Five Year Results of Endovascular versus Medical Therapy in Acute Type B Aortic Intramural Haematoma: Meta-Analysis of Reconstructed Time to Event Data.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate outcomes in the follow up of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) vs. medical therapy in patients with acute type B aortic intramural haematoma (IMH). DATA SOURCES: The following sources were searched for articles meeting the inclusion criteria and published by July 2023: PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL/CCTR (Cochrane Controlled Trials Register). REVIEW METHODS: This systematic review with pooled meta-analysis of time to event data followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines, and its protocol was registered on the public platform PROSPERO (CRD42023456222). The following were analysed: overall survival (all cause mortality), aortic related mortality, and restricted mean survival time. Certainty of evidence was evaluated through the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) tool. RESULTS: Eight studies met the eligibility criteria, including 1 015 patients (440 in the TEVAR group and 575 in the medical therapy group). All studies were observational, and the pooled cohort had a median follow up of 5.1 years. Compared with patients who received medical therapy alone, those who underwent TEVAR had a statistically significantly lower risk of all cause death (HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.30 - 0.65; p < .001; GRADE certainty: low), lower risk of aortic related death (HR 0.04, 95% CI 0.01 - 0.31; p = .002; GRADE certainty: low) and lifetime gain (restricted mean survival time was overall 201 days longer with TEVAR; p < .001). CONCLUSION: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair may be associated with lower risk of all cause and aortic related death compared with medical therapy in patients with acute type B IMH; however, the underlying data are not strong enough to draw robust clinical conclusions. Randomised controlled trials with large sample sizes and longer follow up are warranted to elucidate this question.

Mechanical pump complication after HeartMate 3 implantation.

BACKGROUND: With the improvement in postoperative complications and long-term survival post LVAD, continuing to improve clinical outcomes will require efforts to decrease long-term complications. The purpose of this study is to describe the incidence of mechanical pump failure requiring surgery, which we define as pump failure secondary to either outflow graft compression, outflow graft obstruction, or pump thrombosis requiring surgical intervention. METHODS: 141 consecutive adult patients who underwent HeartMate3 Implantation using the "cut-then-sew" implantation technique between September 2015 and September 2021 were included in our study. The primary outcome measure was mechanical pump complication (outflow graft obstruction and or pump thrombosis) requiring surgical intervention. Secondary outcome measures included incidence of bleeding, stroke, renal failure, length of stay, and overall survival. Median follow up was 27.3 months. RESULTS: Eleven (7.8%) of patients developed mechanical pump complications. Six patients developed outflow graft obstruction. Five patients developed acute pump thrombosis. Median time to a mechanical complication was 828 days. Of the 11 patients who underwent surgery, 10 patients (90%) survived to discharge. Overall survival at 1, 3, and 5 years was 82.9%, 69.1% and 55.2% respectively for the entire cohort. CONCLUSION: The mechanical pump complication rate of 7.8% which is quite high may be related to duration of follow up, as the median time to mechanical complication was 828 days. This study highlights an important late complication that occurs post LVAD implantation.

New Ischemic Cerebral Lesions in Postprocedural Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Carotid Artery Stenting Versus Carotid Endarterectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have demonstrated similar outcomes in terms of ischemic stroke incidence after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) or carotid artery stenting (CAS) in asymptomatic carotid disease, while CEA seems to be the first option for symptomatic carotid disease. The aim of this meta-analysis is to assess the incidence of silent cerebral microembolization detected by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) following these procedures. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases, including comparative studies involving symptomatic or asymptomatic patients undergoing either CEA or CAS and reporting on new cerebral ischemic lesions in postoperative MRI. The primary outcome was the newly detected cerebral ischemic lesions. Pooled effect estimates for all outcomes were calculated using the random-effects model. Prespecified random effects metaregression and subgroup analysis were conducted to examine the impact of moderator variables on the presence of new cerebral ischemic lesions. RESULTS: 25 studies reporting on a total of 1827 CEA and 1500 CAS interventions fulfilled the eligibility criteria. The incidence of new cerebral ischemic lesions was significantly lower after CEA compared to CAS, regardless of the time of MRI assessment (first 24 hours; OR: 0.33, 95% CI: 0.17-0.64, P < 0.001), (the first 72 hours, OR: 0.25, 95% CI 0.18-0.36, P < 0.001), (generally within a week after the operation; OR: 0.24, 95% CI: 0.17-0.34, P < 0.001). Also, the rate of stroke (OR: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.23-0.63, P < 0.001) and the presence of contralateral new cerebral ischemic lesions (OR: 0.16, 95% CI 0.08-0.32, P < 0.001) were less frequent after CEA. Subgroup analysis based on the study design and the use of embolic protection device during CAS showed consistently lower rates of new lesions after CEA. CONCLUSIONS: CEA demonstrates significant lower rates of new silent cerebral microembolization, as detected by MRI in postoperative period compared with CAS.

Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting versus Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients with Chronic Total Occlusion.

OBJECTIVES: Mechanisms of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) differ as CABG provides surgical collateralization and may prolong life by preventing future myocardial infarctions (MIs). However, evidence for CABG in patients with chronic total occlusion (CTO) has not been fully elucidated and the impact of PCI is discussed controversially. METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis of studies comparing outcomes in patients with/without multivessel disease undergoing CABG or PCI for CTO. The primary outcome was long-term all-cause mortality (≥5 years). Secondary outcomes were MIs, repeat revascularization, cardiac mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events, and stroke, as well as short-term mortality (30 days/in-hospital) and stroke. A pooled Kaplan-Meier survival curve after reconstruction analysis was generated. Random-effects models were used. RESULTS: Six studies totaling 12,504 patients were included. In the pooled Kaplan-Meier analysis, PCI showed a significantly higher risk of death in the follow-up compared with CABG (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.12, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.88-2.38, p < 0.01). During the observation period, PCI was also associated with higher rates of MI (odds ratio [OR]: 2.86, 95% CI: 1.82-4.48, p < 0.01) and more repeat revascularization (OR: 4.88, 95% CI: 1.99-11.91, p = 0.0005). The other outcomes did not show significant differences. CONCLUSION: CABG is associated with superior survival to PCI over time in patients with CTO who are eligible for both PCI and CABG. This survival advantage is associated with fewer events of MI and repeat revascularization.

Aortic valve neocuspidization using the Ozaki technique: A meta-analysis of reconstructed patient-level data.

BACKGROUND: Aortic valve neocuspidization using the Ozaki technique has shown promising results both in adults and children. METHODS: A systematic search of the PubMed and Cochrane databases was performed up to November 13, 2021. Individual patient data were reconstructed and analyzed from the Kaplan-Meier curves of all eligible studies for time-to-event outcomes. RESULTS: We included a total of 22 studies reporting on 1,891 patients that underwent Ozaki reconstruction. Mean age at the time of surgery was 43.2 ± 24.5 years (65 ± 12.3 years for adult patients and 12.3 ± 3.8 years for pediatric patients). The most common indication was aortic stenosis (46.4%, 95% CI 34.1-58.6). Mean cross-clamp and cardiopulmonary bypass duration were 106.8 ± 24.8 minutes and 135.2 ± 35.1 minutes, respectively. Permanent pacemaker was implanted in 0.7% (95% CI 0.4-1.2) of the patients. At discharge, mean effective orifice area was 2.1 ± 0.5 cm2/m2. At latest follow-up, peak gradient was 15.7 ± 7.4 mm Hg and only 0.25% (95% CI 0-2.3) had moderate aortic insufficiency. In-hospital mortality was 0.7% (95% CI 0.1-1.7). Late mortality was 1.9% during a mean follow-up of 38.1 ± 23.8 months. One-year, 3-year, and 5-year freedom from reoperation rates were 98.0 %, 97.0 % and 96.5%, respectively. More than half of the reoperations were due to infective endocarditis (51.5%, 95% CI 18.3-84.0). In our cohort, the risk of endocarditis per patient per year was 0.5%. CONCLUSIONS: The midterm outcomes of the Ozaki procedure are excellent in terms of hemodynamics, survival, and freedom from reoperation. Acquiring long-term follow-up will help solidify this technique in the cardiac surgery armamentarium.

