CX 2015 Main Programme


Tuesday | Wednesday | Thursday | Friday


 

Tuesday 28 April 2015 – Main Programme

PERIPHERAL ARTERIAL CONTROVERSIES

Basic principles and imaging

Chairman: Cliff Shearman, Southampton, United Kingdom
Moderator:
Ian Franklin
, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom

Click here to read about the highlights of the Peripheral Arterial Controversies 2015.


08:00-08:10
Essential management for every patient with intermittent claudication before consideration of intervention
Frans Moll
, Utrecht, Netherlands

 

08:10-08:15
Discussion

 

08:15-08:25
3D lower limb perfusion during critical limb ischaemia
Andrew Holden
, Auckland, New Zealand


08:25-08:30
Discussion


08:30-08:40
Contrast reduction angiography for peripheral arterial disease
Martin Malina
, Malmö, Sweden


08:40-08:45
Discussion


08:45-08:55
Debate: IVUS is worth the cost for peripheral arterial disease
For the motion:
Fabrizio Fanelli, Rome, Italy
Against the motion:
Patrick Peeters, Bonheiden, Belgium


08:55-09:00
Discussion and vote


09:00-09:10
There is no advantage using heparin with intra-arterial thrombolysis
Anders Wanhainen
, Uppsala, Sweden


09:10-09:15
Discussion


09:15-09:25
Definition of success of superficial femoral artery interventions
Peter Schneider
, Honolulu, United States


09:25-09:30
Discussion


Iliac reconstruction controversies


09:30-09:40
Early clinical outcomes with a new flexible endoluminal stent graft for iliac artery disease
Andrew Holden
, Auckland, New Zealand


09:40-09:45
Discussion


Superficial femoral artery (SFA) controversies


09:45-09:55
Debate: Endovascular beats open surgery for TASC C & D SFA lesions irrespective of lesion location
For the motion:
Thomas Zeller, Bad Krozingen, Germany
Against the motion:
Malcolm Simms, Birmingham, United Kingdom


09:55-10:00
Discussion and vote


COFFEE – Refreshments will also be served in the Main Auditorium


Preference to use a stent in the superficial femoral artery

With an unrestricted educational grant from Abbott Vascular


Chairman:
Michael Jaff, Boston, United States


10:00-10:03
Coffee & snacks


10:03-10:09
My stent rate for the superficial femoral artery rate is increasing
Andrew Holden,
Auckland, New Zealand

 

10:09-10:12
Discussion


10:12-10:18
The European clinical experience of SUPERA
Iris Baumgartner,
Bern, Switzerland

 

10:18-10:21
Discussion

 

10:21-10:28
Chairman’s case discussion with audience interaction
Michael Jaff,
Boston, United States


The “Leaving nothing behind” controversy


Chairman:
Roger Greenhalgh
, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom
Moderator:
Iris Baumgartner
, Bern, Switzerland


10:30-10:37
Biosorbable stent  – 480° Biomedical
Andrew Holden
, Auckland, New Zealand

 

10:37-10:44
DEFINITIVE AR atherectomy and drug-coated balloons at one year
Thomas Zeller
, Bad Krozingen, Germany

 

10:44-10:51
EverFlex  – Seven-year data
Giovanni Torsello
, Münster, Germany

 

10:51-10:58
The FREEDOM trial – a one-handed delivery system for same-day discharge
Yann Goueffic
, Nantes, France

 

10:58-11:05
Shockwave Lithoplasty for calcified artery
Andrew Holden
, Auckland, New Zealand

 

11:05-11:22
Panel discussion



Drug-coated balloon update

11:22-11:30

Current status of drug-eluting balloon use in the superficial femoral artery
Fabrizio Fanelli
, Rome, Italy

 

11:30-11:38
Update on Lutonix drug-eluting balloon
Dierk Scheinert
, Leipzig, Germany

 

11:38-11:46
ILLUMENATE study – 24-month results
Stephan Duda
, Berlin, Germany

 

11:46-11:54
IN.PACT SFA update
Gunnar Tepe
, Rosenheim, Germany

 

11:54-12:02
Cost-effectiveness of drug-coated balloons
Michael Jaff
, Boston, United States

 

12:02-12:10
Methodology differences
Thomas Zeller
, Bad Krozingen, Germany

 

