Comparison of atrial septal defect and patent foramen ovale in cryptogenic strokes.

OBJECTIVES: Paradoxical embolism from right-to-left shunt through atrial septal defect (ASD) and patent foramen ovale (PFO) is a well-accepted cause of "cryptogenic" strokes (CS). To better understand the pathogenic role of ASD, we compared ASD patients with CS having a high and low likelihood of being PFO-related. METHODS: In the Acute Stroke Registry and Analysis of Lausanne, we calculated prevalence of PFO and ASD in CS patients undergoing echocardiography, and calculated odds ratios (OR) when compared to non-CS. Using the Risk of Paradoxical Embolism (RoPE) score, we divided CS PFO patients in high (HL-PFO, RoPE 8-10) and low-likelihood (LL-PFO, RoPE 0-4) PFO-related stroke. We then performed univariate comparison of epidemiological, clinical and radiological variables of ASD patients with both PFO groups. RESULTS: Among all CS, prevalence of ASD and PFO were 1.3% and 36.8% respectively. When compared to non-CS, ASD and PFO were associated with CS (OR of 5.2, CI= 1.6-16.6, and 2.8, CI= 2.1-3.8). Compared with HL-PFO, ASD patients were older, more often female, had more cardiovascular risk factors and silent strokes. Compared with LL-PFO, ASD patients were younger, more often female, and had less risk factors. No differences were found for clinical and radiological characteristics and clinical outcome. CONCLUSION: ASD is a rare stroke risk factor for CS. Since characteristics of such patients lie in-between high and low-likelihood paradoxical PFO-strokes, a thorough work-up for other stroke mechanisms is warranted. Individual evaluation of the likelihood of the ASD being causative for stroke may be preferable over routine ASD closure.

Enhanced recovery after liver surgery in cirrhotic patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have assessed enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) in liver surgery for cirrhotic patients. The present meta-analysis assessed the impact of ERAS pathways on outcomes after liver surgery in cirrhotic patients compared to standard care. METHODS: A literature search was performed on PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Studies comparing ERAS protocols versus standard care in cirrhotic patients undergoing liver surgery were included. The primary outcome was post-operative complications, while secondary outcomes were mortality rates, length of stay (LoS), readmissions, reoperations, and liver failure rates. RESULTS: After evaluating 41 full-text manuscripts, 5 articles totaling 646 patients were included (327 patients in the ERAS group and 319 in the non-ERAS group). Compared to non-ERAS care, ERAS patients had less risk of developing overall complications (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.31-0.61, p < 0.001). Hospitalization was on average 2 days shorter for the ERAS group (mean difference - 2.04, 95% CI - 3.19 to - 0.89, p < 0.001). Finally, no difference was found between both groups concerning 90-day post-operative mortality and rates of reoperations, readmissions, and liver failure. CONCLUSION: In cirrhotic patients, ERAS protocol for liver surgery is safe and decreases post-operative complications and LoS. More randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm the results of the present analysis.