Graft preservation in heart transplantation: current approaches.

Heart transplantation (HTx) represents the current best surgical treatment for patients affected by end-stage heart failure. However, with the improvement of medical and interventional therapies, the population of HTx candidates is increasingly old and at high-risk for mortality and complications. Moreover, the use of "extended donor criteria" to deal with the shortage of donors could increase the risk of worse outcomes after HTx. In this setting, the strategy of donor organ preservation could significantly affect HTx results. The most widely used technique for donor organ preservation is static cold storage in ice. New techniques that are clinically being used for donor heart preservation include static controlled hypothermia and machine perfusion (MP) systems. Controlled hypothermia allows for a monitored cold storage between 4°C and 8°C. This simple technique seems to better preserve the donor heart when compared to ice, probably avoiding tissue injury due to sub-zero °C temperatures. MP platforms are divided in normothermic and hypothermic, and continuously perfuse the donor heart, reducing ischemic time, a well-known independent risk factor for mortality after HTx. Also, normothermic MP permits to evaluate marginal donor grafts, and could represent a safe and effective technique to expand the available donor pool. However, despite the increasing number of donor hearts preserved with these new approaches, whether these techniques could be considered superior to traditional CS still represents a matter of debate. The aim of this review is to summarize and critically assess the available clinical data on donor heart preservation strategies employed for HTx.

The impact of the distance between patient residency and heart transplant center on outcomes after heart transplantation.

INTRODUCTION: Heart transplant (HTx) recipients require continuous monitoring and care in order to prevent and treat possible complications related to the graft function or to the immunosuppressive treatment promptly. Since heart transplantation centers (HTC) are more experienced in managing HTx recipients than other healthcare facilities, the distance between patient residency and HTC could negatively affect the outcomes. METHODS: Data of patients discharged after receiving HTx between 2000 and 2021, collected into our institutional database, were retrospectively analyzed. The population was divided into three groups: A (n = 180), B (n = 157), and C (n = 134), according to the distance tertiles between patient residency and HTC. The primary end-point was survival, secondary end-points were incidences of complications. RESULTS: Recipient and donor characteristics did not differ between the three groups. Survival at 10 years was 66 ± 4%, 66 ± 4%, and 65 ± 5%, respectively, for groups A, B, and C (p = .34). Immunosuppressive regimen and rate of complications did not differ between groups. However, the rates of outpatient visits and of hospitalization performed at HTC were higher in group A than others. CONCLUSION: Distance from the HTC does not represent a barrier to a successful outcome for HTx recipients, as long as regular and continuous follow-up is provided.

Bentall procedure with the CarboSeal™ and CarboSeal Valsalva™ composite conduits: long-term outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: Data on the long-term results with the standard CarboSeal™ mechanical conduit used for the modified Bentall procedure are lacking as well as information on performance of the Valsalva CarboSeal™ conduit. METHODS: We have analysed 208 recipients of a standard (n = 110) or a Valsalva (n = 98) CarboSeal™ conduit. The median age was 60 years and 90% were males; 35 (17%) had type A aortic dissection and 65 (30%) a bicuspid aortic valve. Data were retrospectively analysed and results were compared between the 2 conduit models. RESULTS: Early mortality was 1.9%; the mean follow-up was 175 ± 95 for standard and 94 ± 51 months for Valsalva conduits (P < 0.01). Actuarial survival was 86 ± 4%, 75 ± 6%, 59 ± 7% and 51 ± 9% at 5, 10, 15 and 20 years, respectively. There were 13 thromboembolic episodes with 3 deaths with an actuarial freedom of 98 ± 1%, 94 ± 2%, 90 ± 3% and 89 ± 4% at 5, 10, 15 and 20 years, respectively. Reoperation on the aortic root was performed in 9 patients for endocarditis (n = 8) and pseudoaneurysm at the right coronary button (n = 1) with an actuarial freedom of 97 ± 1%, 95 ± 2%, 92 ± 3% and 87 ± 4% at 5, 10, 15 and 20 years, respectively. There were no differences between the 2 conduit models in survival and major postoperative complications. CONCLUSIONS: The CarboSeal™ conduit has shown gratifying overall performance up to 20 years and appears a valid option for a modified Bentall operation, when a mechanical prosthesis is indicated. Both CarboSeal™ conduit models provided not statistically different overall long-term results.

Novel, digital, chest drainage system in cardiac surgery.