Surgical Management of G3 Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasms: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Grade 3 (G3) gastroenteropancreatic (GEP) neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) are rare, aggressive tumors with poor prognosis. The World Health Organization 2017 and 2019 classifications further subdivided G3 NENs into G3 neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) and neuroendocrine carcinomas (NECs). Current guidelines favor medical management in most of these patients, and the role of surgical management is not well defined. We performed a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of surgical management versus nonsurgical management for G3 GEP NENs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review of the MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases (end-of-search date: 16 July 2021) was conducted. Individual patient survival data were reconstructed, and random-effects meta-analyses were performed. RESULTS: Fourteen studies comprising 1810 surgical and 910 nonsurgical patients were systematically reviewed. Publication bias adjusted meta-analysis of 12 studies (1788 surgical and 857 nonsurgical patients) showed increased overall survival (OS) after surgical compared with nonsurgical management for G3 GEP NENs [hazard ratio (HR) 0.40, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31-0.53]. Subgroup meta-analyses showed increased OS after surgical management for both pancreatic and gastrointestinal primary sites separately. In another subgroup meta-analysis of G3 GEP NETs (not NECs), surgical management was associated with increased OS compared with nonsurgical management (HR 0.26, 95% CI 0.11-0.61). CONCLUSIONS: Surgical management of G3 GEP NENs may provide a potential survival benefit in well-selected cases. Further research is needed to define which patients will benefit most from surgical versus nonsurgical management. The current literature is limited by inconsistent reporting of survival outcomes in surgical versus nonsurgical groups, tumor grade, differentiation, primary tumor site, and selection criteria for surgical and nonsurgical management.

Long-Term Outcomes of Open Versus Endovascular Treatment for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis With Reconstructed Time-to-Event Data.

BACKGROUND: The advent of endovascular techniques has revolutionized the care of patients with uncomplicated abdominal aortic aneurysms. This analysis compares the overall survival and the freedom from reintervention rate between open surgical repair (OSR) and endovascular repair (EVAR) in patients undergoing elective abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases were searched for studies including patients who underwent either OSR or EVAR for uncomplicated AAA. All randomized controlled trials and propensity-score-matched cohort studies reporting on the outcomes of interest were considered eligible for inclusion. The systematic search of the literature was performed by 2 independent investigators in accordance with the recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. We conducted 1-stage and 2-stage meta-analyses with Kaplan-Meier-derived time-to-event data and meta-analysis with a random-effects model. RESULTS: Thirteen studies met our eligibility criteria, incorporating 13 409 and 13 450 patients in the OSR and EVAR arms, respectively. Patients who underwent open repair had improved overall survival rates compared with those who underwent EVAR (hazard ratio [HR]=0.93, 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.88-0.98, p=0.004) during a mean follow-up of 53.8 (SD=29.8) months and this was validated by the 2-stage meta-analysis (HR=0.89, 95% CI=0.8-0.99, p=0.03, I2=62.25%). Splitting timepoint analysis suggested that EVAR offers better survival outcome compared with OSR in the first 11 months following elective intervention (HR=1.37, 95% CI=1.22-1.54, p<0.0001), while OSR offers a significant survival advantage after the 11-month timepoint and up to 180 months (HR=0.84, 95% CI=0.8-0.89, p<0.0001). Similarly, freedom from reintervention was found to be significantly better in EVAR patients (HR=1.28, 95% CI=1.14-1.44, p<0.0001) within the first 30 days. After the first month postrepair, however, OSR demonstrated higher freedom-from-reintervention rates compared with EVAR that remained significant for up to 168 months during follow-up (HR=0.73, 95% CI=0.66-0.79, p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the first-year survival advantage of EVAR in patients undergoing elective AAA repair, OSR was associated with a late survival benefit and decreased risk for reintervention in long-term follow-up. CLINICAL IMPACT: Open surgical repair for uncomplicated abdominal aortic aneurysm offers better long-term outcomes in terms of survival and freedom from reintervention rate compared to the endovascular approach but in the first year it carries a higher risk of mortality. The novelty of our study lies that instead of comparing study-level effect estimates, we analyzed reconstructed individual patient-level data. This offered us the opportunity to perform our analyses with mathematically robust and flexible survival models, which was proved to be crucial since there was evidence of different hazard over time. Our findings underline the need for additional investigation to clarify the significance of open surgical repair when compared to the latest endovascular devices and techniques within the evolving era of minimally invasive procedures.

