Adjunctive hyperbaric oxygen therapy for spinal cord ischemia after complex aortic repair.

OBJECTIVE: Spinal cord ischemia (SCI) with paraplegia or paraparesis is a devastating complication of complex aortic repair (CAR). Treatment includes cerebrospinal fluid drainage, maintenance of hemoglobin concentration (>10 g/L), and elevating mean arterial blood pressure. Animal and human case series have reported improvements in SCI outcomes with hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT). We reviewed our center's experience with HBOT as a rescue treatment for spinal cord ischemia post-CAR in addition to standard treatment. METHODS: A retrospective review of the University Health Network's Hyperbaric Medicine Unit treatment database identified HBOT sessions for patients with SCI post-CAR between January 2013 and June 2021. Mean estimates of overall motor function scores were determined for postoperative, pre-HBOT, post-HBOT (within 4 hours of the final HBOT session), and at the final assessment (last available in-hospital evaluation) using a linear mixed model. A subgroup analysis compared the mean estimates of overall motor function scores between improvement and non-improvement groups at given timepoints. Improvement of motor function was defined as either a ≥2 point increase in overall muscle function score in patients with paraparesis or an upward change in motor deficit categorization (para/monoplegia, paraparesis, and no deficit). Subgroup analysis was performed by stratifying by improvement or non-improvement of motor function from pre-HBOT to final evaluation. RESULTS: Thirty patients were treated for SCI. Pre-HBOT, the motor deficit categorization was 10 paraplegia, three monoplegia, 16 paraparesis, and one unable to assess. At the final assessment, 14 patients demonstrated variable degrees of motor function improvement; eight patients demonstrated full motor function recovery. Seven of the 10 patients with paraplegia remained paraplegic despite HBOT. The estimated mean of overall muscle function score for pre-HBOT was 16.6 ± 2.9 (95% confidence interval [CI], 10.9-22.3) and for final assessment was 23.4 ± 2.9 (95% CI, 17.7-29.1). The estimated mean difference between pre-HBOT and final assessment overall muscle function score was 6.7 ± 3.1 (95% CI, 0.6-16.1). The estimated mean difference of the overall muscle function score between pre-HBOT and final assessment for the improved group was 16.6 ± 3.5 (95% CI, 7.5-25.7) vs -4.9 ± 4.2 (95% CI, -16.0 to 6.2) for the non-improved group. CONCLUSIONS: HBOT, in addition to standard treatment, may potentially improve recovery in spinal cord function following SCI post-CAR. However, the potential benefits of HBOT are not equally distributed among subgroups.

Risk Prediction Models for Long-Term Survival after Cardiac Surgery: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: The reporting of alternative postoperative measures of quality after cardiac surgery is becoming increasingly important as in-hospital mortality rates continue to decline. This study aims to systematically review and assess risk models designed to predict long-term outcomes after cardiac surgery. METHODS: The MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched for articles published between 1990 and 2020. Studies developing or validating risk prediction models for long-term outcomes after cardiac surgery were included. Data were extracted using checklists for critical appraisal and systematic review of prediction modeling studies. RESULTS: Eleven studies were identified for inclusion in the review, of which nine studies described the development of long-term risk prediction models after cardiac surgery and two were external validation studies. A total of 70 predictors were included across the nine models. The most frequently used predictors were age (n = 9), peripheral vascular disease (n = 8), renal disease (n = 8), and pulmonary disease (n = 8). Despite all models demonstrating acceptable performance on internal validation, only two models underwent external validation, both of which performed poorly. CONCLUSION: Nine risk prediction models predicting long-term mortality after cardiac surgery have been identified in this review. Statistical issues with model development, limited inclusion of outcomes beyond 5 years of follow-up, and a lack of external validation studies means that none of the models identified can be recommended for use in contemporary cardiac surgery. Further work is needed either to successfully externally validate existing models or to develop new models. Newly developed models should aim to use standardized long-term specific reproducible outcome measures.

