidelberg, Germany 08:44 to 08:52
Discussion 08:52 to 08:55
IMPROVE trial ? net benefit results at 12 months Janet Powell, London, United Kingdom 08:55 to 09:03
Discussion 09:03 to 09:06
Twelve-month outcomes ? IPD 3 trial Ron Balm, Amsterdam, Netherlands 09:06 to 09:14
Discussion 09:14 to 09:17
Responsibilities of disciplines after ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm by day and night Jan de Waele, Ghent, Belgium 09:17 to 09:25
Discussion 09:25 to 09:28
Debate: Too many patients with rAAA are denied intervention Matt Thompson, London, United Kingdom 09:28 to 09:38
Debate: Too many patients with rAAA are denied intervention Peter Lamont, Bristol, United Kingdom 09:28 to 09:38
Discussion and vote 09:38 to 09:43
Panel discussion 09:43 to 10:00

Chairman Roger Greenhalgh, London, United Kingdom 10:30 to 12:30
Morphology findings from the IMPROVE trial Robert Hinchliffe, London, United Kingdom 10:30 to 10:38
Discussion 10:38 to 10:41
EVAR alone is first choice for aortic neck <15mm Hence Verhagen, Rotterdam, Netherlands 10:41 to 10:49
Discussion 10:49 to 10:52
Open repair is best more often than not J?rg Schmidli, Bern, Switzerland 10:52 to 11:00
Discussion 11:00 to 11:03
Choice of device for short neck and appraisal of FEVAR Timothy Resch, Malmo, Sweden 11:03 to 11:11
Discussion 11:11 to 11:14
The place for parallel grafts Mario Lachat, Zurich, Switzerland 11:14 to 11:22
Discussion 11:22 to 11:25
Treatment of juxta renal aneurysms with parallel grafts and polymer based technology Matt Thompson, London, United Kingdom 11:25 to 11:33
Discussion 11:33 to 11:36
Potential benefit from robotic navigation with 3D imaging for complex anatomy and endovascular procedures Alan B Lumsden, Houston, United States 11:36 to 11:44
Discussion 11:44 to 11:47
The value of polymer-filled sealing ring technology for abdominal aortic aneurysm David Minion, Lexington, United States 11:47 to 11:55
Discussion 11:55 to 11:58
Debate: EVAR is not sensible for any abdominal aortic aneurysm with a neck length less than 10mm. Jan Blankensteijn, Amsterdam, Netherlands 11:58 to 12:08
Debate: EVAR is not sensible for any abdominal aortic aneurysm with a neck length less than 10mm. Stephen Cheng, PERIPHERAL ARTERIAL CONTROVERSIES, Hong Kong 11:58 to 12:08
Discussion and vote 12:08 to 12:13
Chairman Eric Ducasse, Bordeaux, France 13:00 to 13:28
The INNOVATION study at 3 years ? accuracy of placement Giovanni Pratesi, Florence, Italy 13:02 to 13:10
High expectations of cost-effectiveness Arne Schwindt, Munster, Germany 13:15 to 13:23
Discussion 13:23 to 13:28
Chairman Frans Moll, Utrecht, Netherlands 13:30 to 14:19
Radiation levels for mobile, fixed and clarity fixed C-arm fluoroscopy Joost van Herwaarden, Utrecht, Netherlands 13:30 to 13:38
Discussion 13:38 to 13:40
Reduction of radiation to all involved in endovascular procedures Lindsay Machan, Vancouver, Canada 13:40 to 13:48
Discussion 13:48 to 13:50
Reduction of radiation to the operator Barry Katzen, Miami, United States 13:50 to 13:58
Discussion 13:58 to 14:00
Doing more with less - dose optimised imaging protocols for complex endovascular procedures Eric Verhoeven, Nuremberg, Germany 14:00 to 14:08
Panel discussion 14:10 to 14:19
Launch: Six-month results of a new iliac branch endoprosthesis Darren Schneider, New York, United States 14:19 to 14:29
Discussion 14:29 to 14:31
Branched iliac device prevents gluteal claudication in aorto-iliac aneurysms Lars L?nn, Copenhagen, Denmark 14:31 to 14:39
Discussion 14:39 to 14:41