Transthoracic fundoplication using the Belsey Mark IV technique versus Nissen fundoplication: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Nissen fundoplication is considered the cornerstone surgical treatment for hiatal hernia repair. Belsey Mark IV (BMIV) transthoracic fundoplication is an alternative approach that is rarely utilized in today's minimally invasive era. This study aims to summarize the safety and efficacy of BMIV and to compare it with Nissen fundoplication. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases for single arm and comparative studies published by March 31st, 2022, according to PRISMA statement. Inverse-variance weights were used to estimate the proportion of patients experiencing the studied outcome and random-effects meta-analyses were performed. RESULTS: 17 studies were identified, incorporating 2136 and 638 patients that underwent Belsey Mark IV or Nissen fundoplication, respectively. A total of 13.8% (95% CI: 9.6-18.6) of the patients that underwent fundoplication with the BMIV technique had non-resolution of their symptoms and 3.5% (95% CI: 2.0-5.4) required a reoperation. Overall, 14.8% (95% CI: 9.5-20.1) of the BMIV arm patients experienced post-operative complications, 5.0% (95% CI: 2.0-9.0) experienced chronic postoperative pain and 6.9% (95% CI: 3.1-11.9) had a hernia recurrence. No statistically significant difference was observed between Belsey Mark IV and Nissen fundoplication in terms of post-interventional non-resolution of symptoms (odds ratio [OR]: 1.49 [95% Confidence Interval (95%CI):0.6-4.0]; p = 0.42), post-operative complications (OR:0.83, 95%CI: 0.5-1.5, p = 0.54) and in-hospital mortality (OR:0.69, 95%CI: 0.13-3.80, p = 0.67). Belsey Mark IV arm had significantly lower reoperation rates compared to Nissen arm (OR:0.28, 95%CI: 0.1-0.7, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: BMIV fundoplication is a safe and effective but technically challenging. The BMIV technique may offer benefits to patients compared to the laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication. These benefits, however, are challenged by the increased morbidity of a thoracotomy.

Unilateral versus bilateral anterograde cerebral perfusion in acute type A aortic dissection repair: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study is to compare the safety and efficacy of unilateral anterograde cerebral perfusion (UACP) and bilateral anterograde cerebral perfusion (BACP) for acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD). METHODS: A systematic review of the MEDLINE (PubMed), Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases (last search: August 7th, 2021) was performed according to the PRISMA statement. Studies directly comparing UACP versus BACP for ATAAD were included. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed. RESULTS: Eight retrospective cohort studies were identified, incorporating 2416 patients (UACP: 843, BACP: 1573). No statistically significant difference was observed regarding in-hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR]:1.05 [95% Confidence Interval (95% CI):0.70-1.57]), permanent neurological deficit (PND) (OR: 0.94 [95% CI: 0.52-1.70]), transient neurological deficit (TND) (OR: 1.37 [95% CI: 0.98-1.92]), renal failure (OR: 0.96 [95% CI: 0.70-1.32]), and re-exploration for bleeding (OR: 0.77 [95% CI: 0.48-1.22]). Meta-regression analysis revealed that PND and TND were not influenced by differences in rates of total arch repair, Bentall procedure, and concomitant CABG in UACP and BACP groups. Cardiopulmonary bypass time (Standard Mean Difference [SMD]: -0.11 [95% CI: -0.22, 0.44]), Cross clamp time (SMD: -0.04 [95% CI: -0.38, 0.29]), and hypothermic circulatory arrest time (SMD: -0.12 [95% CI: -0.55, 0.30]) were comparable between UACP and BACP. Intensive care unit stay was shorter in BACP arm (SMD:0.16 [95% CI: 0.01, 0.31]); however, length of hospital stay was shorter in UACP arm (SMD: -0.25 [95% CI: -0.45, -0.06]). CONCLUSIONS: UACP and BACP had similar results in terms of in-hospital mortality, PND, TND, renal failure, and re-exploration for bleeding rate in patients with ATAAD. ICU stay was shorter in the BACP arm while LOS was shorter in the UACP arm.