Mitral valve surgery for rheumatic heart disease: replace, repair, retrain?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Rheumatic heart disease (RHD) affects over 30 million people worldwide. Substantial variation exists in the surgical treatment of patients with RHD. Here, we aim to review the surgical techniques to treat RHD with a focus on rheumatic mitral valve (MV) repair. We introduce novel educational paradigms to embrace repair-oriented techniques in cardiac centers. RECENT FINDINGS: Due to the low prevalence of RHD in high-income countries, limited expertise in MV surgery for RHD, technical complexity of MV repair for RHD and concerns about durability, most surgeons elect for MV replacement. However, in some series, MV repair is associated with improved outcomes, fewer reinterventions, and avoidance of anticoagulation-related complications. In low- and middle-income countries, the RHD burden is large and MV repair is more commonly performed due to high rates of loss-to-follow-up and barriers associated with anticoagulation, international normalized ratio monitoring, and risk of reintervention. SUMMARY: Increased consideration for MV repair in the setting of RHD may be warranted, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. We suggest some avenues for increased exposure and training in rheumatic valve surgery through international bilateral partnership models in endemic regions, visiting surgeons from endemic regions, simulation training, and courses by professional societies.

The Call for the "Interventional/Hybrid" Aortic Surgeon: Open, Endovascular, and Hybrid Therapies of the Aortic Arch.

Aortic arch pathology is relatively rare but potentially highly fatal and associated with considerable comorbidity. Operative mortality and complication rates have improved over time but remain high. In response, aortic arch surgery is one of the most rapidly evolving areas of cardiac surgery in terms of surgical volume and improved outcomes. Moreover, there has been a surge in novel devices and techniques, many of which have been developed by or codeveloped with vascular surgeons and interventional radiologists. Nevertheless, the extent of arch surgery, the choice of nadir temperature, cannulation, and perfusion strategies, and the use of open, endovascular, or hybrid options vary according to country, centre, and surgeon. In this review article, we provide a technical overview of the surgical, total endovascular, and hybrid repair options for aortic arch pathology through historical developments and contemporary results. We highlight key information for surgeons, cardiologists, and trainees to understand the management of patients with aortic arch pathology. We conclude by discussing training paradigms, the role of aortic teams, and gaps in knowledge, arguing for the need for wire skills for the future "interventional aortic surgeon" and increased research into techniques and novel devices to continue improving outcomes for aortic arch surgery.

Female and Country Representation on Editorial Boards of Cardiothoracic Surgery Journals.

Editorial board positions are prestigious and have important implications as gatekeepers for the advancement of academic surgeons. We assessed the composition of editorial boards of cardiothoracic surgery journals to identify female and low- and middle-income country (LMIC) representation. Journals listed as "Cardiac and Cardiovascular Systems" in the 2019 InCites Journal Citation Reports (JCR) directory by Clarivate Analytics were manually searched to identify journals pertaining to cardiothoracic surgery. Editorial boards for each journal were reviewed as available on journal websites, assessing for sex and country income group (high-income country vs. LMIC) of editorial board members. Descriptive statistics were performed, and differences were assessed through t tests and correlations using STATA version 14. Twenty-two cardiothoracic journals were identified, of which 16 were listed on JCR and 6 were sister journals. A total of 1,970 editorial board members were identified, of whom 206 (10.5%) were female and 103 (5.2%) from LMICs (each, p < 0.001). Female representation varied between 0% and 29.7% across journals. There were 391 associate and deputy editors, 62 (15.9%) were female and 15 (3.8%) from LMICs (each, p < 0.001). Only 1 (4.5%) of the 22 journals had a female Editor-in-Chief. A total of 15 LMICs were represented: Brazil (56 members), China (11 members), and India (11 members). LMIC representation varied between 0% and 76.6% (Brazilian Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery), with the second highest representation being only 16.33%. After excluding the Brazilian Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery (the only country-specific journal), LMIC representation was only 3.7% on editorial boards. The intersection between female sex and LMIC origin was found in only three editorial board members. A statistically significant positive correlation was seen between percentage of females in editorial boards and journal impact factor (r= 0.769, p < 0.001). No correlation was seen between percentage of LMIC in boards and impact factor (r = -0.306, p = 0.250). Our findings suggest editorial boards of cardiothoracic surgery journals remain highly imbalanced in terms of sex and country income group. Disparities in editorial boards may further result in less inclusive review processes, which may lead to fewer publications and slower academic advancement by underrepresented groups. Societies should partake in active assessment and reporting of disparities across their editorial boards as well as assessment of implicit biases and barriers impeding female and LMIC researchers from joining their boards.