12:10-12:30
Panel discussion on drug-coated balloons and algorithm of care


 LUNCH – Food will also be served in the Main Auditorium


Industry sponsored satellite

12:30-13:00 Click here


Industry sponsored satellite

13:00-13:30 Click here


Increasing lesion length options and various stent controversies

Chairman: Roger Greenhalgh, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom
Moderator:
Andrew Holden
, Auckland, New Zealand


13:30-13:38
Paradigms and importance of lesion length and type
William Gray
, New York, United States


13:38-13:41
Discussion


13:41-13:49
Lower profile robotic catheter use for internal prosthetic bypasses
Alan Lumsden
, Houston, United States

 

13:49-13:52
Discussion


13:52-14:00
Zilver PTX – final results at five years
Michael Dake
, Stanford, United States


14:00-14:03
Discussion


14:03-14:11
The value of drug elution on a new bare metal stent – SuperNova to Majestic
Richard Powell
, Lebanon, United States


14:11-14:14
Discussion


14:14-14:22
Lesion up to 100mm
Konstantinos Katsanos,
London, United Kingdom

 

14:22-14:25
Discussion

 

14:25-14:33
The SUPERA stent for superficial femoral artery lesions even with calcification
Firas Mussa
, New York, United States

 

14:33-14:36
Discussion

 

14:36-14:44
The value of Smart Flex for femoropopliteal disease
Peter Goverde
, Antwerp, Belgium

 

14:44-14:47
Discussion


14:47-14:55
Stent graft and double stent graft for very long lesions in the SFA
Daniele Savio
, Turin, Italy

 

14:55-14:58
Discussion

 

14:58-15:06
Long-term results of laser and drug-eluting balloon for in-stent restenosis
Jos van den Berg
, Lugano, Switzerland

 

15:06-15:09
Discussion

 

15:09-15:30
Panel discussion on stent usage and longer lesions


TEA – Refreshments will also be served in the Main Auditorium


Industry sponsored satellite

15:30-16:00 Click here


Open surgical controversy

Chairman: Paul Blair, Belfast, United Kingdom
Moderator:
Cliff Shearman
, Southampton, United Kingdom

 

16:00-16:10
Debate: Heparin bonding benefits superficial femoral artery PTFE bypass results
For the motion:
Russell Samson, Sarasota, United States
Against the motion:
Jonathan Beard, Sheffield, United Kingdom

 

16:10-16:20
Discussion and vote


Popliteal debate

16:20-16:30
Debate: Popliteal aneurysm should be treated by endovascular means
For the motion:
Michele Antonello, Padua, Italy
Against the motion:
Martin Björck, Uppsala, Sweden

 

16:30-16:40
Discussion and vote


Below the knee

Chairman: Frans Moll, Utrecht, Netherlands
Moderator:
Michael Edmonds
, London, United Kingdom


16:40-16:48
Definition of critical limb ischaemia
Jim Reekers
, Amsterdam, Netherlands

 

16:48-16:56
Appraisal of rotational atherectomy in calcified infrapopliteal lesions
Fabrizio Fanelli
, Rome, Italy

 

16:56-17:04
The angiosome concept is convincing
Maarit Venermo
, Helsinki, Finland

 

17:04-17:12
Current status of below-the-knee interventions
Thomas Zeller
, Bad Krozingen, Germany

 

17:12-17:20
Influence of steroid on chronic limb ischaemia – similar in severity to the nephropathic foot
Iris Baumgartner
, Bern, Switzerland

 

17:20-17:28
PADI trial one-year results – drug-eluting stents vs. PTA
Hans van Overhagen
, Den Haag, Netherlands

 

17:28-17:36
Lower restenosis of long below-the-knee lesions at six months with everolimus-eluting stent vs. paclitaxel-coated balloon
Konstantinos Katsanos
, London, United Kingdom

 

17:36-18:00
Panel discussion on effectiveness of treatment options


Additional Peripheral Arterial activities

CX Abstracts – Peripheral

Tuesday 28 April and Wednesday 29 April – Click here

LINC@CX

Wednesday 29 April – Click here

NEW CX Live Peripheral Arterial Cases

Wednesday 29 April – Click here

CX ilegx Collaboration Day

Thursday 30 April – Click here


Wednesday 29 April 2015 – Main Programme

ABDOMINAL AORTIC CONTROVERSIES

Epidemiology, indications and medical management

Chairman: Andrew Holden, Auckland, New Zealand
Moderator:
Giovanni Torsello
, Münster, Germany

Click here to read about the highlights of the Abdominal Aortic Controversies 2015.