Machine learning and artificial intelligence in cardiac transplantation: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: This review aims to systematically evaluate the currently available evidence investigating the use of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) in the field of cardiac transplantation. Furthermore, based on the challenges identified we aim to provide a series of recommendations and a knowledge base for future research in the field of ML and heart transplantation. METHODS: A systematic database search was conducted of original articles that explored the use of ML and/or AI in heart transplantation in EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane database, and Google Scholar, from inception to November 2021. RESULTS: Our search yielded 237 articles, of which 13 studies were included in this review, featuring 463 850 patients. Three main areas of application were identified: (1) ML for predictive modeling of heart transplantation mortality outcomes; (2) ML in graft failure outcomes; (3) ML to aid imaging in heart transplantation. The results of the included studies suggest that AI and ML are more accurate in predicting graft failure and mortality than traditional scoring systems and conventional regression analysis. Major predictors of graft failure and mortality identified in ML models were: length of hospital stay, immunosuppressive regimen, recipient's age, congenital heart disease, and organ ischemia time. Other potential benefits include analyzing initial lab investigations and imaging, assisting a patient with medication adherence, and creating positive behavioral changes to minimize further cardiovascular risk. CONCLUSION: ML demonstrated promising applications for improving heart transplantation outcomes and patient-centered care, nevertheless, there remain important limitations relating to implementing AI into everyday surgical practices.

Late Outcomes After Aortic Root Enlargement During Aortic Valve Replacement: Meta-Analysis With Reconstructed Time-To-Event Data.

OBJECTIVES: The present authors aimed to assess the late outcomes of patients undergoing aortic root enlargement (ARE) at the time of surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). DESIGN: Study-level meta-analysis with reconstructed time-to-event data. SETTING: Follow-up of patients after surgical procedure. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients with aortic valve disease requiring surgery. INTERVENTIONS: SAVR with ARE versus SAVR without ARE. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses reporting guideline. The following databases were searched for studies meeting the authors' inclusion criteria and published by November 30, 2021: PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, SciELO, LILACS, CCTR/CENTRAL, and Google Scholar. Nine nonrandomized studies met the authors' eligibility criteria. All studies were nonrandomized. A total of 213,134 patients (SAVR with ARE: 7,556 patients; SAVR without ARE: 205,578 patients) were included from studies published from 1997 to 2021. The total rate of AAE was 3.7%, varying in the studies from 2.9% to 28.1%. The studies consisted of patients whose mean age varied from 63 to 79 years. Patients in the SAVR with ARE group had a significantly better overall survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.94, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.90-0.99, p = 0.016) in the unmatched populations, but the matched analysis revealed no difference between SAVR with/without ARE in terms of overall survival (HR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.90-1.25; p = 0.474). CONCLUSIONS: In the context of patients undergoing SAVR with or without ARE, patients who undergo ARE do not experience worse late outcomes. Further randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm or refute the authors' current findings.

Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass graft surgery in dialysis-dependent patients: A pooled meta-analysis of reconstructed time-to-event data.