Hybrid arch frozen elephant trunk repair for acute type A aortic dissection: Extra-anatomic subclavian reconstruction.

Acute type A aortic dissection is a life-threatening condition that confers significant early perioperative risk but is also associated with late aortic disease progression and the need for reintervention. Recent efforts to improve patient outcomes have focused on improving quality of care and extending treatment in the aortic root and arch to reduce late aortic events. The hybrid arch frozen elephant trunk technique facilitates a more aggressive distal aortic repair that may help mitigate the early and late deleterious effects of persistent false lumen perfusion. However, in the acute and emergency settings, management of the left subclavian artery remains a challenge. We present a step-by-step instructional guide on performing an emergency hybrid arch frozen elephant trunk procedure with emphasis on management of the difficult left subclavian artery. Our case report demonstrates a transthoracic aortoaxillary extra-anatomic bypass of the left axillary artery. We discuss the most important considerations when managing the left subclavian artery in an acute type A aortic dissection. Finally, we detail the benefits and limitations of the transthoracic aortoaxillary extra-anatomic technique and discuss other approaches to left subclavian artery reconstruction.

Variations in Coronary Revascularization Practices and Their Effect on Long-Term Outcomes.

Background The degree of hospital-level variation in the ratio of percutaneous coronary interventions to coronary artery bypass grafting procedures (PCI:CABG) and the association of the PCI:CABG ratio with clinical outcome are unknown. Methods and Results In a multicenter population-based study conducted in Ontario, Canada, we identified 44 288 patients from 19 institutions who had nonemergent diagnostic angiograms indicating severe multivessel coronary artery disease (2013-2017) and underwent a coronary revascularization procedure within 90 days. Hospitals were divided into tertiles according to their adjusted PCI:CABG ratio into low (0.70-0.85, n=17 487), medium (1.01-1.17, n=15 275), and high (1.18-1.29, n=11 526) ratio institutions. Compared with low PCI:CABG ratio hospitals, hazard ratios (HRs) for major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events were higher at medium (HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.14-1.25) and high ratio (HR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.15-1.27) hospitals during a median 3.3 (interquartile range 2.1-4.6) years follow-up. When interventional cardiologists performed the diagnostic angiogram, the odds of the patient receiving PCI was higher (odds ratio, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.23-1.52) than when it was performed by noninterventional cardiologists, after accounting for patient characteristics. Having the diagnostic angiogram at an institution without cardiac surgical capabilities was independently associated with a higher risk of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.02-1.11), death (HR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.02-1.18), and myocardial infarction (HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.03-1.17). Conclusions Patients undergoing diagnostic angiography in hospitals with higher PCI:CABG ratio had higher rates of adverse outcomes, including major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularization. Presence of on-site cardiac surgery was associated with better survival and lower major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events.

Cardiovascular Physicians, Scientists, and Trainees Balancing Work and Caregiving Responsibilities in the COVID-19 Era: Sex and Race-Based Inequities.

BACKGROUND: The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has exposed a work-life (im)balance that has been present but not openly discussed in medicine, surgery, and science for decades. The pandemic has exposed inequities in existing institutional structure and policies concerning clinical workload, research productivity, and/or teaching excellence inadvertently privileging those who do not have significant caregiving responsibilities or those who have the resources to pay for their management. METHODS: We sought to identify the challenges facing multidisciplinary faculty and trainees with dependents, and highlight a number of possible strategies to address challenges in work-life (im)balance. RESULTS: To date, there are no Canadian-based data to quantify the physical and mental effect of COVID-19 on health care workers, multidisciplinary faculty, and trainees. As the pandemic evolves, formal strategies should be discussed with an intersectional lens to promote equity in the workforce, including (but not limited to): (1) the inclusion of broad representation (including equal representation of women and other marginalized persons) in institutional-based pandemic response and recovery planning and decision-making; (2) an evaluation (eg, institutional-led survey) of the effect of the pandemic on work-life balance; (3) the establishment of formal dialogue (eg, workshops, training, and media campaigns) to normalize coexistence of work and caregiving responsibilities and to remove stigma of gender roles; (4) a reevaluation of workload and promotion reviews; and (5) the development of formal mentorship programs to support faculty and trainees. CONCLUSIONS: We believe that a multistrategy approach needs to be considered by stakeholders (including policy-makers, institutions, and individuals) to create sustainable working conditions during and beyond this pandemic.