Discussion 14:59 to 15:01
A new repositionable and conformable endograft system for expected improved EVAR device Robert Rhee, New York, United States 15:01 to 15:09
Discussion 15:09 to 15:11
Elective AAA repair in octo- and nonagenarians Kevin Mani, Uppsala, Sweden 15:11 to 15:19
Panel discussion 15:21 to 15:30
Chairman Andrew Holden, Auckland, New Zealand 15:30 to 16:27
Discussion 15:51 to 15:56
EVAS for acute AAA - how to do it and early results Michel Reijnen, Arnhem, Netherlands 15:56 to 16:04
Discussion 16:04 to 16:09
Building evidence to support EVAS as the next gold standard Matt Thompson, London, United Kingdom 16:09 to 16:17
Panel discussion 16:22 to 16:27
Debate: At least one follow-up visit with imaging, ultrasound or CT each five years is required after EVAR Janet Powell, London, United Kingdom 16:30 to 16:40
Debate: At least one follow-up visit with imaging, ultrasound or CT each five years is required after EVAR Michael Wyatt, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, United Kingdom 16:30 to 16:40

Chairman Roger Greenhalgh, London, United Kingdom 16:30 to 17:35
Discussion and vote 16:40 to 16:45
EVAR - surveillance protocol 20 years after EVAR introduction Fabio Verzini, Perugia, Italy 16:45 to 16:53
Discussion 16:53 to 16:55
Performance of new generation endografts in more than 900 patients with different anatomic scenarios: what we have learned Theodosios Bisdas, M?nster, Germany 16:55 to 17:03
Discussion 17:03 to 17:05
The impact of EVAS on secondary interventions compared with EVAR Andrew Holden, Auckland, New Zealand 17:05 to 17:13
Discussion 17:13 to 17:15
Endoleak is associated with sac growth but not mortality (OVER trial) Frank Lederle, Minneapolis, United States 17:15 to 17:23
Panel discussion 17:25 to 17:35
Debate: Liquid embolic products and glues are indicated for type I endoleaks Fabrizio Fanelli, Rome, Italy 17:35 to 17:45
Debate: Liquid embolic products and glues are indicated for type I endoleaks Robert Morgan, London, United Kingdom 17:35 to 17:45
Discussion and vote 17:45 to 17:50
Extension fenestrated cuffs St?phan Haulon, Lille, France 17:50 to 17:58
Discussion 17:58 to 18:00
Chimney grafts Giovanni Torsello, Muenster, Germany 18:00 to 18:08
Discussion 18:08 to 18:10
Upward migration and type Ib endoleak years after EVAR - a word of caution Hence Verhagen, Rotterdam, Netherlands 18:10 to 18:18
Panel discussion 18:20 to 18:30
Thursday 30 April

Definition of ?best medical therapy? for carotid disease Martin Brown, London, United Kingdom 08:00 to 08:09

Chairman Ross Naylor, Leicester, United Kingdom 08:00 to 10:30
Discussion 08:09 to 08:11
Resistance to platelet inhibitory therapy and stroke risk in patients with carotid disease Charles McCollum, Manchester, United Kingdom 08:11 to 08:20
Discussion 08:20 to 08:22
Debate: Selective carotid screening is justified in modern clinical practice Peter Schneider, Honolulu, United States 08:22 to 08:32
Debate: Selective carotid screening is justified in modern clinical practice Ankur Thapar, Harlow, United Kingdom 08:22 to 08:32
Discussion and vote 08:32 to 08:37
Carotid artery stenting in the hyperacute period after onset of symptoms: ?The rule of 5' Gioachino Coppi, Modena, Italy 08:37 to 08:46
Discussion 08:46 to 08:48
Is there any role for intervention in acute carotid dissection? Colin Derdeyn, St. Louis, United States 08:48 to 08:57
Discussion 08:57 to 08:59
Results of urgent carotid intervention after thrombolysis following stroke Martin Bjorck, Uppsala, Sweden 08:59 to 09:08
Discussion 09:08 to 09:10
An algorithm for predicting late stroke risk in asymptomatic patients Andrew Nicolaides, Nicosia, Cyprus 09:10 to 09:19
Discussion 09:19 to 09:21
The significance of symptomatic vertebral artery disease Hugh Markus, Cambridge, United Kingdom 09:21 to 09:30
Discussion 09:30 to 09:32
Debate: Robotic navigation improves the results of carotid stenting Trevor Cleveland, Sheffield, United Kingdom 09:32 to 09:42
Discussion and vote 09:42 to 09:47
Panel discussion 09:47 to 10:00
Chairman Janet Powell, London, United Kingdom 10:30 to 11:20