OBJECTIVE: Το perform a systematic review with meta-analysis of published data comparing outcomes between a percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in dialysis-dependent patients. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases for studies including dialysis-dependent patients who underwent either CABG or PCI. This meta-analysis follows the recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. We conducted one-stage and two-stage meta-analysis with Kaplan-Meier-derived individual patient data for overall survival and meta-analysis with the random-effects model for the in-hospital mortality and repeat revascularization. RESULTS: Twelve studies met our eligibility criteria, including 13,651 and 28,493 patients were identified in the CABG and PCI arms, respectively. Patients who underwent CABG had overall improved survival compared with those who underwent PCI at the one-stage meta-analysis (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.12, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.09-1.16, p < .0001) and the two-stage meta-analysis (HR: 1.15, 95% CI: 1.08-1.23, p < .001, I2 = 30.0%). Landmark analysis suggested that PCI offers better survival before the 8.5 months of follow-up (HR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.92-0.99, p = .043), while CABG offers an advantage after this timepoint (HR: 1.3, 95% CI: 1.22-1.32, p < .001). CABG was associated with increased odds for in-hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR]: 1.70, 95% CI: 1.50-1.92, p < .001, I2 = 0.0%) and decreased odds for repeat revascularization (OR: 0.22, 95% CI: 0.14-0.34, p < .001, I2 = 58.08%). CONCLUSIONS: In dialysis-dependent patients, CABG was associated with long-term survival but a higher risk for early mortality. The risk for repeat revascularization was higher with PCI.

Renal outcomes in valve-in-valve transcatheter versus redo surgical aortic valve replacement: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Postoperative acute kidney injury (AKI) and the requirement for renal replacement therapy (RRT) remain common and significant complications of both transcatheter valve-in-valve aortic valve replacement (ViV-TAVR) and redo surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Nevertheless, the understanding of renal outcomes in the population undergoing either redo SAVR or ViV-TAVR remains controversial. METHODS: A systematic database search with meta-analysis was conducted of comparative original articles of ViV-TAVR versus redo SAVR in EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane database, and Google Scholar, from inception to September 2021. Primary outcomes were AKI and RRT. Secondary outcomes were stroke, major bleeding, pacemaker implantation rate, operative mortality, and 30-day mortality. RESULTS: Our search yielded 5435 relevant studies. Eighteen studies met the inclusion criteria with a total of 11,198 patients. We found ViV-TAVR to be associated with lower rates of AKI, postoperative RRT, major bleeding, pacemaker implantation, operative mortality, and 30-day mortality. No significant difference was observed in terms of stroke rate. The mean incidence of AKI in ViV-TAVR was 6.95% (±6%) and in redo SAVR was 15.2% (±9.6%). For RRT, our data showed that VIV-TAVR to be 1.48% (±1.46%) and redo SAVR to be 8.54% (±8.06%). CONCLUSION: Renoprotective strategies should be put into place to prevent and reduce AKI incidence regardless of the treatment modality. Patients undergoing re-intervention for the aortic valve constitute a high-risk and frail population in which ViV-TAVR demonstrated it might be a feasible option for carefully selected patients. Long-term follow-up data and randomized control trials will be needed to evaluate mortality and morbidity outcomes between these 2 treatments.

Immediate and late outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus surgical aortic valve replacement in bicuspid valves: Meta-analysis of reconstructed time-to-event data.

BACKGROUND: Outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with aortic stenosis and bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) must be better investigated. METHODS: A meta-analysis including studies published by January 2022 reporting immediate outcomes (in-hospital death, stroke, acute kidney injury [AKI], major bleeding, new permanent pacemaker implantation [PPI], paravalvular leakage [PVL]), mortality in the follow-up (with Kaplan-Meier curves for reconstruction of individual patient data). RESULTS: Five studies met our eligibility criteria. No statistically significant difference was observed for in-hospital death, stroke, AKI, and PVL. TAVI was associated with lower risk of major bleeding (odds ratio [OR]: 0.29; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.12-0.69; p = .025), but higher risk of PPI (OR: 2.00; 95% CI: 1.05-3.77; p = .041). In the follow-up, mortality after TAVI was significantly higher in the analysis with the largest samples (HR: 1.24, 95% CI: 1.01-1.53, p = .043), but no statistically significant difference was observed with risk-adjusted populations (HR: 1.06, 95% CI: 0.86-1.32, p = .57). Landmark analyses suggested a time-varying risk with TAVI after 10 and 13 months in both largest and risk-adjusted populations (HR: 2.13, 95% CI: 1.45-3.12, p < .001; HR: 1.7, 95% CI: 1.11-2.61, p = .015, respectively). CONCLUSION: Considering the immediate outcomes and comparable overall survival observed in risk-adjusted populations, TAVI can be used safely in selected BAV patients. However, a time-varying risk is present (favoring SAVR over TAVI at a later timepoint). This finding was likely driven by higher rates of PPI with TAVI.

