Mitral valve surgery via repeat median sternotomy versus right mini-thoracotomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Redo mitral valve surgeries have high mortality and morbidity and can be physically demanding for patients. Median sternotomy remains the gold standard for most cardiac surgeries. To tackle certain risks with a re-sternotomy, alternative procedures such as the right anterolateral minithoracotomy have been explored. This review aims to compare the clinical outcomes of re-sternotomy (MS) versus right mini thoracotomy (MT) in mitral valve surgery. METHODS: A systematic, electronic search was performed according to Preferred Reporting items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis guidelines to identify relevant articles that compared outcomes of the MS versus MT procedures in patients who have had cardiac surgery via a MS approach. RESULTS: Twelve studies were identified, enrolling 4514 patients. Length of hospital stay(MD = -3.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] [-4.92, -2.49]), 30-day mortality(odds ratio [OR] = 0.59, 95% CI [0.39, 0.90]), and new-onset renal failure(OR = 0.38, 95% CI [0.22, 0.65]) were statistically significant in favor of the MT approach. Infection rates(OR = 0.56, 95% CI[0.25, 1.21]) and length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay (MD = -0.55, 95% CI[-1.16, 0.06]) was lower in the MT group; however, the difference was not significant. No significant differences were observed in the CPB time(MD = -2.33, 95% CI [-8.15, 3.50]), aortic cross-clamp time MD = -1.67, 95% CI[-17.07, 13.76]), and rates of stroke(OR = 1.03, 95% CI[0.55, 1.92]). CONCLUSION: Right MT is a safe alternative to the traditional re-sternotomy for patients who have had previous cardiac surgery. The approach offers a reduced length of hospital stay, ICU stay, and a lower risk of new-onset renal failure requiring dialysis. This review calls for robust trials in the field to further strengthen the evidence.

Robotic coronary artery surgery: Outcomes and pitfalls.

OBJECTIVE: Coronary artery bypass grafting is one of the most commonly performed surgical procedures in cardiovascular surgery with a steadily evolving minimally invasive approach. METHODS: Conventional coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is performed traditionally via midline sternotomy. Exciting advancements in technology and engineering over the last two decades have resulted in the transition from conventional to minimally invasive CABG including robotically assisted surgery. RESULTS: The minimally invasive techniques are continuously striving to promote coronary revascularization into the arena of minimally invasive surgery. Examination of 10 previously completed studies with relevant follow-up periods enables an insightful vision into the outcomes and pitfalls surrounding robot-assisted CABG (RACAB) as explored in this review. Studies indicate that RACAB is associated with decreased postoperative complications such as major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events without compromise in survival rates. Despite this, certain drawbacks such as incurring costs and technical complexity of the procedure cannot be dismissed. CONCLUSION: There exist patient-related benefits from minimally invasive techniques such as decreased certain postoperative complications. Furthermore, with experience and a specialized stepwise program, it is possible to perform the entire procedure from the console. However, certain pitfalls involving increased expenses, steep learning curve and the lack of proper haptic feedback currently withhold the worldwide expansion of RACAB and limit it to specialized institutions only.

Outcomes in cardiac implantable electronic device-related infective endocarditis: a systematic review of current literature.

Aim: Cardiac implantable electronic device infective endocarditis is a serious infection with poor prognosis. Materials & methods: The systematic review of the literature was conducted using searches from the various databases. We included studies published between January 2010 and June 2021. Results: A total of 35 articles met the inclusion criteria. Patients were approximately 70 years old and an average of 71.2% of patients were male. The most common presenting feature was a fever. The modified Duke criteria was used to aid diagnosis. Management entailed extraction of the cardiac implantable electronic device in 80.5% of the studies. The overall mortality rates ranged from 4 to 36%. The most frequently isolated organism was Staphylococcus aureus. Conclusion: Cardiac implantable electronic device infective endocarditis needs timely diagnosis and effective management for promising outcomes.

Comparative Analysis of Endovascular Intervention and Endarterectomy in Patients with Femoral Artery Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Peripheral artery disease is a prevalent illness affecting more than 200 million people worldwide. A commonly used technique to manage the condition has been open endarterectomy. However, in recent times, a shift towards minimally invasive techniques has resulted in endovascular intervention as a popular alternative. This review aims to assess the safety and efficacy of endovascular intervention when compared with endarterectomy. A systematic review of the articles published in PubMed, Ovid, Embase, and Scopus within the last 10 years was conducted. The PRISMA guidelines were adhered to, and the Newcastle-Ottawa and NICE quality assessment scales were used. A meta-analysis of proportions was performed using the RStudio software (RStudio Team (2021). RStudio: Integrated Development Environment for R, PBC, Boston, MA, USA). Twenty-six studies were included, with a total of 7126 patients (endovascular, 2496; endarterectomy, 4630). Technical success was greater for endarterectomy than endovascular intervention with an odds ratio of 0.38; 95% CI [0.27-0.54]. In terms of safety as well endovascular intervention was better than endarterectomy with an odds ratio of 0.22; 95% CI [0.15 to 0.31] for wound infection. Endovascular intervention is a safe and effective procedure; however, it cannot be considered superior to endarterectomy.

Septic Cardiomyopathy: From Basics to Management Choices.

Septic cardiomyopathy (SCM) is increasingly recognized as a potential complication of septic shock; it is understood to be a reversible left ventricular systolic dysfunction. The presence of SCM in septic shock, in previous studies, infer a poorer prognosis as it significantly increases the mortality rate of patients to 70%-90% and its incidence varies from 18% to 40% of septic shock patients. The pathogenesis is unclear, but believed to be a combination of bacterial toxins, cytokines, nitric oxide, and cardiac mitochondrial dysfunction, that depresses intrinsic cardiac contractility. The presence of SCM can be diagnosed in patients using a bedside transthoracic echocardiogram which typically shows left ventricular ejection fraction <45% and right ventricular dilatation. For management, levosimendan provides a good hemodynamic response without increasing cardiac oxygen demand when compared to dobutamine, while more invasive techniques such as extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, and intra-aortic balloon pulsation are being explored as well as potential rescue strategies for patients with severe SCM.