The frequency of cerebral embolisation after aortic arch catheterisation Richard Gibbs, London, United Kingdom 10:30 to 10:37
Discussion 10:37 to 10:40
Discussion 10:47 to 10:50
The value of medication such as statins before aortic arch catheterisation Frank Lederle, Minneapolis, United States 10:50 to 10:57
Discussion 10:57 to 11:00
Panel discussion 11:00 to 11:05
Debate: Low profile endovascular aortic devices have more benefits than disadvantages Peter Holt, London, United Kingdom 11:05 to 11:15
Debate: Low profile endovascular aortic devices have more benefits than disadvantages Eric Verhoeven, Nuremberg, Germany 11:05 to 11:15
Discussion and vote 11:15 to 11:20

Chairman Roger Greenhalgh, London, United Kingdom 11:20 to 12:30
Micromesh use to reduce cerebral embolisation during carotid stenting Alberto Cremonesi, Cotignola (RA), Italy 11:20 to 11:27
Discussion 11:27 to 11:30
Ascending aortic reconstruction considerations Rodney White, Torrance, United States 11:30 to 11:37
Discussion 11:37 to 11:40
TEVAR in the aortic arch ? influence of the proximal landing zone on outcome Dittmar Boeckler, Heidelberg, Germany 11:40 to 11:47
Discussion 11:47 to 11:50
Branched stent grafts for the treatment of complex arch lesions Piergiorgio Cao, Rome, Italy 11:50 to 11:57
Discussion 11:57 to 12:00
Open surgery Stephen Large, Cambridge, United Kingdom 12:00 to 12:07
Launch: Early clinical experience of a new thoracic branched device for the aortic arch Michael Dake, Stanford, United States 12:10 to 12:18
Discussion 12:18 to 12:21
Panel discussion 12:21 to 12:30
Chairman Andrew Holden, Auckland, New Zealand 13:30 to 14:35

Debate: Hybrid beats total TEVAR wherever it can be used Frans Moll, Utrecht, Netherlands 13:30 to 13:40
Debate: Hybrid beats total TEVAR wherever it can be used Franco Grego, Padua, Italy 13:30 to 13:40
Discussion and vote 13:40 to 13:45
Debate: Endovascular branched graft beats open surgery for the left subclavian artery Marcus Brooks, Westbury on Trim, United Kingdom 13:45 to 13:55
Debate: Endovascular branched graft beats open surgery for the left subclavian artery Jean M Panneton, Norfolk, United States 13:45 to 13:55
Discussion and vote 13:55 to 14:00
Complex arch and thoracic aortic procedures using robotic system Thomas Nolte, Bad Bevensen, Germany 14:00 to 14:08
Discussion 14:08 to 14:10
Debate: The heyday of open aortic surgery is over Hans-Henning Eckstein, Munich, Germany 14:10 to 14:20
Debate: The heyday of open aortic surgery is over Frank Veith, New York, United States 14:10 to 14:20
Discussion and vote 14:20 to 14:25
Panel discussion on interventions for ascending and arch of the aorta 14:25 to 14:35
Predictions of clinical success after TEVAR for chronic dissection Matt Thompson, London, United Kingdom 14:35 to 14:44
Discussion 14:44 to 14:46
Factors that predict success after TEVAR for chronic type B dissection Herv? Rousseau, Toulouse, France 14:46 to 14:55
Techniques for embolisation of the false lumen Tilo K?lbel, Hamburg, Germany 14:57 to 15:06
Discussion 15:06 to 15:08
Spinal cord protection ? related complications in chronic type B dissection Vincent Riambau, Barcelona, Spain 15:08 to 15:17
Discussion 15:17 to 15:19

