Evaluation of the learning curve for fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair Benjamin W. Starnes, MD, Michael T. Caps, MD, Zachary M. Arthurs, MD, Billi Tatum, RN, Niten Singh, MD Journal of Vascular Surgery Volume 64, Issue 5, Pages 1219-1227 (November 2016) DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2016.04.049 Copyright © 2016 Terms and Conditions
Fig 1 A, Cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis of composite outcome of death or any major complication. The red and green lines represent 90% alert (red) and 90% reassurance (green) boundaries. ALM/CLA, Arc line measurement with centerline adjustment; CTs, constraining ties. P0 (acceptable failure rate) = 12.5%, P1 (unacceptable failure rate) = 20.0%, α (type I error rate) = β (type II error rate) = 10%. B, Adjusted CUSUM analysis of composite outcome of death or any major complication. Plot was constructed using the predicted probability of death or major complication from the model in Table V rather than the actual outcome. Journal of Vascular Surgery 2016 64, 1219-1227DOI: (10.1016/j.jvs.2016.04.049) Copyright © 2016 Terms and Conditions
Fig 2 Scatterplots of (A) procedure time, (B) fluoroscopy time, (C) contrast material administered, and (D) estimated blood loss as a function of case number. Data are presented for cases with two or more fenestrations for (A) and (B) and for the entire sample for (C) and (D). ALM/CLA, Arc line measurement with centerline adjustment; CTs, constraining ties. Journal of Vascular Surgery 2016 64, 1219-1227DOI: (10.1016/j.jvs.2016.04.049) Copyright © 2016 Terms and Conditions