BACKGROUND: A new, self-contained, digital, continuous pump-driven chest drainage system is compared in a randomized control trial to a traditional wall-suction system in cardiac surgery. METHODS: One hundred and twenty adult elective cardiac patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft and/or valve surgery were randomized to the study or control group. Both groups had similar pre/intra-operative demographics: age 67.8 vs 67.0 years, Euroscore 2.3 vs 2.2, and body surface area 1.92 vs 1.91 m2 . Additionally, a satisfaction assessment score (0-10) was performed by 52 staff members. RESULTS: Given homogenous intra-operative variables, total chest-tube drainage was comparable among groups (566 vs 640 mL; ns), but the study group showed more efficient fluid collection during the early postoperative phase due to continuous suction (P = .01). Blood, cell saver transfusions and postoperative hemoglobin values were similar in both groups. The study group experienced drain removal after 29.8 vs 38.4 hours in the control group (ns). Seven crossovers from the Study to the Control group were registered but no patient had drain-related complications. The Personnel Satisfaction Assessment scored above 5 for all questions asked. CONCLUSIONS: The new, digital, chest drainage system showed better early drainage of the chest cavity and was as reliable as conventional systems. Quicker drain removal might impact on intensive care unit (ICU) stay and reduce costs. Additional advantages are portable size, battery operation, patient mobility, noiseless function, digital indications and alarms. The satisfaction assessment of the new system by the staff revealed a higher score when compared to the traditional wall suction chest drainage system.

Infective endocarditis following a valve-in-valve procedure.

An 83-year-old man had aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis with a pericardial bioprosthesis and subsequent implantation of a CoreValve™ prosthesis as a valve-in-valve procedure. Approximately 4 years later, he developed endocarditis on the CoreValve™ with severe prosthetic stenosis, a periannular abscess and systemic embolization. At reoperation both prostheses were removed and another bioprosthesis inserted after reconstruction of the aortic root. Endocarditis after transaortic valve implantation is an uncommon event with dismal prognosis. Infection of a self-expandable device as a valve-in-valve has not been previously reported. This complication represents a surgical challenge which, however, can be successfully managed.

Bicuspid aortic valve disease and ascending aortic aneurysm: should an aortic root replacement be mandatory?†.

OBJECTIVES: The higher risk of adverse aortic events in patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) disease and ascending aorta aneurysm is known, but the management of moderate aortic root dilatation in younger patients is a controversial issue. The aim of the study was to compare survival in patients with or without root replacement. METHODS: We reviewed 166 consecutive patients with BAV disease and concomitant ascending aorta aneurysm (mean ascending aorta diameter: 51.4 ± 7.2 mm) undergoing cardiac surgery from 1994 to 2010. A total of 77 patients underwent Bentall procedure (90.9% male, mean age: 55.7 ± 12.7 years, Bentall group), whereas the remaining 89 patients underwent aortic valve replacement with supracoronary ascending aorta replacement (SAAR 71.9% male, mean age: 60.5 ± 11.2 years, SAAR group, P = 0.002). The preoperative mean diameter of the root was 44.0 ± 7.2 mm in the Bentall, and 38.5 ± 4.8 mm in the SAAR group (P < 0.0001). RESULTS: In-hospital mortality was 2.6% in the Bentall, and 2.3% in the SAAR groups. Overall survival was 84 and 81% in the Bentall (median follow-up: 105 months) versus 89 and 88% in the SAAR (median follow-up: 73 months) groups at 10 and 15 years (P = 0.36), respectively. The mean cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time was 201 ± 56 min and 174 ± 58 min (P = 0.0016), the mean cross-clamp time 156 ± 42 min and 132 ± 38 min (P = 0.0008) in the Bentall and SAAR groups, respectively. Four sudden deaths have occurred in the Bentall group and in 2 in the SAAR group. Progressive dilatation of the aortic root in the SAAR group was not significat (postoperative mean diameter: 36.3 ± 4.4 mm). Neither subgroup of patients in the SAAR with preoperative moderate dilatation of aortic root had significat aortic dilatation at the mean follow-up of 73 ± 39 months (preoperative diameter: 43.5 ± 2.3 mm versus postoperative: 39.1 ± 4.2 mm). One patient in Bentall and 1 in the SAAR groups were reoperated for tubular graft infection. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with BAV disease, ascending aorta aneurysm and moderate dilatation of the root, the significat reduction of CPB and cross-clamp times, the stability of the residual root at long term and the low risk of adverse aortic events associated with SAAR compared with the Bentall procedure have led us to consider the isolated aortic valve replacement with supracoronary aorta replacement an alternative strategy to the Bentall procedure, especially in high-risk and older patients.