CONTEXTE: La pandémie de COVID-19 a mis en lumière le déséquilibre entre travail et vie personnelle qui règne depuis des décennies dans les milieux de la médecine, de la chirurgie et des sciences, mais dont on ne parlait pas ouvertement. La pandémie a en effet mis au jour des iniquités dans la structure et les politiques des établissements en matière de charge de travail clinique, de productivité de la recherche et d'excellence en enseignement, qui favorisent par inadvertance les personnes qui n'ont pas de responsabilités familiales importantes ou qui ont les ressources nécessaires pour leur prise en charge. MÉTHODOLOGIE: Nous avons tenté de cerner les difficultés auxquelles font face les enseignants multidisciplinaires et les stagiaires ayant des personnes à charge, et nous proposons un certain nombre de stratégies possibles pour faciliter la conciliation travail-vie personnelle. RÉSULTATS: À ce jour, il n'existe pas de données canadiennes permettant de quantifier les répercussions physiques et mentales de la pandémie de COVID-19 sur les travailleurs de la santé, les enseignants multidisciplinaires et les stagiaires. Au fil de l'évolution de la pandémie, il conviendrait de formuler des stratégies officielles à la lumière des commentaires d'intervenants des différents secteurs concernés, afin de promouvoir l'équilibre au sein des effectifs; ces stratégies pourraient notamment inclure ce qui suit (sans toutefois s'y limiter) : 1) l'inclusion d'une vaste représentation (y compris une représentation égale des femmes et des autres personnes marginalisées) pour la réponse à la pandémie dans les établissements, la planification du rétablissement et la prise de décisions; 2) une évaluation (p. ex. au moyen d'un sondage mené sous la direction des établissements) des répercussions de la pandémie sur la conciliation travail-vie personnelle; 3) l'établissement d'un dialogue formel (p. ex. ateliers, activités de formation et campagnes dans les médias) afin de normaliser la coexistence des responsabilités professionnelles et familiales et d'éliminer la stigmatisation associée aux rôles des sexes; 4) une réévaluation de la charge de travail et des promotions; et 5) la mise sur pied de programmes formels de mentorat pour soutenir les enseignants et les stagiaires. CONCLUSIONS: Nous croyons que les intervenants (décideurs, établissements et personnes) devraient envisager une approche multistratégie afin d'instaurer des conditions de travail viables pendant la pandémie et par la suite.

Valve-sparing root replacement in patients with bicuspid versus tricuspid aortic valves.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to compare the outcomes of patients undergoing aortic valve-sparing root replacement with bicuspid versus tricuspid aortic valves. METHODS: A total of 333 consecutive patients (bicuspid aortic valve, n = 45; tricuspid aortic valve, n = 288) underwent valve-sparing root replacement using the reimplantation technique from 1988 to 2012 at a single institution. The primary analysis was performed on a 1:3 bicuspid aortic valve:tricuspid aortic valve propensity-matched dataset to mitigate known differences between these 2 groups. In the matched, dataset, mean age (bicuspid aortic valve: 40 ± 13 years; tricuspid aortic valve: 41 ± 14) and rates of comorbidities were similar between groups. Patients with bicuspid aortic valves were less likely to have Marfan syndrome (bicuspid aortic valve: 9% vs tricuspid aortic valve: 53%, P < .001). Patients were followed prospectively with aortic root imaging for a median of 8.2 (5.3-12.2) years. RESULTS: Primary cusp repair was required more often in patients with bicuspid aortic valves (bicuspid aortic valve: 79% vs tricuspid aortic valve: 45%, P < .001). A total of 3 operative deaths occurred (bicuspid aortic valve 0% vs tricuspid aortic valve 2%, P = .52). The probability of aortic insufficiency increased significantly over time in both groups (odds ratio, 1.106; 95% confidence interval, 1.033-1.185; P = .004), but there was no significant difference in this increase between the bicuspid aortic valve and tricuspid aortic valve groups (P = .08). Long-term freedom from mortality (P = .20), cumulative incidence of aortic valve reoperation (P = .42), and valve-related events (P = .69) were similar across groups. CONCLUSIONS: In well-selected patients with bicuspid aortic valves and favorable cusp morphology, valve-sparing root replacement offers excellent long-term clinical outcomes.

