Minimal invasive extracorporeal circulation: A bibliometric network analysis of the global scientific output.

INTRODUCTION: Minimal Invasive Extracorporeal Circulation (MiECC) has recently emerged as a more 'physiologic' alternative to conventional extracorporeal circulation. However, its adoption is still limited due to lack of robust scientific evidence and ongoing debate about its potential benefits. This bibliometric analysis aims to analyze the scientific articles on MiECC and identify current research domains and existing gaps to be addressed in future studies. METHODS: Pertinent articles were retrieved from the Web of Science (WOS) database. The search string included 'minimal invasive extracorporeal circulation' and its synonyms. The VOSviewer (version 1.6.17) software was used to conduct comprehensive analyses. Semantic and research networks, bibliographic coupling and journal analysis were performed. RESULTS: Of the 1777 articles identified in WOS, 292 were retrieved. The trend in publications increased from 1991 to date. Most articles focused on transfusion requirements, acute kidney injury, inflammatory markers and cytokines, inflammation and delirium, though the impact of intraoperative optimal fluid and hemodynamic management as far as the occurrence of postoperative complications were poorly addressed. The semantic network analysis found inter-connections between the terms "cardiopulmonary bypass", "inflammatory response", and "cardiac surgery". Perfusion contributed the highest number of published documents. The most extensive research partnerships were between Germany, Greece, Italy, and England. CONCLUSIONS: Notwithstanding the scientific community's growing interest in MiECC, crucial topics (i.e., the best anesthetic management and intraoperative need for inotropes, vasopressors and fluids) still require more comprehensive exploration. This investigation may prove to be a useful tool for clinicians, scientists, and students concerning global publication output and for the use of MiECC in cardiac surgery.

Predictors of Pneumothorax/Pneumomediastinum in Mechanically Ventilated COVID-19 Patients.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence, predictors, and outcome of pneumothorax (PNX)/pneumomediastinum (PMD) in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). DESIGN: Observational study. SETTING: Tertiary-care university hospital. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred sixteen consecutive critically ill, invasively ventilated patients with COVID-19 ARDS. INTERVENTIONS: The authors collected demographic, mechanical ventilation, imaging, laboratory, and outcome data. Primary outcome was the incidence of PNX/PMD. Multiple logistic regression analyses were performed to identify predictors of PNX/PMD. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: PNX/PMD occurred in a total of 28 patients (24.1%), with 22 patients developing PNX (19.0%) and 13 developing PMD (11.2%). Mean time to development of PNX/PMD was 14 ± 11 days from intubation. The authors found no significant difference in mechanical ventilation parameters between patients who developed PNX/PMD and those who did not. Mechanical ventilation parameters were within recommended limits for protective ventilation in both groups. Ninety-five percent of patients with PNX/PMD had the Macklin effect (linear collections of air contiguous to the bronchovascular sheaths) on a baseline computed tomography scan, and tended to have a higher lung involvement at intensive care unit (ICU) admission (Radiographic Assessment of Lung Edema score 32.2 ± 13.4 v 18.7 ± 9.8 in patients without PNX/PMD, p = 0.08). Time from symptom onset to intubation and time from total bilirubin on day two after ICU admission were the only independent predictors of PNX/PMD. Mortality was 60.7% in patients who developed PNX/PMD versus 38.6% in those who did not (p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: PNX/PMD occurs frequently in COVID-19 patients with ARDS requiring mechanical ventilation, and is associated with increased mortality. Development of PNX/PMD seems to occur despite use of protective mechanical ventilation and has a radiologic predictor sign.

Two-months quality of life of COVID-19 invasively ventilated survivors; an Italian single-center study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 disease can lead to severe functional impairments after discharge. We assessed the quality of life of invasively ventilated COVID-19 ARDS survivors. METHODS: We carried out a prospective follow-up study of the patients admitted to the Intensive Care Units (ICUs) of a teaching hospital. Patients affected by COVID-19 ARDS who required invasive ventilation and were successfully discharged home were assessed through the telephone administration of validated tests. We explored survival, functional outcomes, return to work, quality of life, cognitive and psychological sequelae. The main variables of interest were the following: demographics, severity scores, laboratory values, comorbidities, schooling, working status, treatments received during ICU stay, complications, and psychological, cognitive, functional outcomes. RESULTS: Out of 116 consecutive invasively ventilated patients, overall survival was 65/116 (56%) with no death occurring after hospital discharge. Forty-two patients were already discharged home with a median follow-up time of 61 (51-71) days after ICU discharge and 39 of them accepted to be interviewed. Only one patient (1/39) experienced cognitive decline. The vast majority of patients reported no difficulty in walking (32/35:82%), self-care (33/39:85%), and usual activities (30/39:78%). All patients were either malnourished (15/39:38%) or at risk for malnutrition (24/39:62%). Exertional dyspnea was present in 20/39 (51%) patients. 19/39 (49%) reported alterations in senses of smell and/or taste either before or after hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: Invasively ventilated COVID-19 ARDS survivors have an overall good recovery at a 2-months follow-up which is better than what was previously reported in non-COVID-19 ARDS patients.

Nations with high smoking rate have low SARS-CoV-2 infection and low COVID-19 mortality rate.

Background and aim of the work The effect of tobacco smoking on COVID-19 disease is debated with common sense and experts suggesting a deleterious effect and manuscripts worldwide reporting a low prevalence of active tobacco smokers among intensive care unit patients. Methods We categorized countries worldwide into three groups with <25%; 25-45%; >45% of active male smokers with data expressed as median and interquartile range [IQR] and extracted data on SARS-CoV-2 infections and COVID-19 deaths per million inhabitants. We also applied multivariate regression techniques to adjust for several epidemiological factors. Results COVID-19 mortality was 13 (5-24) per million inhabitants in countries with male smokers >45% and 33 (4-133) in countries where male smokers were <25%. SARS-CoV-2 infection rates were 436 (217-954) and 1139 (302-4084) with data confirmed when dividing data for each continent and when controlling for confounding factors. Conclusions We found a counterintuitive low COVID-19 mortality and SARS-CoV-2 infection in countries with high prevalence of male smokers at the global level and within each continent, suggesting that active smoking habit is protective. Further research should urgently investigate which is the possible mechanism of action.