Chairman Matt Thompson, London, United Kingdom 16:00 to 16:35
Debate: Long-term results following intervention for sub-acute uncomplicated type B dissection warrant intervention Christoph Nienaber, Rostock, Germany 16:00 to 16:10
Debate: Long-term results following intervention for sub-acute uncomplicated type B dissection warrant intervention Ross Milner, Chicago, United States 16:00 to 16:10
Discussion and vote 16:10 to 16:15
Dissection algorithm Michael Dake, Stanford, United States 16:15 to 16:23
Discussion 16:23 to 16:25
The impact of timing in the treatment of acute dissection Nimesh Desai, Philadelphia, United States 16:25 to 16:33
Discussion 16:33 to 16:35
Risk score for open repair, EVAR and thoracic interventions Ian Loftus, London, United Kingdom 16:45 to 16:53
Discussion 16:53 to 16:55
Debate: The threshold diameter for intervention of the thoracic aorta is unknown Janet Powell, London, United Kingdom 16:55 to 17:05
Debate: The threshold diameter for intervention of the thoracic aorta is unknown Vincent Riambau, Barcelona, Spain 16:55 to 17:05
Discussion and vote 17:05 to 17:10
Two-stage TEVAR yields lower mortality and more protection against spinal cord injury Matthew J Eagleton, Cleveland, United States 17:10 to 17:18
Discussion 17:18 to 17:20
Renal revascularisation during open TAAA with Hybrid Vascular Graft Roberto Chiesa, Milan, Italy 17:20 to 17:28
Discussion 17:28 to 17:30
Strategies to reduce paraplegia after TAAA repair (endovascular and open) Theodosios Bisdas, M?nster, Germany 17:30 to 17:38
Panel discussion 17:40 to 18:00
Friday 01 May

Five-year data using a 7cm catheter system Olivier Pichot, Grenoble, France 08:00 to 08:07
Chairman Ian Franklin, London, United Kingdom 08:00 to 12:30

Discussion 08:07 to 08:09
Benefits of bipolar radiofrequency technology Isaac Nyamekye, Worcester, United Kingdom 08:09 to 08:16
Discussion 08:16 to 08:18
The unipolar approach for radiofrequency Attila Szabo, Budapest, Hungary 08:18 to 08:25
Discussion 08:25 to 08:27
Laser fibre types - design and outcome Ian Chetter, Hull, United Kingdom 08:27 to 08:34
Discussion 08:34 to 08:36
Panel discussion on thermal truncal ablation 08:36 to 08:46
Endovenous glue ablation - Variclose Kursat Bozkurt, Istanbul, Turkey 08:55 to 09:02
Discussion 09:02 to 09:04
The use of cyanoacrylate adhesive for the treatment of refluxing great saphenous vein - VenaSeal Guido Lengfellner, Regensburg, Germany 09:04 to 09:11
Discussion 09:11 to 09:13
A comparison of thermal and non-thermal ablation Tristan Lane, London, United Kingdom 09:13 to 09:20
Discussion 09:20 to 09:22
Optimal results of foam sclerotherapy Attilio Cavezzi, San Benedetto del Tronto, Italy 09:22 to 09:29
Discussion 09:29 to 09:31
Foam phlebectomy techniques and outcomes Michael Cumming, St Louis Park, United States 09:31 to 09:38
Discussion 09:38 to 09:40
Panel discussion on non-thermal truncal ablation 09:40 to 09:50
Identification of those that need correcting Barrie Price, Guildford, United Kingdom 09:50 to 09:57
Discussion 09:57 to 10:00
Chairman Fabrizio Fanelli, Rome, Italy 10:00 to 10:28
From venous thrombosis to post-thrombotic syndrome Marzia Lugli, Modena, Italy 10:03 to 10:09
Discussion 10:09 to 10:12
Building an interventional pathway Gerard O'Sullivan, Galway, Ireland 10:12 to 10:18
Discussion 10:18 to 10:21
Chairman Ian Franklin, London, United Kingdom 10:30 to 10:54

