Femoral versus axillary cannulation in acute type A aortic dissections: A meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: There has been a growing interest in antegrade cannulation techniques in type A aortic dissection surgery. Axillary cannulation has previously been reported to provide better outcomes in terms of short-term mortality and neurological event. Consensus regarding the best cannulation strategy still remains controversial. METHOD: The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were conducted up until October 3, 2020. Data regarding mortality, stroke, reoperation for bleeding and length of hospital stay, wound infection and cardiopulmonary bypass time were extracted and submitted to a meta-analysis using random-effects modelling and the I2 -test for heterogeneity. Fourteen retrospective observational studies were included, enrolling a total of 2621 patients. RESULTS: There were a total of 2621 patients (1327 axillary cannulation and 874 femoral cannulation). Axillary cannulation was associated with reduced short term mortality (pooled odds ratio [OR] = +0.42, 95% confidence interval [CI] = +0.25 to +0.70; p = .0009) compared to femoral cannulation. Axillary cannulation was also associated with a lower incidence of neurological events (pooled OR = +0.63, 95% CI = +0.42 to +0.94; p = .02). CONCLUSION: Our meta-analyses suggests that axillary cannulation has superior outcomes in terms of mortality and stroke following emergency surgery for type A aortic dissection. However, the lack of high quality randomized controlled trials does not make this recommendation generalisable to all units.

Neuroprotective strategies with circulatory arrest in open aortic surgery - A meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Deep hypothermic circulatory arrest (DHCA) in aortic surgery is associated with morbidity and mortality despite evolving strategies. With the advent of antegrade cerebral perfusion (ACP), moderate hypothermic circulatory arrest (MHCA) was reported to have better outcomes than DHCA. There is no standardised guideline or consensus regarding the hypothermic strategies to be employed in open aortic surgery. Meta-analysis was performed comparing DHCA with MHCA + ACP in patients having aortic surgery. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was undertaken. Any studies with DHCA versus MHCA + ACP in aortic surgeries were selected according to specific inclusion criteria and analysed to generate summative data. Statistical analysis was performed using STATS Direct. The primary outcomes were hospital mortality and post-operative stroke. Secondary outcomes were cardiopulmonary bypass time (CPB), post-operative blood transfusion, length of ICU stay, respiratory complications, renal failure and length of hospital stay. Subgroup analysis of primary outcomes for Arch surgery alone was also performed. RESULTS: Fifteen studies were included with a total of 5869 patients. There was significantly reduced mortality (Pooled OR = +0.64, 95% CI = +0.49 to +0.83; p = 0.0006) and stroke rate (Pooled OR = +0.62, 95% CI = +0.49 to +0.79; p < 0.001) in the MHCA group. MHCA was associated significantly with shorter CPB times, shorter duration in ICU, less pulmonary complications, and reduced rates of sepsis. There was no statistical difference between the two groups in terms of circulatory arrest times, X-Clamp times, total operation duration, transfusion requirements, renal failure and post-op hospital stay. CONCLUSION: MHCA + ACP are associated with significantly better post-operative outcomes compared with DHCA for both mortality and stroke and majority of the secondary outcomes.

Minimally invasive (mini-thoracotomy) versus median sternotomy in redo mitral valve surgery: A meta-analysis of observational studies.

