Nonintubated versus intubated thoracoscopic bullectomy for primary spontaneous pneumothorax: A multicenter propensity-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: We aimed at comparing in a multicenter propensity-matched analysis, results of nonintubated versus intubated video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) bullectomy/blebectomy for primary spontaneous pneumothorax (PSP). METHODS: Eleven Institutions participated in the study. A total of 208 patients underwent VATS bullectomy by intubated (IVATS) (N = 138) or nonintubated (NIVATS) (N = 70) anesthesia during 60 months. After propensity matching, 70 pairs of patients were compared. Anesthesia in NIVATS included intercostal (N = 61), paravertebral (N = 5) or thoracic epidural (N = 4) block and sedation with (N = 24) or without (N = 46) laryngeal mask under spontaneous ventilation. In the IVATS group, all patients underwent double-lumen-intubation and mechanical ventilation. Primary outcomes were morbidity and recurrence rates. RESULTS: There was no difference in age (26.7 ± 8 vs 27.4 ± 9 years), body mass index (19.7 ± 2.6 vs 20.6 ± 2.5), and American Society of Anesthesiology score (2 vs 2). Main results show no difference both in morbidity (11.4% vs 12.8%; p = 0.79) and recurrence free rates (92.3% vs 91.4%; p = 0.49) between NIVATS and IVATS, respectively, whereas a difference favoring the NIVATS group was found in anesthesia time (p < 0.0001) and operative time (p < 0.0001), drainage time (p = 0.001), and hospital stay (p < 0.0001). There was no conversion to thoracotomy and no hospital mortality. One patient in the NIVATS group needed reoperation due to chest wall bleeding. CONCLUSION: Results of this multicenter propensity-matched study have shown no intergroup difference in morbidity and recurrence rates whereas shorter operation room time and hospital stay favored the NIVATS group, suggesting a potential increase in the role of NIVATS in surgical management of PSP. Further prospective studies are warranted.

Should Moderate Functional Tricuspid Regurgitation Be Repaired During Surgery for Rheumatic Mitral Valve Disease?

BACKGROUND: Surgical repair of concomitant functional moderate tricuspid valve (TV) regurgitation at the time of mitral valve (MV) surgery remains controversial. AIM: The objective of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of concomitant repair of functional moderate tricuspid regurgitation (TR) during MV surgery for rheumatic valve disease. METHOD: From 1998 to 2016, 1,240 patients had rheumatic MV disease associated with moderate functional TR: 974 patients had MV surgery and concomitant TV repair (group 1) and 266 patients had MV surgery alone (group 2). Study endpoints were operative outcomes, rehospitalisation for congestive heart failure (CHF), and TV reintervention. Propensity score matching identified 192 well-matched pairs for outcomes comparison. RESULTS: Patients who had concomitant TV repair were younger (p=0.02) and there were fewer diabetics (p=0.015). In matched patients, low cardiac output was significantly higher in group 2 (p=0.044) and there was no difference in ventilation time, intensive care unit stay, cardiopulmonary bypass, and ischaemic times (p=0.480, p=0.797, p=0.232, and p=0.550, respectively) between groups. Patients in group 2 required more TV reintervention (1 vs 35 in group 1 and 2, respectively; p=0.004) and rehospitalisation for CHF (5 vs 40 in group 1 and 2, respectively; p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Concomitant TV repair for moderate TR in patients undergoing rheumatic MV surgery was not associated with increased operative risk. Postoperative low cardiac output syndrome and the risk of late TV reinterventions and rehospitalisation for CHF were lower with TV repair. Concomitant repair of the moderate TV regurgitation maybe beneficial for patients undergoing rheumatic MV surgery.