Duplex scanning is mandatory before treatment of asymptomatic cosmetic thread veins Mark Whiteley, Guildford, United Kingdom 10:30 to 10:40
Discussion and vote 10:40 to 10:45
Thread veins need compression Philip Coleridge-Smith, London, United Kingdom 10:45 to 10:52
Discussion 10:52 to 10:54

Chairman Alun Davies, London, United Kingdom 10:54 to 15:45
The algorithm of choice of imaging modality, duplex, venography and IVUS and the place of CT and MR venography Stephen Black, East Horsley, United Kingdom 10:54 to 11:01
Discussion 11:01 to 11:03
Improved clinical outcomes consequent upon excellent pelvic imaging Mark Whiteley, Guildford, United Kingdom 11:03 to 11:10
CT and MR venography and the limitations of venography in the lying position Narayan Karunanithy, London, United Kingdom 11:12 to 11:19
Discussion 11:19 to 11:21
The measurement of a deep venous stenosis Carsten Arnoldussen, Maastricht, Netherlands 11:21 to 11:28
Discussion 11:28 to 11:30

Panel discussion on venous imaging 11:39 to 12:05
The use of coils and foam into pelvic veins Anthony Lopez, Guildford, United Kingdom 12:05 to 12:12
Optimal care pathway for a leg ulcer patient Manj Gohel, Cambridge, United Kingdom 12:14 to 12:21
Panel discussion on venous interventions and pathways 12:23 to 12:30

Chairman Stephen Black, East Horsley, United Kingdom 13:30 to 15:30

Chairman Stephen Black, East Horsley, United Kingdom 13:30 to 15:30
The value of IVUS in planning and deployment of deep venous stents Marzia Lugli, Modena, Italy 13:30 to 13:37
Discussion 13:37 to 13:39
The Zilver Vena stent Gerard O'Sullivan, Galway, Ireland 13:39 to 13:46
Discussion 13:46 to 13:48
The VENITI stent Olivier Hartung, Marseille, France 13:48 to 13:55
Discussion 13:55 to 13:57
The sinus-Venous stent Rick de Graaf, Maastricht, Netherlands 13:57 to 14:04
Panel discussion on deep venous stents 14:06 to 14:16
Methods to estimate the age and nature of a deep venous occlusion Prakash Saha, London, United Kingdom 14:16 to 14:23
Discussion 14:23 to 14:25

Discussion 14:32 to 14:34
Acoustic energy thrombolytic technology for remote clot removal, including pulmonary embolism - EKOS Julian Hague, London, United Kingdom 14:34 to 14:41
Reconstruction of the inferior vena cava and Angiovac for inferior vena cava occlusion Iris Baumgartner, Bern, Switzerland 14:43 to 14:50
Discussion 14:50 to 14:52
Detachment of occlusive thrombus in deep vein, aspiration, fragmentation and removal from veins or arteries - Rotarex and Aspirex Michael Lichtenberg, Arnsberg, Germany 14:52 to 14:59
Discussion 14:59 to 15:01
Breaking of thrombus and removal from peripheral veins and arteries - AngioJet Gerard O'Sullivan, Galway, Ireland 15:01 to 15:08
Panel discussion on catheter-directed thrombolysis and thrombectomy 15:19 to 15:30
Industry Sponsored Satellite - Gore Tuesday 28 April