08:00-08:08
Life style other than smoking and the risk for abdominal aortic aneurysm
Frank Lederle
, Minneapolis, United States

 

08:08-08:11
Discussion

 

08:11-08:19
Factors associated with abdominal aortic aneurysm expansion and rupture
Janet Powell
, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom

 

08:19-08:22
Discussion

 

08:22-08:30
Threshold for elective intervention
Kevin Mani
, Uppsala, Sweden

 

08:30-08:33
Discussion

 

08:33-08:41
Endovascular indications for embolising aortic lesions
Michel Makaroun
, Pittsburgh, United States

 

08:41-08:44
Discussion


Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm

08:44-08:52
Intraoperative CT in EVAR is also helpful in ruptured cases
Dittmar Böckler
, Heidelberg, Germany

 

08:52-08:55
Discussion

 

08:55-09:03
IMPROVE trial – net benefit results at 12 months
Janet Powell
, London, United Kingdom


09:03-09:06
Discussion

 

09:06-09:14
Twelve-month outcomes – IPD 3 trial
Ron Balm
, Amsterdam, Netherlands

 

09:14-09:17
Discussion

 

09:17-09:25
Responsibilities of disciplines after ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm by day and night
Jan de Waele
, Ghent, Belgium

 

09:25-09:28
Discussion

 

09:28-09:38
Debate: Too many patients with rAAA are denied intervention
For the motion:
Matt Thompson, London, United Kingdom
Against the motion:
Peter Lamont, Bristol, United Kingdom

 

09:38-09:43
Discussion and vote

 

09:43-10:00
Panel discussion


COFFEE – Refreshments will also be served in the Main Auditorium


Industry sponsored satellite

10:00-10:30 Click here


Procedures for infra-renal abdominal aortic neck

Chairman: Roger Greenhalgh, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom
Moderator:
Frans Moll
, Utrecht, Netherlands


10:30-10:38
Morphology findings from the IMPROVE trial
Robert Hinchliffe
, London, United Kingdom

 

10:38-10:41
Discussion

 

10:41-10:49
EVAR alone is first choice for aortic neck <15mm
Hence Verhagen
, Rotterdam, Netherlands

 

10:49-10:52
Discussion

 

10:52-11:00
Open repair is best more often than not
Juerg Schmidli
, Bern, Switzerland

 

11:00-11:03
Discussion

 

11:03-11:11
Choice of device for short neck and appraisal of FEVAR
Timothy Resch
, Malmö, Sweden

 

11:11-11:14
Discussion

 

11:14-11:22
The place for parallel grafts
Mario Lachat
, Zurich, Switzerland

 

11:22-11:25
Discussion

 

11:25-11:33

Treatment of juxta renal aneurysms with parallel grafts and polymer based technology

Matt Thompson, London, United Kingdom

 

11:33-11:36
Discussion

 

11:36-11:44
Potential benefit from robotic navigation with 3D imaging for complex anatomy and endovascular procedures
Alan Lumsden
, Houston, United States

 

11:44-11:47
Discussion

 

11:47-11:55
The value of  polymer-filled sealing ring technology for abdominal aortic aneurysm
David Minion
, Lexington, United States

 

11:55-11:58
Discussion

 

11:58-12:08
Debate: EVAR is not sensible for any abdominal aortic aneurysm with a    neck length less than 10mm
For the motion:
Stephen Cheng, Hong Kong
Against the motion:
Jan Blankensteijn, Amsterdam, Netherlands

 

12:08-12:13
Discussion and vote

 

12:13-12:30
Panel discussion on short infrarenal aortic neck
First discussant from the floor:
Rao Vallabhaneni
, Liverpool, United Kingdom


LUNCH – Food will also be served in the Main Auditorium


Industry sponsored satellite

12:30-13:00 Click here


Results of INCRAFT at three years


With an unrestricted educational grant from Cordis

Chairman: Eric Ducasse, Bordeaux, France


13:00-13:02
Coffee & snacks

 

13:02-13.10
The INNOVATION study at three years: Accuracy of placement achieved
Giovanni Pratesi,
Florence, Italy

