Long-term outcomes in surgically intervened empyema patients: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Pleural empyema is significant cause of morbidity and mortality. Debate in the literature exists regarding the best initial and definitive therapy, with recent research demonstrating superior short-term outcomes with initial surgical intervention. Despite this, the impact of surgical intervention on long-term outcomes has been incompletely described. A systematic review was undertaken to assess the current evidence evaluating the long-term impact of surgical intervention. METHODS: A systematic review was undertaken according to PRISMA guidelines utilizing three databases. Articles included all papers where patients received surgical intervention for empyema with outcomes evaluated beyond 90 days. Two reviewers extracted and reviewed the articles. Grey literature was included. RESULTS: Eleven studies and two abstracts were extracted. One study and two abstracts evaluated the quality of life outcomes, two studies evaluated dyspnoea outcomes, seven studies evaluated long-term lung function and two studies evaluated mortality and re-admissions. 60-65% of patients had no dyspnoea between 2 and 7 years follow-up. In six of seven studies, normal lung function was achieved in patients with chronic fibrothorax with FEV1% and FVC% improvements between 14-30% and 13-50%, respectively. The results from such biased cohorts could not be extrapolated to conclude that surgical intervention results in better outcomes than ICC drainage. Risk of bias was severe for all 11 studies. CONCLUSION: Surgical intervention potentially improves post-operative lung function, long-term dyspnoea, and mortality. The impact this has on quality of life remains unknown. Future prospective trials with homogenous comparative groups are required to better define the role of surgery and its impact on long-term outcomes.

Perceval valve intermediate outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis at 5-year follow-up.

OBJECTIVES: New technologies for the treatment of Aortic Stenosis are evolving to minimize risk and treat an increasingly comorbid population. The Sutureless Perceval Valve is one such alternative. Whilst short-term data is promising, limited mid-term outcomes exist, until now. This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate mid-term outcomes in the Perceval Valve in isolation. METHODS: A systematic literature review of 5 databases was performed. Articles included evaluated echocardiographic and mortality outcomes beyond 5 years in patients who had undergone Perceval Valve AVR. Two reviewers extracted and reviewed the articles. Weighted estimates were performed for all post-operative and mid-term data. Aggregated Kaplan Meier curves were reconstructed from digitised images to evaluate long-term survival. RESULTS: Seven observational studies were identified, with a total number of 3196 patients analysed. 30-day mortality was 2.5%. Aggregated survival at 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 years was 93.4%, 89.4%, 84.9%, 82% and 79.5% respectively. Permanent pacemaker implantation (7.9%), severe paravalvular leak (1.6%), structural valve deterioration (1.5%), stroke (4.4%), endocarditis (1.6%) and valve explant (2.3%) were acceptable at up to mid-term follow up. Haemodynamics were also acceptable at up mid-term with mean-valve gradient (range 9-13.6 mmHg), peak-valve gradient (17.8-22.3 mmHg) and effective orifice area (1.5-1.8 cm2) across all valve sizes. Cardiopulmonary bypass (78 min) and Aortic cross clamp times (52 min) were also favourable. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this represents the first meta-analysis to date evaluating mid-term outcomes in the Perceval Valve in isolation and demonstrates good 5-year mortality, haemodynamic and morbidity outcomes. KEY QUESTION: What are the mid-term outcomes at up to 5 years follow up in Perceval Valve Aortic Valve Replacement? KEY FINDINGS: Perceval Valve AVR achieves 80% freedom from mortality at 5 years with low valve gradients and minimal morbidity. KEY OUTCOMES: Perceval Valve Aortic Valve Replacement has acceptable mid-term mortality, durability and haemodynamic outcomes.