Chairman Russell Samson, Sarasota, United States 15:30 to 16:00
Heparin-bonded Gore Viabahn Endoprosthesis versus saphenous vein Michel Reijnen, Arnhem, Netherlands 15:30 to 16:00
10-year follow-up from more than 1,000 patients with the Gore Propaten Vascular Graft Raffaele Pulli, Firenze, Italy 15:30 to 16:00
Wednesday 29 April

Chairman Robert Rhee, New York, United States 10:00 to 10:30
TEVAR device selection in consideration of anatomy, disease and radial force Ali Azizzadeh, Houston, United States 10:00 to 10:30
EU clinical data collection on iliac branched endoprosthesis Michel Reijnen, Arnhem, Netherlands 10:00 to 10:30
Clinical challenges of complex abdominal anatomy Marc van Sambeek, Eindhoven, Netherlands 10:00 to 10:30
Industry Sponsored Satellite - Maquet Tuesday 28 April

Chairman Afshin Assadian, Vienna, Austria 13:00 to 13:30
Challenging (endo) vascular graft infections: what happens when two different antiseptics are combined on one graft? Xavier Berard, Bordeaux, France 13:00 to 13:30
Fusion Bioline ? what happens when the benefits of heparin, ePTFE and polyester are joined together? Alan B Lumsden, Houston, United States 13:00 to 13:30
Thursday 30 April

Chairman Eric Ducasse, Bordeaux, France 15:30 to 16:00
When to perform Ch-EVAR: what patient and what bridging stent to get the best clinical result Konstantinos Donas, Munster, Germany 15:30 to 16:00
When to perform FEVAR: what patient and what bridging stent to get the best clinical result Tara Mastracci, London, United Kingdom 15:30 to 16:00
Industry Sponsored Satellite - Medtronic Tuesday 28 April

Chairman Peter Schneider, Honolulu, United States 12:30 to 13:00
DCB in a real-world patient population: Insights from IN.PACT Global Study Gunnar Tepe, Rosenheim, Germany 12:30 to 13:00
Are all DCB equal? Lesson learned from pre-clinical and clinical experience William Gray, New York, United States 12:30 to 13:00
DCB economic value proposition: Insights from IN.PACT SFA trial Adam Salisbury, Kansas City, United States 12:30 to 13:00
Wednesday 29 April

Chairman Fabio Verzini, Perugia, Italy 12:30 to 13:00
Endurant stent graft clinical & economic performances at mid-term follow-up Edward Woo, Washington, United States 12:30 to 13:00
Endurant IIs has broadened stent graft applicability, without compromising on durability Vincent Riambau, Barcelona, Spain 12:30 to 13:00
Performances of Valiant Captivia in type B aortic dissection: pros and cons Ludovic Canaud, MONTPELLIER CEDEX 5, France 12:30 to 13:00
Industry Sponsored Satellite - Vascutek Thursday 30 April

Chairman Alun Davies, London, United Kingdom 12:30 to 13:30
The first 101 Fenestrated Anaconda cases in the UK Robin Williams, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom 12:30 to 13:30
Single-centre experience with Fenestrated Anaconda Afshin Assadian, Vienna, Austria 12:30 to 13:30
Anaconda for 90? indication Robbert Meerwaldt, Enschede, Netherlands 12:30 to 13:30
Global Data on Fenestrated Anaconda Randy Moore, Calgary, Canada 12:30 to 13:30
CX Edited Live Cases - Aortic and Carotid Tuesday 28 April