 

13:10-13:15
Discussion

 

13:15-13:23
High expectations of cost-effectiveness
Arne Schwindt,
Münster, Germany

 

13:23-13:28
Discussion


Mini-symposium: Radiation exposure to operator and patient

Chairman: Frans Moll, Utrecht, Netherlands

Moderator: Janet Powell, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom


13:30-13:38
Radiation levels for mobile, fixed and clarity fixed C-arm fluoroscopy
Joost van Herwaarden
, Utrecht, Netherlands

 

13:38-13:40
Discussion

 

13:40-13:48
Reduction of radiation to all involved in endovascular procedures
Lindsay Machan
, Vancouver, Canada

 

13:48-13:50
Discussion

 

13:50-13:58
Reduction of radiation to the operator
Barry Katzen
, Miami, United States

 

13:58-14:00
Discussion

 

14:00-14:08
Doing more with less – dose optimised imaging protocols for complex endovascular procedures
Eric Verhoeven
, Nuremberg, Germany

 

14:08-14:10
Discussion

 

14:10-14:19
Panel discussion


Technical approaches for elective aneurysm repair

14:19-14:29
Launch: Six-month results of a new iliac branch endoprosthesis
Darren Schneider
, New York, United States

 

14:29-14:31
Discussion

 

14:31-14:39
Branched iliac device prevents gluteal claudication in aorto-iliac aneurysms
Lars Lonn
, Copenhagen, Denmark

 

14:39-14:41
Discussion

 

14:41-14:49
The treatment of aortic graft infection by a technique using femoral vein and fascial strengthening
Maarit Venermo
, Helsinki, Finland

 

14:49-14:51
Discussion

 

14:51-14:59
Non-radical management of infected aortic grafts
Martin Malina
, Malmö, Sweden

 

14:59-15:01
Discussion

 

15:01-15:09
A new repositionable and conformable endograft system for expected improved EVAR device
Robert Rhee
, New York, United States

 

15:09-15:11
Discussion

 

15:11-15:19
Elective AAA repair in octo- and nonagenarians
Kevin Mani
, Uppsala, Sweden

 

15:19-15:21
Discussion

 

15:21-15:30 Panel discussion


TEA – Refreshments will also be served in the Main Auditorium


Changing the standard of care with EndoVascular Aneurysm Sealing (EVAS)


With an unrestricted educational grant from Endologix

Chairman: Andrew Holden, Auckland, New Zealand


15:30-15:38
EVAS patient selection and case planning

Jan Heyligers,
Tilburg, Netherlands

 

15:38-15:43
Discussion

 

15:43-15:51
Radiologic and duplex protocols and appearances for EVAS
Andrew Winterbottom,
Cambridge, United Kingdom

 

15:51-15:56
Discussion

 

15:56-16:04
EVAS for acute AAA: How to do it and early results
Michel Reijnen,
Arnhem, Netherlands

 

16:04-16:09
Discussion

 

16:09-16:17
Building evidence to support EVAS as the next gold standard
Matt Thompson,
London, United Kingdom

 

16:17-16:22
Discussion

 

16:22-16:27
Panel Discussion


Follow-up

Chairman: Roger Greenhalgh, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom
Moderator:
Sebastian Debus
, Hamburg, Germany

 

16:30-16:40
Debate: At least one follow-up visit with imaging, ultrasound or CT each five years is required after EVAR
For the motion:
Janet Powell, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom
Against the motion:
Michael Wyatt, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, United Kingdom

 

16:40-16:45
Discussion and vote

 

16:45-16:53
EVAR – surveillance protocol 20 years after EVAR introduction
Fabio Verzini
, Perugia, Italy

 

16:53-16:55
Discussion

 

16:55-17:03
Performance of new generation endografts in more than 900 patients with different anatomic scenarios: what we have learned
Theodosios Bisdas
, Münster, Germany

 

17:03-17:05
Discussion

 

17:05-17:13
The impact of EVAS on secondary interventions compared with EVAR
Andrew Holden
, Auckland, New Zealand

 

17:13-17:15
Discussion

 

17:15-17:23
Endoleak is associated with sac growth but not mortality (OVER trial)
Frank Lederle
, Minneapolis, United States

 

17:23-17:25
Discussion

 

