Clinical profile, microbiology and outcomes in infective endocarditis treated with aortic valve replacement: a multicenter case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Aortic valve infective endocarditis (IE) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. We aimed to describe the clinical profile, risk factors and predictors of short- and long-term mortality in patients with aortic valve IE treated with aortic valve replacement (AVR) compared with a control group undergoing AVR for non-infectious valvular heart disease. METHODS: Between January 2008 and December 2013, a total of 170 cases with IE treated with AVR (exposed cohort) and 677 randomly selected non-infectious AVR-treated patients with degenerative aortic valve disease (controls) were recruited from three tertiary hospitals with cardiothoracic facilities across Scandinavia. Crude and adjusted hazard ratios (HR) were estimated using Cox regression models. RESULTS: The mean age of the IE cohort was 58.5 ± 15.1 years (80.0% men). During a mean follow-up of 7.8 years (IQR 5.1-10.8 years), 373 (44.0%) deaths occurred: 81 (47.6%) in the IE group and 292 (43.1%) among controls. Independent risk factors associated with IE were male gender, previous heart surgery, underweight, positive hepatitis C serology, renal failure, previous wound infection and dental treatment (all p < 0.05). IE was associated with an increased risk of both short-term (≤ 30 days) (HR 2.86, [1.36-5.98], p = 0.005) and long-term mortality (HR 2.03, [1.43-2.88], p < 0.001). In patients with IE, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (HR 2.13), underweight (HR 4.47), renal failure (HR 2.05), concomitant mitral valve involvement (HR 2.37) and mediastinitis (HR 3.98) were independent predictors of long-term mortality. Staphylococcus aureus was the most prevalent microbe (21.8%) and associated with a 5.2-fold increased risk of early mortality, while enterococci were associated with the risk of long-term mortality (HR 1.78). CONCLUSIONS: In this multicenter case-control study, IE was associated with an increased risk of both short- and long-term mortality compared to controls. Efforts should be made to identify, and timely treat modifiable risk factors associated with contracting IE, and mitigate the predictors of poor survival in IE.

Incidence and healing times of postoperative sternal wound infections: a retrospective observational single-centre study.

Objectives: Analyses of incidence and time required to heal sternal wound infections after heart surgery performed via a median sternotomy between 2020 and 2022. Results: Superficial wound infections (SWI) were five times more common (2.7%) than mediastinitis (0.5%) among 2693 patients. The median time between the operation and diagnosis of SWI was 26 (interquartile range [IQR] 15-33) days vs. 16 (IQR 9-25) days for mediastinitis (p = .12). Gram-negative bacteria caused 44% of the 85 infections. Sternal wound infection correlated to higher body mass index, female sex, smoking, diabetes mellitus, previous myocardial infarction, coronary artery bypass grafting, use of internal mammary graft, and re-entry for postoperative bleeding. Eight of 59 patients (13.6%) with sternal wound infections had bilateral mammary grafts, compared to 102 of 1191 patients (8.6%) without wound infections (p = .28). Negative pressure wound therapy was always used to treat mediastinitis and applied in 63% of patients with SWI. Two of 13 patients with mediastinitis (15%) and none of 72 patients with SWI died within 90 days after the operation. The median time until the wound healed was 1.9 (IQR 1.3-3.7) months after SWI vs. 1.7 (IQR 1.3-5.3) months after mediastinitis (p = .63). Six patients (7%) required longer than one year to treat the infection. Conclusions: Postoperative sternal wound infections usually appeared several weeks after surgery and were associated with factors as high body mass index, diabetes mellitus and coronary artery bypass. SWI were more common than mediastinitis and often required negative pressure wound therapy and similar treatment time as mediastinitis.

Bleeding is associated with severely impaired outcomes in surgery for acute type a aortic dissection.

Background. Surgery for acute type A aortic dissection confers a risk for significant bleeding. We analyzed the impact of massive bleeding on complications after surgery for acute type A aortic dissection. Methods. Patients undergoing surgery for acute type A aortic dissection from the retrospective multicenter Nordic Consortium for Acute Type A Aortic Dissection (NORCAAD) database 2005-2014 were eligible. Massive bleeding was defined according to the Universal Definition of Perioperative Bleeding. The primary outcome measure was early mortality and secondary outcome measures were perioperative stroke, mechanical ventilation more than 48 h, new-onset dialysis, and intensive care unit stay. Propensity score matching was performed to adjust for differences in covariates. Results. Nine hundred ninety-seven patients were included, of whom 403 (40.4%) had massive bleeding. In the propensity score-matched cohort (344 pairs), patients with massive bleeding had higher 30-day mortality (17.2 versus 7.6%, p < .001), mechanical ventilation more than 48 h (52.8 versus 22.6%, p < .001), perioperative stroke (24.3 versus 14.8%, p = .002), new-onset dialysis (22.5 versus 4.9%, p < .001), and longer intensive care unit stay (6 versus 3 days, p < .001), compared with patients without massive bleeding. Risk factors for massive bleeding were previous cardiac surgery, preoperative clopidogrel or ticagrelor therapy, DeBakey type I dissection, and localized or generalized malperfusion. Conclusions. Massive bleeding in surgery for acute type A aortic dissection is associated with a markedly increased risk for severe complications as well as early death. Further improvement of surgical technique and pharmacological optimization of coagulation is paramount to possibly improve outcomes in acute type A aortic dissection repair.

Bleeding in minimally invasive versus conventional aortic valve replacement.

BACKGROUND: Observational studies have shown reduced perioperative bleeding in patients undergoing minimally invasive, compared with full sternotomy, aortic valve replacement. Data from randomized trials are conflicting. METHODS: This was a Swedish single center study where adult patients with aortic stenosis, 100 patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to undergo either minimally invasive (ministernotomy) or full sternotomy aortic valve replacement. The primary outcome was severe or massive bleeding defined by the Universal Definition of Perioperative Bleeding in adult cardiac surgery (UDPB). Secondary outcomes included blood product transfusions, chest tube output, re-exploration for bleeding, and several other clinically relevant events. RESULTS: Out of 100 patients, three patients randomized to ministernotomy were intraoperatively converted to full sternotomy (none was bleeding-related). Three patients (6%) in the full sternotomy group and 3 patients (6%) in the ministernotomy group suffered severe or massive postoperative bleeding according to the UDPB definition (p = 1.00). Mean chest tube output during the first 12 postoperative hours was 350 (standard deviation (SD) 220) ml in the full sternotomy group and 270 (SD 190) ml in the ministernotomy group (p = 0.08). 28% of patients in the full sternotomy group and 36% of patients in the ministernotomy group received at least one packed red blood cells transfusion (p = 0.39). Two patients in each group (4%) underwent re-exploration for bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement did not result in less bleeding-related outcomes compared to full sternotomy. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov . Unique identifier: NCT02272621.