Roadsaver - Carotid stenting with micromesh Arne Schwindt, Munster, Germany 09:20 to 10:00
Treatment of a chronic type B aortic dissection with Valiant Captivia following ascending aorta and arch surgery Luigi Lovato, Bologna, Italy 11:10 to 11:50
ZENITH Alpha Thoracic endograft Geert Schurink, Maastricht, Netherlands 11:50 to 12:30
Nellix - Endovascular aneurysm sealing (EVAS) with polymer in the aortic sac Michel Reijnen, Arnhem, Netherlands 13:30 to 14:10
The INCRAFT low profile device introduced percutaneously Gianbattista Parlani, Perugia, Italy 14:10 to 14:50
The INCRAFT low profile device introduced percutaneously Hany Zayed, London, United Kingdom 14:10 to 14:50
The INCRAFT low profile device introduced percutaneously Jost Philipp Schaefer, Kiel, Germany 14:10 to 14:50
Challenging AAA anatomy treated by Endurant IIs stent graft Johannes Gahlen, Ludwigsburg, Germany 14:50 to 15:30
The E-liac device in complex iliac aneurysm Jost Philipp Schaefer, Kiel, Germany 16:40 to 17:20
Control of infection with prosthetic grafts: added value of INTERGARD SYNERGY Jean-Paul de Vries, Nieuwegein, Netherlands 17:20 to 18:00
CX Live Peripheral Arterial Cases - SFA and popliteal Wednesday 29 April

Case 1: Stellarex drug-coated balloon :- Drug-coated balloon treatment and provisional stenting of a TASC B superficial femoral artery lesion Thomas Zeller, Bad Krozingen, Germany 10:30 to 12:30
Case 2: Silverhawk or Turbohawk and IN.PACT Admiral or IN.PACT Pacific :- Silverhawk-Atherectomy and drug-eluting balloon treatment of a superficial femoral artery TASC B/C lesion Thomas Zeller, Bad Krozingen, Germany 10:30 to 12:30
Case 3: Jetstream atherectomy catheter and Ranger drug-eluting balloon :- Atherectomy and drug coated balloon treatment of a calcified superficial femoral artery lesion Thomas Zeller, Bad Krozingen, Germany 10:30 to 12:30
Case 4: Turbohawk and drug-eluting balloon :- Atherectomy and drug coated balloon treatment of the common femoral artery Thomas Zeller, Bad Krozingen, Germany 10:30 to 12:30
Case 5: Zilver PTX (New release system) :- Drug-eluting stent in a TASC C superficial femoral artery lesion Thomas Zeller, Bad Krozingen, Germany 13:30 to 15:30
Case 6: SUPERA :- Popliteal lesion eccentric or calcified Thomas Zeller, Bad Krozingen, Germany 13:30 to 15:30
Case 7: SUPERA and provisional re-entry device (Outback) :- Calcified superficial femoral artery chronic total occlusion Thomas Zeller, Bad Krozingen, Germany 13:30 to 15:30
Case 8: Drug-eluting balloon and SmartFlex stent :- Distal superficial femoral artery lesion likely to respond insufficiently entirely to drug-eluting balloon pre-treatment Thomas Zeller, Bad Krozingen, Germany 13:30 to 15:30
Case 10: Biosensors sirolimus-eluting balloon and BioMimics stent :- TASC B distal superficial femoral artery lesion, drug-eluting balloon and provisional stenting Thomas Zeller, Bad Krozingen, Germany 16:00 to 18:00
Case 11: Plain old balloon angioplasty and heparin-bonded contoured-edge Viabahn Thomas Zeller, Bad Krozingen, Germany 16:00 to 18:00
Case 12: Rotarex and IN.PACT Pacific :- Superficial femoral artery in-stent re-occlusion, mechanical thrombectomy followed by drug-eluting balloon Thomas Zeller, Bad Krozingen, Germany 16:00 to 18:00
ilegx Collaboration Day Thursday 30 April