17:25-17:35
Panel discussion


Mini-symposium: Management of type I endoleaks


17:35-17:45
Debate: Liquid embolic products and glues are indicated for type I endoleaks
For the motion:
Robert Morgan, London, United Kingdom
Against the motion:
Fabrizio Fanelli, Rome, Italy

 

17:45-17:50
Discussion and vote

 

17:50-17:58
Extension fenestrated cuffs
Stéphan Haulon
, Lille, France

 

17:58-18:00
Discussion

 

18:00-18:08
Chimney grafts
Giovanni Torsello
, Münster, Germany

 

18:08-18:10
Discussion

 

18:10-18:18
Upward migration and type Ib endoleak years after EVAR – a word of caution
Hence Verhagen
, Rotterdam, Netherlands

 

18:18-18:20
Discussion

 

18:20-18:30
Panel discussion


Additional Aortic activities

NEW CX Edited Live Cases – Aortic

Tuesday 28 April – Click here

CX Abstracts – Abdominal Aortic

Tuesday 28 April and Thursday 30 April – Click here

CX Abstracts – Thoracic Aortic

Wednesday 29 April – Click here


Thursday 30 April 2015 – Main Programme

CAROTID CONTROVERSIES

Chairman: Ross Naylor, Leicester, United Kingdom
Moderator:
Frans Moll,
Utrecht, Netherlands

 

08:00-08:09
Definition of ‘best medical therapy’ for carotid disease
Martin Brown
, London, United Kingdom

 

08:09-08:11
Discussion

 

08:11-08:20
Resistance to platelet inhibitory therapy and stroke risk in patients with carotid disease
Charles McCollum
, Manchester, United Kingdom

 

08:20-08:22
Discussion

 

08:22-08:32
Debate: Selective carotid screening is justified in modern clinical practice
For the motion:
Peter Schneider, Honolulu, United States
Against the motion:
Ankur Thapar, Harlow, United Kingdom

 

08:32-08:37
Discussion and vote

 

08:37-08:46
Carotid artery stenting in the hyperacute period after onset of symptoms: ‘The rule of 5’
Gioachino Coppi
, Modena, Italy

 

08:46-08:48
Discussion

 

08:48-08:57
Is there any role for intervention in acute carotid dissection?
Colin Derdeyn
, St Louis, United States

 

08:57-08:59
Discussion

 

08:59-09:08
Results of urgent carotid intervention after thrombolysis following stroke
Martin Björck
, Uppsala, Sweden

 

09:08-09:10
Discussion

 

09:10-09:19
An algorithm for predicting late stroke risk in asymptomatic patients
Andrew Nicolaides
, London, United Kingdom

 

09:19-09:21
Discussion

 

09:21-09:30
The significance of symptomatic vertebral artery disease
Hugh Markus
, Cambridge, United Kingdom

 

09:30-09:32
Discussion

 

09:32-09:42
Debate: Robotic navigation improves the results of carotid stenting
For the motion:
Celia Riga, London, United Kingdom
Against the motion:
Trevor Cleveland, Sheffield, United Kingdom

 

09:42-09:47
Discussion and vote

 

09:47-10:00
Panel discussion


COFFEE


THORACIC AORTIC CONTROVERSIES


Stroke during aortic arch interventions

Chairperson: Janet Powell, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom
Moderator:
Frank Veith,
New York, United States


10:30-10:37
The frequency of cerebral embolisation after aortic arch catheterisation
Richard Gibbs
, London, United Kingdom

 

10:37-10:40
Discussion

 

10:40-10:47
The reporting of  cerebral embolisation after aortic arch catheterisation
Regula von Allmen
, St Gallen, Switzerland

 

10:47-10:50
Discussion

 

10:50-10:57
The value of medication such as statins before aortic arch catheterisation
Frank Lederle
, Minneapolis, United States

 

10:57-11:00
Discussion

 

11:00-11:05
Panel discussion

 

11:05-11:15
Debate: Low profile endovascular aortic devices have more benefits than disadvantages
For the motion:
Eric Verhoeven, Nuremberg, Germany
Against the motion:
Peter Holt, London, United Kingdom

 

11:15-11:20
Discussion and vote


Interventions for ascending and arch of the aorta


Chairman:
Roger Greenhalgh
, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom
Moderator:
Matt Thompson
, London, United Kingdom