Paravertebral Block Versus Intercostal Nerve Block in Non-Intubated Uniportal Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery: A Randomised Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Non-intubated uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) has been reported to be safe and feasible for patients with various thoracic diseases, including those who have respiratory dysfunction. This study examined the anaesthetic and analgesic sparing effects of either paravertebral block or intercostal nerve block on the non-intubated technique with spontaneous ventilation in patients under general anaesthesia (GA) using a supraglottic airway device. The primary aim was to compare the anaesthetic sparing effect of paravertebral block versus intercostal nerve block in non-intubated GA with airway support via a supraglottic airway device during VATS surgery. The secondary aim was to compare the recovery characters and postoperative outcomes of the patients. METHODS: The study included 105 patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status II-III who had video-assisted thoracoscopy without endotracheal intubation and using a laryngeal airway. The patients were divided into three groups; each group consisted of 35 patients. Group I (35 patients): control group received only GA. Group 2 (35 patients): received a single-shot paravertebral block before induction of the GA. Group 3 (35 patients): received thoracoscopic intercostal block infiltration after induction of anaesthesia from the third to the eighth intercostal nerve block, in addition to intrathoracic vagal block. Heart rate, mean arterial pressure (MAP), and oxygen saturation were recorded before induction of GA (T0), after induction of GA (T1), 20 minutes later (T2), and before the end of the surgical procedure (T3). RESULTS: Heart rate was significantly lower in Groups 2 and 3 compared with Group 1, and lower in Group 2 compared with Group 3. The MAP was significantly lower in Groups 2 and 3 compared with Group 1, and there was no significant difference between Groups 2 and 3. Oxygen saturation was significantly higher in Group 2 and in Group 3 compared with Group 1 and there was no significance difference between Groups 2 and 3. Expiratory fraction of sevoflurane (Ef sevo) was significantly lower in Groups 2 and 3 compared with Group 1, with no difference between Group 2 and 3. Groups 2 and 3 had lower fentanyl requirements, time to spontaneous eye movement, time to spontaneous arm movement, time to purposeful movement, and time to laryngeal mask removal than Group 1. CONCLUSIONS: Regional anaesthesia by either preoperative paravertebral block or thoracoscopic intercostal nerve block with ipsilateral vagal block provided an anaesthetic sparing effect, guided by lower Ef sevo concentration, with comparable bi-spectral index in patients undergoing uniportal thoracoscopic surgery.

Surgery for Active Infective Endocarditis of the Aortic Valve With Infection Extending Beyond the Leaflets.

BACKGROUND: The optimal aortic substitute in extensive aortic valve active infective endocarditis (AIE) continues to be debated. To determine the surgical approach in aortic valve AIE with infection extension beyond the leaflets, we evaluated the outcome of reconstructive surgery with various valve substitutes in those patients. METHODS: During 2000-2013, 168 patients had surgery for extensive aortic valve AIE. Patients were categorised based on aortic valve substitute: Group A: Stented aortic valve replacement (AVR), Group B: Stented AVR with patch support, Group C: Stentless valve, Group D: Aortic allograft, and Group E: Composite valve graft. Outcome parameters were mortality, postoperative cardiogenic or septic shock, stroke, or reinfection. RESULTS: Stented valves with patch support were more frequently utilised in cases of native valve endocarditis (p<0.001). Postoperative complications were comparable among groups. Concomitant preoperative extension of infection in the mitral valve predicted reinfection (OR 3.6; confidence interval 1.46-8.66; p=0.005). Survival was not affected by operative group (log rank=0.6). Univariable preoperative predictors of mortality were: septic shock (hazard ratio 8.3; 95% confidence interval 3.6-19.2; p<0.001), ejection fraction (hazard ratio 0.96; 95% confidence interval 0.93-0.99; p=0.006), preoperative cardiogenic shock (hazard ratio 1.9; 95%CI 1.1-3.6, p=0.02) and concomitant mitral valve surgery (hazard ratio 1.8; 95% confidence interval 1.2-2.5; p=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Surgical treatment of extensive aortic valve infective endocarditis remains a challenge. Outcomes were not affected by the surgical complexity of aortic reconstruction procedure or valve substitute. Surgical approach should be tailored to individual patient's characteristics.