Long-term outcomes of total arch replacement versus proximal aortic replacement in acute type A aortic dissection: Meta-analysis of Kaplan-Meier-derived individual patient data.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the long-term outcomes of a conservative approach (with proximal aortic replacement with or without hemiarch replacement) versus an aggressive approach (with total aortic arch replacement) in the treatment of acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD). METHODS: We performed a pooled analysis of Kaplan-Meier-derived individual patient data from studies with follow-up comparing the aforementioned approaches to treat patients with ATAAD. RESULTS: Eighteen studies met our eligibility criteria, comprising 5243 patients with follow-up (Conservative: 3676 patients; Aggressive: 1567 patients). We observed a statistically significant difference in overall survival favoring the aggressive approach (hazard ratios [HR] 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.76-0.98, p = .022), but no statistically significant difference in the risk of reoperation (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.66-1.2, p = .439) in the overall follow-up. Landmark analyses revealed that, in the first 3 months after the procedure, mortality rates were comparable between conservative and aggressive approaches (HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.88-1.24, p = .627), but the results beyond 3 months showed improved survival in patients undergoing the aggressive surgical procedure (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.59-0.85, p < .001). The landmark analyses also revealed that, in the first 7 years after the procedure, reoperation rates were comparable between the approaches (HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.76-1.40, p = .848), but the results beyond 7 years showed a lower risk of reoperation in patients undergoing the aggressive surgical procedure (HR 0.10, 95% CI 0.01-0.75, p = .025). CONCLUSION: The aggressive approach seems to confer better long-term survival and lower risk of the need for reoperation in the follow-up of patients treated for ATAAD.

The Association of Spondylitis and Aortic Aneurysm Disease.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to assess any relation between spondylitis and aortic aneurysmal disease by reviewing the current literature. METHODS: A systematic search was undertaken using MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL databases till May 2019, for articles reporting on patients suffering from spondylitis and aortic aneurysm. RESULTS: The most involved aortic segment was infrarenal aorta (56.9%). The lumbar vertebrae were more frequently affected (79.7%). Commonest symptoms were back pain (79.1%), fever (33.7%) and lower limb pain (29.1%). 55.8% of cases were diagnosed using computed tomography. The pathology was attributed to infectious causes in 25.1% of cases. 53.4% of patients were treated only for the aneurysm, 27.9% for both pathologies, while two patients solely for the vertebral disease. Endovascular aneurysm repair was chosen in 12.8% of cases. The 30-day mortality was 8.1% (7/86); mostly from vascular complications. CONCLUSIONS: A synchronous spondylitis and aortic aneurysm may share common etiopathology, when an infectious or inflammatory cause is presented. The lumbar vertebrae are more frequently affected. Low quality data do not allow safe conclusion to suggest the best treatment option.

Trans-Carotid Artery Revascularization Versus Carotid Endarterectomy in Patients With Carotid Artery Disease: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of 30-day Outcomes.