 

11:20-11:27
Micromesh use to reduce cerebral embolisation during carotid stenting
Alberto Cremonesi
, Cotignola, Italy

 

11:27-11:30
Discussion

 

11:30-11:37
Ascending aortic reconstruction considerations
Rodney White
, Torrance, United States

 

11:37-11:40
Discussion

 

11:40-11:47
TEVAR in the aortic arch – influence of the proximal landing zone on outcome
Dittmar Böckler
, Heidelberg, Germany

 

11:47-11:50
Discussion

 

11:50-11:57
Branched stent grafts for the treatment of complex arch lesions
Piergiorgio Cao
, Rome, Italy

 

11:57-12:00
Discussion

 

12:00-12:07
Open surgery
Stephen Large
, Cambridge, United Kingdom

 

12:07-12:10
Discussion

 

12:10-12:18

Early clinical experience of a new thoracic branched device for the aortic arch

Michael Dake, Stanford, United States

 

12:18-12:21
Discussion

 

12:21-12:30
Panel discussion


LUNCH – Food will also be served in the Main Auditorium


Industry sponsored satellite

12:30-13:30 Click here


Interventions for ascending and arch of the aorta (continued)

Chairman: Andrew Holden, Auckland, New Zealand
Moderator:
Colin Bicknell
, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom

 

13:30-13:40
Debate: Hybrid beats total TEVAR wherever it can be used
For the motion:
Franco Grego, Padua, Italy
Against the motion:
Frans Moll, Utrecht, Netherlands

 

13:40-13:45
Discussion and vote

 

13:45-13:55
Debate: Endovascular branched graft beats open surgery for the left subclavian artery
For the motion:
Jean Panneton, Norfolk, United States
Against the motion:
Marcus Brooks, Bristol, United Kingdom

 

13:55-14:00
Discussion and vote

 

14:00-14:08
Complex arch and thoracic aortic procedures using robotic system
Thomas Nolte
, Bad Bevensen, Germany

 

14:08-14:10
Discussion

 

14:10-14:20
Debate: The heyday of open aortic surgery is over
For the motion:
Frank Veith, New York, United States
Against the motion:
Hans-Henning Eckstein, Munich, Germany

 

14:20-14:25
Discussion and vote

 

14:25-14:35
Panel discussion on interventions for ascending and arch of the aorta


Controversies in chronic type B dissection of the aorta

14:35-14:44
Predictions  of clinical success after TEVAR for chronic dissection
Matt Thompson
, London, United Kingdom

 

14:44-14:46
Discussion

 

14:46-14:55
Factors that predict success after TEVAR for chronic type B dissection
Hervé Rousseau
, Toulouse, France

 

14:55-14:57
Discussion

 

14:57-15:06
Technique for embolisation of the false lumen
Tilo Kolbel,
Hamburg, Germany

 

15:06-15:08
Discussion

 

15:08-15:17
Spinal cord protection – related complications in chronic type B dissection
Vincent Riambau
, Barcelona, Spain

 

15:17-15:19
Discussion

 

15:19-15:30
Panel discussion on type B dissection of the aorta


TEA – Refreshments will also be served in the Main Auditorium


Industry sponsored satellite

15:30-16:00 Click here


Current best practice in the management of chronic type B dissection


Chairman:
Matt Thompson
, London, United Kingdom
Moderator:
Dittmar Böckler
, Heidelberg, Germany


16:00-16:10
Debate: Long-term results following intervention for sub-acute uncomplicated type B dissection warrant intervention
For the motion:
Christoph Nienaber, Rostock, Germany
Against the motion:
Ross Milner, Chicago, United States

 

16:10-16:15
Discussion and vote

 

16:15-16:23
Dissection algorithm
Michael Dake
, Stanford, United States

 

16:23-16:25
Discussion

 

16:25-16:33
The impact of timing in the treatment of acute dissection
Nimesh Desai
, Philadelphia, United States

 

16:33-16:35
Discussion


Descending thoracic aorta, thoracoabdominal and juxtarenal

16:35-16:43
MR elastography for optimal durability of thoracic endografts
Rachel Clough
, London, United Kingdom

 

16:43-16:45
Discussion

 

16:45-16:53
Risk score for open repair, EVAR and thoracic interventions
Ian Loftus
, London, United Kingdom

