Evolution of Early Postoperative Cardiac Rehabilitation in Patients with Acute Type A Aortic Dissection.

INTRODUCTION: Surgically treated acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) patients are often restricted from physical exercise due to a lack of knowledge about safe blood pressure (BP) ranges. The aim of this study was to describe the evolution of early postoperative cardiac rehabilitation (CR) for patients with ATAAD. METHODS: This is a retrospective study of 73 patients with ATAAD who were referred to the CR department after surgery. An incremental symptom-limited exercise stress test (ExT) on a cyclo-ergometer was performed before and after CR, which included continuous training and segmental muscle strengthening (five sessions/week). Systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP and DBP) were monitored before and after all exercise sessions. RESULTS: The patients (78.1% male; 62.2 ± 12.7 years old; 54.8% hypertensive) started CR 26.2 ± 17.3 days after surgery. During 30.4 ±11.6 days, they underwent 14.5 ± 4.7 sessions of endurance cycling training, and 11.8 ± 4.3 sessions of segmental muscle strengthening. At the end of CR, the gain of workload during endurance training and functional capacity during ExT were 19.6 ± 10.2 watts and 1.2 ± 0.6 METs, respectively. The maximal BP reached during endurance training was 143 ± 14/88 ± 14 mmHg. The heart rate (HR) reserve improved from 20.2 ± 13.9 bpm to 33.2 ± 16.8 bpm while the resting HR decreased from 86.1 ± 17.4 bpm to 76.4 ± 13.3 bpm. CONCLUSION: Early post-operative exercise-based CR is feasible and safe in patients with surgically treated ATAAD. The CR effect is remarkable, but it requires a close BP monitoring and supervision by a cardiologist and physical therapist during training.

Surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Aims: The aim of this review was to assess the effect of concomitant surgical atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation on postoperative freedom from AF and patient-important outcomes. Methods and results: We searched Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE databases from inception to May 2016 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating surgical AF ablation using any lesion set vs. no surgical AF ablation in adults with AF undergoing cardiac surgery. We performed screening, risk-of-bias evaluation, and data collection independently and in duplicate. We evaluated risk of bias with the modified Cochrane tool, quality of evidence using GRADE framework, and pooled data with a random-effects model. Of the 23 included studies, only one was considered at low risk of bias. Surgical AF ablation was associated with more freedom from AF at 12 months [relative risk (RR) = 2.32, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.92-2.80; P < 0.001, low quality]. However, no significant difference was seen in mortality (RR = 1.07, 95% CI 0.72-1.52; P = 0.41, moderate quality), stroke (RR = 1.19, 95% CI 0.59-2.39; P = 0.63, moderate quality), or pacemaker implantation (RR = 1.28, 95% CI 0.85-1.95; P = 0.24, high quality). Comparing biatrial and left-sided lesion sets showed no difference in mortality (P-interaction = 0.60) or stroke (P-interaction = 0.12). At 12 months, biatrial procedures led to more freedom from AF (RR = 2.80, 95% CI 2.13-3.68; P < 0.0001) when compared with left-sided ablation (RR = 2.00, 95% CI 1.68-2.39; P < 0.0001) (P-interaction = 0.04) Biatrial procedures appear to increase the risk for pacemaker (RR = 2.68, 95% CI 1.41-5.11; P = 0.002) compared with no ablation while left-sided ablation does not (RR = 1.08, 95% CI 0.67-1.74; P = 0.76) (P-interaction = 0.03). Conclusion: Surgical AF ablation during cardiac surgery improves freedom from AF. However, impact on patient-important outcomes including mortality and stroke has not shown statistical significance in current RCT evidence. Biatrial compared with left-sided lesion sets showed no difference in mortality or stroke but were associated with significantly increased freedom from AF and risk for pacemaker requirement.

Surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

INTRODUCTION: Atrial fibrillation (AF) affects 10% of patients undergoing cardiac surgery and is an independent risk factor for all-cause mortality, ischaemic stroke and heart failure. Surgical AF ablation has been shown to significantly improve maintenance of sinus rhythm, however, small to medium size trials conducted to date lack the power required to assess patient-important outcomes such as mortality, stroke, heart failure and health-related quality of life. Moreover, a recent randomised trial (RCT) suggested harm by surgical AF ablation with an almost threefold increase in the requirement for permanent pacemaker postablation. We aim to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate efficacy and safety of surgical AF ablation compared to no surgical ablation. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will search Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE for RCTs evaluating the use of surgical AF ablation, including any lesion set, versus no surgical AF ablation in adults with AF undergoing any type of cardiac surgery. Outcomes of interest include mortality, embolic events, quality of life, rehospitalisation, freedom from AF and adverse events, including need for pacemaker and worsening heart failure. Independently and in duplicate, reviewers will screen references, assess eligibility of potentially relevant studies using predefined eligibility criteria and collect data using prepiloted forms. We will pool data using a random effects model and present results as relative risk with 95% CIs for dichotomous outcomes and as mean difference with 95% CI for continuous outcomes. We will assess risk of bias using the Cochrane Collaboration tool, and quality of evidence with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Our results will help guide clinical practice by providing the most comprehensive analysis of risks and benefits associated with the procedure. Our results will be disseminated through publication in peer-reviewed journals and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42015025988.