OBJECTIVE: Redo mitral valve surgery has traditionally been performed via a median sternotomy. It is often challenging and is associated with increased perioperative mortality. Advances in cardiac surgical techniques over the last two decades have led to an increase in the use of a minimally invasive approach via a right anterolateral mini-thoracotomy as opposed to a repeat median sternotomy. However, despite these advances, there is no general consensus on the best form of entry, and as of yet, there are no randomized controlled trials. We performed a meta-analysis of observational studies to aid in determining the best approach for redo mitral valve surgery. METHOD: The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were conducted up until 1 June 2020. Data regarding mortality, stroke, reoperation for bleeding and length of hospital stay, wound infection and cardiopulmonary bypass time were extracted and submitted to a meta-analysis using random effects modelling and the I2-test for heterogeneity. Seven retrospective observational studies were included, enrolling a total of 1070 patients. RESULTS: There were a total of 1070 patients. Of these 364 had non-sternotomy approach compared with 707 patients who had median sternotomy. Further subgroup analysis revealed that 327 of the 364 patients had a mini-thoracotomy approach while the remaining 37 patients had a full thoracotomy approach. In-hospital mortality and length of stay were less in non-sternotomy group compared to median sternotomy group. There were no differences in stroke, CPB time and wound infections between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Redo mitral valve surgery can be performed safely with satisfactory outcomes via a mini-thoracotomy approach. This meta-analysis shows comparable results with reduced in-hospital mortality and hospital length of stay with a mini-thoracotomy approach.

External aortic clamping versus endoaortic balloon occlusion in minimally invasive cardiac surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Minimally invasive cardiac valve surgery is safe, effective and increasingly popular. It is performed worldwide with the use of either external aortic clamping or endoaortic balloon occlusion. METHODS: We conducted a literature search using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus and Web of Science. Primary outcomes included aortic dissection, conversion to sternotomy, mortality, stroke and cross-clamp time. Secondary outcomes included atrial fibrillation, acute kidney injury, reoperation for bleeding, cardiopulmonary bypass times, myocardial infarction, use of intra-aortic balloon pump and length of hospital stay. The random effects model was used to calculate the outcomes of both binary and continuous data. RESULTS: Thirty retrospective studies were included in the meta-analysis. The incidence of aortic dissection (pooled odds ratio = 3.88, 95% confidence interval = 1.06-14.18; P =0.04) and conversion to sternotomy (pooled odds ratio = 3.07, 95% confidence interval = 1.33-7.10; P = 0.009) was higher in the endoaortic balloon occlusion group than in the external aortic clamping group, in whom a direct comparison was possible. The remaining observational studies did not show any significant differences in either group. There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality (P = 0.37), stroke (P = 0.26), cross-clamp time (P = 0.20), atrial fibrillation (P = 0.18), acute kidney injury (P = 0.49), reoperation for bleeding (P = 0.24), cardiopulmonary bypass time (P = 0.06), myocardial infarction (P = 0.74), use of intra-aortic balloon pump (P = 0.11) or length of hospital stay (P = 0.47). CONCLUSIONS: External aortic clamping may be safer than endoaortic balloon occlusion with respect to aortic dissection and conversion to sternotomy. However, mortality, length of stay, stroke, cross-clamp time and other cardiovascular complication rates were similar between the 2 techniques.

Comparison of minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass and drug-eluting stents for management of isolated left anterior descending artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 7,710 patients.

BACKGROUND: In the contemporary era of drug-eluting stents (DES) the issue of optimal revascularization strategy for patients with isolated disease of the left anterior descending (LAD) artery has gained more significance. We aimed to evaluate the current best evidence on the subject by performing a systematic review and meta-analysis of the studies comparing minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) grafting with DES in patients with isolated LAD disease. METHODS: A literature search was conducted from 1966 through March 2018 using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and other scientific databases to identify relevant articles. Analyzed outcomes included all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) and target vessel revascularization (TVR). The random effects model was used to calculate the outcomes of both binary and continuous data to control any heterogeneity between the studies. Heterogeneity amongst the trials was determined by means of the Cochran Q value and quantified using the I2 inconsistency test. All P values were 2-sided and a 5% level was considered significant. RESULTS: A total of 7,710 patients from 12 studies were identified. There was no significant difference in mortality rate [pooled odds ratio (OR) =0.92; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.65 to 1.32; P=0.66], MI rate (pooled OR =1.13, 95% CI, 0.62 to 2.06; P=0.69) or MACCE (pooled OR =1.31; 95% CI, 0.58 to 2.95; P=0.52). However, TVR rate was significantly more for patients having percutaneous intervention with DES (pooled OR =0.27; 95% CI, 0.16 to 0.45; P<0.0001) compared to MIDCAB. CONCLUSIONS: MIDCAB offers superior freedom from TVR with similar mortality, MI rate, and MACCE compared to percutaneous intervention with DES for revascularization in patient with isolated proximal LAD stenosis.