 

16:53-16:55
Discussion

 

16:55-17:05
Debate: The threshold diameter for intervention of the thoracic aorta is unknown
For the motion:
Janet Powell, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom
Against the motion:
Vincent Riambau, Barcelona, Spain

 

17:05-17:10
Discussion and vote

 

17:10-17:18
Two-stage TEVAR yields lower mortality and more protection against spinal cord injury
Matthew Eagleton
, Cleveland, United States

 

17:18-17:20
Discussion

 

17:20-17:28
Renal revascularisation during open TAAA with Hybrid Vascular Graft
Roberto Chiesa
, Milan, Italy

 

17:28-17:30
Discussion

 

17:30-17:38
Strategies to reduce paraplegia after TAAA repair (endovascular and open)
Theodosios Bisdas
, Münster, Germany

 

17:38-17:40
Discussion

 

17:40-18:00
Panel discussion


Additional Aortic activities

NEW CX Edited Live Cases – Aortic

Tuesday 28 April – Click here

CX Abstracts – Abdominal Aortic

Tuesday 28 April and Thursday 30 April – Click here

CX Abstracts – Thoracic Aortic

Wednesday 29 April – Click here


Friday 1 May 2015 – Main Programme

VENOUS CONTROVERSIES

Superficial venous controversies

Chairman: Ian Franklin, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom
Moderator:
Mark Whiteley
, Guildford, United Kingdom

Click here to read about the highlights of the Venous Controversies 2015.

Truncal ablation

Thermal


Radiofrequency methods and their differences


08:00-08:07
Five-year data using a 7cm catheter system
Olivier Pichot
, Grenoble, France

 

08:07-08:09
Discussion

 

08:09-08:16
Benefits of bipolar radiofrequency technology
Isaac Nyamekye
, Worcester, United Kingdom

 

08:16-08:18
Discussion

 

08:18-08:25
The unipolar approach for radiofrequency
Attila Szabo
, Budapest, Hungary

 

08:25-08:27
Discussion


Endovenous Laser Therapy


08:27-08:34
Laser fibre types – design and outcome
Ian Chetter
, Hull, United Kingdom

 

08:34-08:36
Discussion

 

08:36-08:46
Panel discussion on thermal truncal ablation


Non-thermal


08:46-08:53
The mechanochemical method of ablation comes of age
Alun Davies
, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom

 

08:53-08:55
Discussion

 

08:55-09:02
Endovenous glue ablation – Variclose
Kursat Bozkurt
, Istanbul, Turkey

 

09:02-09:04
Discussion

 

09:04-09:11
The use of cyanoacrylate adhesive for the treatment of refluxing great saphenous vein – VenaSeal
Guido Lengfellner
, Regensburg, Germany

 

09:11-09:13
Discussion

 

09:13-09:20
A comparison of thermal and non-thermal ablation
Tristan Lane
, London, United Kingdom

 

09:20-09:22
Discussion

 

09:22-09:29
Optimal results of foam sclerotherapy
Attilio Cavezzi
, San Benedetto del Tronto, Italy

 

09:29-09:31
Discussion

 

09:31-09:38
Foam phlebectomy techniques and outcomes
Michael Cumming
, St Louis Park, United States

 

09:38-09:40
Discussion

 

09:40-09:50
Panel discussion on non-thermal truncal ablation


Perforating vein intervention


09:50-09:57
Identification of those that need correcting
Barrie Price
, Guildford, United Kingdom

 

09:57-10:00
Discussion


COFFEE – Refreshments will also be served in the Main Auditorium


Venous thrombosis – incidence, consequence and towards a Patient Pathway


With an unrestricted educational grant from Boston Scientific

Chairman: Fabrizio Fanelli, Rome, Italy


10:00-10:03
Coffee & snacks

 

10:03-10:09
From venous thrombosis to post-thrombotic syndrome
Marzia Lugli,
Modena, Italy

 

10:09-10:12
Discussion

 

10:12-10:18
Building an interventional pathway
Gerard O’Sullivan,
Galway, Ireland

 

10:18-10:21
Discussion

 

10:21-10:28
Chairman’s case discussion with audience interaction



Sclerotherapy and laser therapy of thread veins

Chairman: Ian Franklin, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom
Moderator:
Stephen Black
, London, United Kingdom


