Glenn shunt as a rescue strategy for acute right ventricular failure after right ventricular myocardial infarction.

We present the case of a 52-year-old woman with cardiogenic shock and refractory right ventricular failure due to spontaneous dissection of the right coronary artery. She remained dependent on mechanical support for several weeks. Both a right ventricular assist device implant and a bidirectional cavopulmonary anastomosis were explored as long-term support options. A history of malignancy and possible right ventricular functional recovery resulted in a decision in favour of the bidirectional cavopulmonary anastomosis and concomitant tricuspid valve annuloplasty. Postoperatively her clinical condition improved significantly, and she could be discharged home. Echocardiography showed normalization of right ventricular dimensions and slight improvement of right ventricular function.

Learning healthcare systems in cardiology: A qualitative interview study on ethical dilemmas of a learning healthcare system.

Background: Implementation of an LHS in cardiology departments presents itself with ethical challenges, including ethical review and informed consent. In this qualitative study, we investigated stakeholders' attitudes toward ethical issues regarding the implementation of an LHS in the cardiology department. Methods: We conducted a qualitative study using 35 semi-structured interviews and 5 focus group interviews with 34 individuals. We interviewed cardiologists, research nurses, cardiovascular patients, ethicists, health lawyers, epidemiologists/statisticians and insurance spokespersons. Results: Respondents identified different ethical obstacles for the implementation of an LHS within the cardiology department. These obstacles were mainly on ethical oversight in LHSs; in particular, informed con sent and data ownership were discussed. In addition, respondents reported on the role of patients in LHS. Respondents described the LHS as a possibility for patients to engage in both research and care. While the LHS can promote patient engagement, patients might also be reduced to their data and are therefore at risk, according to respondents. Conclusions: Views on the ethical dilemmas of a LHSs within cardiology are diverse. Similar to the literary debate on oversight, there are different views on how ethical oversight should be regulated. This study adds to the literary debate on oversight by highlighting that patients wish to be informed about the learning activities within the LHS they participate in, and that they wish to actively contribute by sharing their data and identifying learning goals, provided that informed consent is obtained.