Late results of the Ross procedure.

OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to examine the long-term results of the Ross procedure in a cohort of patients followed prospectively for more than 2 decades. METHODS: From 1990 to 2004, 212 consecutive patients with a median age (interquartile range) of 34 years (28-41) underwent the Ross procedure; 82% had congenital aortic valve disease. The technique of aortic root replacement was used in one half of the patients. Patients have been followed prospectively for a median (interquartile range) of 18.0 (14.6-21.2) years. Valve function was assessed by echocardiography. RESULTS: Cumulative mortality at 20 years was 10.8% (95% confidence interval, 6.5-17.8). Thirty patients required Ross-related reoperations and 3 for coronary artery disease. The cumulative probability of Ross-related reoperations at 20 years was 16.8% (95% confidence interval, 11.3-24.5), on the pulmonary autograft was 11.5% (95% confidence interval, 7.2-18.0), and on the pulmonary homograft was 8.2% (4.6-14.7). The implantation technique was not associated with the cumulative incidence of reoperations on the pulmonary autograft. The development of moderate or severe aortic insufficiency and pulmonary homograft dysfunction increased with time. At 20 years, the probability of aortic insufficiency was 13% (95% confidence interval, 8.0-20.3) and of pulmonary homograft dysfunction was 19.7% (95% confidence interval, 13.9-27.2). Preoperative aortic insufficiency was associated with increased odds of postoperative aortic insufficiency. CONCLUSIONS: The long-term results of the Ross procedure are excellent regardless of the implantation technique, but there is a progressive deterioration of function of both semilunar valves.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of chordal replacement versus leaflet resection for posterior mitral leaflet prolapse.

OBJECTIVES: To compare outcomes of chordal replacement versus leaflet resection techniques for repair of isolated posterior mitral leaflet prolapse. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE databases for studies that compared chordal replacement ("neo-chord" group) versus leaflet resection ("resection" group) techniques for the treatment of posterior mitral leaflet prolapse. Data were extracted by 2 independent investigators and subjected to a meta-analysis using a random-effects model. RESULTS: One randomized controlled trial (RCT), 1 propensity-matched study, and 6 unadjusted observational studies, with a total of 1926 patients, met our inclusion criteria. Two studies reported only perioperative outcomes; mean follow-up ranged from 1.0 to 5.9 years in the remaining studies. In pooled data from unadjusted observational studies, annuloplasty ring diameter was higher in the neo-chord group (+1.5 mm; P = .0003), but with high heterogeneity (I2 = 91%). Based on limited data, postprocedural left ventricular ejection fraction may be greater in the neo-chord group, but this difference reached statistical significance only in the RCT (+3.4%; P = .03), and not in 2 observational studies that reported this outcome (+2.7%; P = .10). There was no difference in recurrent mitral regurgitation at follow-up between the resection and neo-chord groups; however, patients in the neo-chord group had a lower rate of mitral valve reoperation at follow-up in the unadjusted observational studies (incidence rate ratio, 0.22; P = .0008 [I2 = 0%; 4 studies, 1331 patients]). CONCLUSIONS: Chordal replacement may be associated with greater freedom from reoperation and may lead to improved postoperative left ventricular function compared with leaflet resection. However, these conclusions are supported primarily by data from unadjusted observational studies, and high-quality RCTs of chordal replacement versus leaflet resection are needed.