10:30-10:40
Debate: Duplex scanning is mandatory before treatment of asymptomatic cosmetic thread veins
For the motion:
Mark Whiteley, Guildford, United Kingdom
Against the motion:
Alun Davies, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom

 

10:40-10:45
Discussion and vote

 

10:45-10:52
Thread veins need compression
Philip Coleridge-Smith
, London, United Kingdom

 

10:52-10:54
Discussion


Superficial and deep venous imaging

Chairman: Alun Davies, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom
Moderator:
Ian Franklin
, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom


10:54-11:01
The algorithm of choice of imaging modality, duplex, venography and IVUS and the place of CT and MR venography
Stephen Black
, London, United Kingdom

 

11:01-11:03
Discussion

 

11:03-11:10
Improved clinical outcomes consequent upon excellent pelvic imaging
Mark Whiteley
, Guildford, United Kingdom

 

11:10-11:12
Discussion

 

11:12-11:19
CT and MR venography and the limitations of venography in the lying position
Narayan Karunanithy
, London, United Kingdom

 

11:19-11:21
Discussion

 

11:21-11:28
The measurement of a deep venous stenosis
Carsten Arnoldussen
, Maastricht, Netherlands

 

11:28-11:30
Discussion

 

11:30-11:37
The range of use of state-of-the-art duplex scanning in experienced hands
Judith Holdstock
, Guildford, United Kingdom

 

11:37-11:39
Discussion

 

11:39-12:05
Panel discussion on venous imaging


Venous interventions and pathways


12:05-12:12
The use of coils and foam into pelvic veins
Tony Lopez
, London, United Kingdom

 

12:12-12:14
Discussion

 

12:14-12:21
Optimal care pathway for a leg ulcer patient
Manj Gohel
, Cambridge, United Kingdom

 

12:21-12:23
Discussion

 

12:23-12:30
Panel discussion on venous interventions and pathways


Announcement of the winners of the CX Abstract prize


LUNCH


Deep venous controversies

Deep venous stents

Chairman: Stephen Black, London, United Kingdom
Moderator:
Alun Davies,
Imperial College, London, United Kingdom


13:30-13:37
The value of IVUS in planning and deployment of deep venous stents
Marzia Lugli
, Modena, Italy

 

13:37-13:39
Discussion

 

13:39-13:46
The Zilver Vena stent
Gerard O’Sullivan
, Galway, Ireland

 

13:46-13:48
Discussion

 

13:48-13:55
The VENITI stent
Olivier Hartung
, Marseille, France

 

13:55-13:57
Discussion

 

13:57-14:04
The sinus-Venous stent
Rick de Graaf
, Maastricht, Netherlands

 

14:04-14:06
Discussion

 

14:06-14:16
Panel discussion on deep venous stents


Catheter-directed thrombolysis and thrombectomy

14:16-14:23
Methods to estimate the age and nature of a deep venous occlusion
Prakash Saha
, London, United Kingdom

 

14:23-14:25
Discussion

 

14:25-14:32
Evidence base is needed to change management of acute deep vein thrombosis
Ander Cohen
, London, United Kingdom

 

14:32-14:34
Discussion

 

14:34-14:41
Acoustic energy thrombolytic technology for remote clot removal, including pulmonary embolism – Ekosonic
Julian Hague
, London, United Kingdom

 

14:41-14:43
Discussion

 

14:43-14:50
Reconstruction of the inferior vena cava and Angiovac for inferior vena cava occlusion
Iris Baumgartner
, Bern, Switzerland

 

14:50-14:52
Discussion

 

15:52-14:59
Detachment of occlusive thrombus in deep vein, aspiration, fragmentation and removal from veins or arteries – Rotarex and Aspirex
Michael Lichtenberg
, Arnsberg, Germany

 

14:59-15:01
Discussion

 

15:01-15:08
Breaking of thrombus and removal from peripheral veins and arteries – AngioJet
Gerard O’Sullivan
, Galway, Ireland

 

15:08-15:10
Discussion

 

15:10-15:30
Panel discussion on catheter-directed thrombolysis and thrombectomy


Additional Venous activities

CX Abstracts – Venous

Tuesday 28 April – Click here

NEW CX Venous Workshop

Wednesday 29 April and Thursday 30 April – Click here


Tuesday | Wednesday | Thursday | Friday