Introduction to the ilegx day Michael Edmonds, London, United Kingdom 08:00 to 08:05
Chairman Michael Edmonds, London, United Kingdom 08:00 to 09:05
Designing a diabetic foot service Cliff Shearman, Southampton, United Kingdom 08:25 to 08:35
EndoVAC hybrid treatment of vascular infection ? long-term results Anders Wanhainen, Uppsala, Sweden 08:45 to 08:55
Discussion 08:55 to 09:05
Chairman Michael Edmonds, London, United Kingdom 09:05 to 10:00
The importance of open access and rapid assessment Michael Edmonds, London, United Kingdom 09:05 to 09:15
New wound care techniques for tissue loss in the diabetic ischaemic foot Jennifer Tremlett, London, United Kingdom 09:35 to 09:45
Discussion 09:45 to 10:00
Chairman Cliff Shearman, Southampton, United Kingdom 10:30 to 12:30
The timing of revascularisation Robert Hinchliffe, London, United Kingdom 10:30 to 10:37
Discussion 10:44 to 10:50
Endovascular first Trevor Cleveland, Sheffield, United Kingdom 10:50 to 10:57
Surgery has its place Patrick Chong, Frimley, United Kingdom 10:57 to 11:04
Discussion 11:04 to 11:10
Follow-up of endo or open revascularisation ? duplex use Alun Davies, London, United Kingdom 11:10 to 11:17
CRITISCH registry Theodosios Bisdas, M?nster, Germany 11:17 to 11:24
Evaluation of a robotic system for femoropopliteal interventions Marianne Brodmann, Graz, Austria 11:24 to 11:31
Discussion 11:31 to 11:37
Arm vein use for lower limb salvage Mahmoud Malas, Baltimore, United States 11:37 to 11:44
WiFi classification of the diabetic ischaemic foot Joseph Mills, Tucson, United States 11:44 to 11:51
BASIL 2 and 3 trials Andrew Bradbury, Birmingham, United Kingdom 11:57 to 12:07
BEST-CLI trial Matthew Menard, Boston, United States 12:07 to 12:17
Discussion 12:17 to 12:23
Chairman Roger Greenhalgh, London, United Kingdom 13:30 to 18:00
Mechanisms of action of the Lutonix drug-eluting balloon Elena Ladich, Gaithersburg, United States 13:30 to 13:36
Discussion 13:36 to 13:41
Take everything detachable out of the vessel and treat the target lesion and not the occluded vessel segment Michael Lichtenberg, Arnsberg, Germany 13:41 to 13:47
Discussion 13:47 to 13:52
Atherectomy and the use of DEB Koen Keirse, Tienen, Belgium 13:52 to 13:58
Discussion 13:58 to 14:03
Lessons from the lithoplasty registry Michael Jaff, Boston, United States 14:03 to 14:09
Discussion 14:09 to 14:14
Bioresorbable state of art for SFA Michael Dake, Stanford, United States 14:14 to 14:20
Discussion 14:20 to 14:25
Stent: an old memory in the DCB era Fabrizio Fanelli, Rome, Italy 14:25 to 14:31
Discussion 14:31 to 14:36
Discussion 14:42 to 14:47
Why bailout stent rates vary so much after DCB and dissection management Peter Schneider, Honolulu, United States 14:47 to 14:53
Discussion 14:53 to 14:58
Differences in types of DEB and consequent outcome variations Michael Jaff, Boston, United States 14:58 to 15:04
Panel discussion on "Leaving nothing behind" 15:09 to 15:30
DEB vs. BMS vs. Supera Sabine Steiner, Leipzig, Germany 16:00 to 16:05
Discussion 16:10 to 16:20
When the pathophysiology of SFA disease requires a permanent implant in order to counteract negative remodelling Jos van den Berg, Lugano, Switzerland 16:20 to 16:25
Discussion 16:25 to 16:30
Discussion 16:35 to 16:40
SUPERA use even with calcification Peter Goverde, Antwerp, Belgium 16:40 to 16:45
Mid-term and late sustained effectiveness: examining the relative durability of endovascular therapies Michael Dake, Stanford, United States 16:50 to 16:55
Discussion 16:55 to 17:00
Lesions suitable for Smart Flex Eric Ducasse, Bordeaux, France 17:00 to 17:05
Discussion 17:05 to 17:10
The BioMimics stent Stephen Williams, Baltimore, United States 17:10 to 17:15
Discussion 17:15 to 17:20
Viabahn for long lesions Daniele Savio, Turin, Italy 17:20 to 17:25
Viabhan for restenosis Jorge Fernandez Noya, Santiago Compostela, Spain 17:30 to 17:35
Panel discussion on "Leaving something in" 17:40 to 18:00