On- or off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting for octogenarians: A meta-analysis of comparative studies involving 27,623 patients.

OBJECTIVE: Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is being increasingly offered to octogenarians. Both on- and off-pump CABG are reported as effective surgical revascularization strategies for octogenarians by single institution studies. However, the issue of superiority of one strategy over the other for octogenarians remains unresolved due to limited sample size of these studies. A meta-analysis of studies comparing outcomes of on- and off-pump CABG in octogenarians was undertaken to address the issue. METHODS: A literature search was conducted from 1966 through September 2016 using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus and Web of Science to identify relevant articles. Primary outcomes of interest included in-hospital mortality and stroke. Secondary outcomes of interest were atrial fibrillation, acute renal failure, reoperation for bleeding, deep sternal wound infection, myocardial infarction, intensive therapy unit (ITU) stay and hospital stay. The random effects model was used to calculate the outcomes of both binary and continuous data to control any heterogeneity between the studies. Heterogeneity amongst the trials was determined by means of the Cochran Q value and quantified using the I2 inconsistency test. All p-values were 2-sided and a 5% level was considered significant. RESULTS: Sixteen retrospective studies (18,685 on-pump patients and 8938 off-pump patients) were included in the systematic review. In-hospital mortality (pooled OR = 0.64, 95% CI = 0.44 to 0.93; p = 0.02), stroke rate (pooled OR = 0.61, 95% CI = 0.48 to 0.76; p < 0.001) and length of hospital stay (pooled WMD = +0.29, 95% CI = +0.02 to +0.56; p = 0.04) were significantly lower in the off-pump patients. Atrial fibrillation (p = 0.36), acute renal failure (p = 0.47), reoperation for bleeding (p = 0.99), deep sternal wound infection (p = 0.59), myocardial infarction (p = 0.93), and length of ITU stay (p = 0.27) were comparable. CONCLUSION: Off-pump compared to on-pump CABG offers surgical myocardial revascularization to octogenarians with lower in-hospital mortality, stroke rate and length of hospital stay with similar incidence of other adverse outcomes. Preferentially offering off-pump CABG to octogenarians could translate into reduced economic burden on the healthcare providers.

Determining optimal fluid and air leak cut off values for chest drain management in general thoracic surgery.

BACKGROUND: Chest drain duration is one of the most important influencing aspects of hospital stay but the management is perhaps one of the most variable aspects of thoracic surgical care. The aim of our study is to report outcomes associated with increasing fluid and air leak criteria of protocol based management. METHODS: A 6-year retrospective analysis of protocolised chest drain management starting in 2007 with a fluid criteria of 3 mL/kg increasing to 7 mL/kg in 2011 to no fluid criteria in 2012, and an air leak criteria of 24 hours without leak till 2012 when digital air leak monitoring was introduced with a criteria of <20 mL/min of air leak for more than 6 hours. Patient data were obtained from electronic hospital records and digital chest films were reviewed to determine the duration of chest tube drainage and post-drain removal complications. RESULTS: From 2009 to 2012, 626 consecutive patients underwent thoracic surgery procedures under a single consultant. A total of 160 did not require a chest drain and data was missing in 22, leaving 444 for analysis. The mean age [standard deviation (SD)] was 57±19 years and 272 (61%) were men. There were no differences in the incidence of pneumothoraces (P=0.191), effusion (P=0.344) or re-interventions (P=0.431) for drain re-insertions as progressively permissive criteria were applied. The median drain duration dropped from 1-3 days (P<0.001) and accordingly hospital stay reduced from 4-6 days (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that chest drains can be safely removed without fluid criteria and air leak of less than 20 mL/min with median drain duration of 1 day, associated with a reduced length of hospital stay.