This systematic review and meta-analysis compared trans-carotid artery revascularization (TCAR) as an alternative approach to carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in patients with carotid artery disease. An electronic search was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases including comparative studies with patients who underwent either TCAR or CEA. This meta-analysis is according to the recommendations of the PRISMA statement. Eight studies met our eligibility criteria, incorporating 7,606 and 7,048 patients in the TCAR and CEA groups, respectively. Thirty-day mortality (odds ratio [OR]: 0.94, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.56-1.56, P = .81) and stroke (OR: 0.92, 95%CI 0.70-1.22, P = .57) were similar between the two groups, with low heterogeneity. The odds of myocardial infarction (OR: 1.79, 95% CI: 1.18-2.71, P = .01) and cranial nerve injury were significantly higher in patients undergoing CEA compared with TCAR (OR: 4.11, 95% CI: 2.59-6.51, P < .001). The subgroup analysis according to symptomatic pre-intervention status revealed no statistically significant difference regarding 30-day mortality (symptomatic OR: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.40-2.07, P = .82, asymptomatic OR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.46-1.86, P = .83) and stroke (symptomatic OR: 0.88, 95% CI:0.47-1.64, P = .68, asymptomatic OR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.64-1.35, P = .70). TCAR offers an alternative treatment for patients with carotid artery stenosis with comparable to CEA mortality and stroke rates during a 30-day post-operative period.

Outcomes following minimally invasive approaches vs. open extended lobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer: a propensity-matched analysis of the National Cancer Database.

Background: Traditional thoracotomy, an invasive surgical procedure, has been the standard approach for extended lobectomy in treating non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has gained traction with advancements in surgical techniques. Despite this, the outcomes of extended lobectomy via a minimally invasive approach remain largely uncharted. Using the comprehensive National Cancer Database (NCDB), our research aimed to clarify the safety, feasibility, and efficacy of minimally invasive extended lobectomy in patients diagnosed with NSCLC. Methods: Our study encompassed a selection of patients with NSCLC who underwent extended lobectomy (defined as lobectomy or bilobectomy with chest wall, diaphragm or pericardial resection) between 2010 and 2014. Through propensity score matching (PSM), we ensured a balanced comparison between patients who underwent MIS and those who opted for the traditional open extended lobectomy. Both univariate and multivariate analyses were employed to discern whether the surgical approach had any significant impact on the prognosis of patients undergoing this specific procedure. Results: Before PSM, our dataset included 3,934 patients. After 1:2 PSM, the MIS group included 683 cases, while the open group included 1,317 cases. One notable finding was the reduced average postoperative hospital stay for the MIS group at 7.15 days compared to the open group at 8.40 days (P<0.001). Furthermore, the 5-year survival rate was similar, with the MIS group at 53.1% and the open group at 51.3% (P=0.683). Conclusions: The results of our study suggest that MIS for extended lobectomy not only is safe and feasible but also is oncologically effective. However, it is imperative to note that these encouraging findings necessitate further validation through prospective studies to ascertain the full scope of benefits and potential risks associated with MIS.

Conservative Versus Surgical Therapy in Patients With Infective Endocarditis and Surgical Indication-Meta-Analysis of Reconstructed Time-to-Event Data.

BACKGROUND: Infective endocarditis represents a life-threatening disease with high mortality rates. A fraction of patients receives exclusively conservative antibiotic treatment due to their comorbidities and high operative risk, despite fulfilling criteria for surgical therapy. The aim of the present study is to compare outcomes in patients with infective endocarditis and indication for surgical therapy in those who underwent or did not undergo valve surgery. METHODS AND RESULTS: Three databases were systematically assessed. A pooled analysis of Kaplan-Meier-derived reconstructed time-to-event data from studies with longer follow-up comparing conservative and surgical treatment was performed. A landmark analysis to further elucidate the effect of surgical intervention on mortality was carried out. Four studies with 3003 patients and median follow-up time of 7.6 months were included. Overall, patients with an indication for surgery who were surgically treated had a significantly lower risk of mortality compared with patients who received conservative treatment (hazard ratio [HR], 0.27 [95% CI, 0.24-0.31], P<0.001). The survival analysis in the first year showed superior survival for patients who underwent surgery when compared with those who did not at 1 month (87.6% versus 57.6%; HR, 0.31 [95% CI, 0.26-0.37], P<0.01), at 6 months (74.7% versus 34.6%) and at 12 months (73.3% versus 32.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Based on the findings of this study-level meta-analysis, patients with infective endocarditis and formal indication for surgical intervention who underwent surgery are associated with a lower risk of short- and long-term mortality when compared with conservative treatment.