Intra-operative and post-operative management of conduits for coronary artery bypass grafting: a clinical consensus statement of the European Society of Cardiology Working Group on Cardiovascular Surgery and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery Coronary Task Force.

The structural and functional integrity of conduits used for coronary artery bypass grafting is critical for graft patency. Disruption of endothelial integrity and endothelial dysfunction are incurred during conduit harvesting subsequent to mechanical or thermal injury and during conduit storage prior to grafting, leading to acute thrombosis and early graft failure. Late graft failure, in particular that of vein grafts, is precipitated by progressive atherogenesis. Intra-operative management includes appropriate selection of conduit-specific harvesting techniques and storage solutions. Arterial grafts are prone to vasospasm subsequent to surgical manipulation, and application of intra-operative vasodilatory protocols is critical. Post-operative management includes continuation of oral vasodilator therapy and selection of antithrombotic and lipid-lowering agents to attenuate atherosclerotic disease progression in conduits. In this review, the scientific evidence underlying the key aspects of intra- and post-operative management of conduits for coronary artery bypass grafting is examined. Clinical consensus statements for best clinical practice are provided, and areas requiring further research are highlighted.

Graft Failure After Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting and Its Association With Patient Characteristics and Clinical Events: A Pooled Individual Patient Data Analysis of Clinical Trials With Imaging Follow-Up.

BACKGROUND: Graft patency is the postulated mechanism for the benefits of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). However, systematic graft imaging assessment after CABG is rare, and there is a lack of contemporary data on the factors associated with graft failure and on the association between graft failure and clinical events after CABG. METHODS: We pooled individual patient data from randomized clinical trials with systematic CABG graft imaging to assess the incidence of graft failure and its association with clinical risk factors. The primary outcome was the composite of myocardial infarction or repeat revascularization occurring after CABG and before imaging. A 2-stage meta-analytic approach was used to evaluate the association between graft failure and the primary outcome. We also assessed the association between graft failure and myocardial infarction, repeat revascularization, or all-cause death occurring after imaging. RESULTS: Seven trials were included comprising 4413 patients (mean age, 64.4±9.1 years; 777 [17.6%] women; 3636 [82.4%] men) and 13 163 grafts (8740 saphenous vein grafts and 4423 arterial grafts). The median time to imaging was 1.02 years (interquartile range [IQR], 1.00-1.03). Graft failure occurred in 1487 (33.7%) patients and in 2190 (16.6%) grafts. Age (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.08 [per 10-year increment] [95% CI, 1.01-1.15]; P=0.03), female sex (aOR, 1.27 [95% CI, 1.08-1.50]; P=0.004), and smoking (aOR, 1.20 [95% CI, 1.04-1.38]; P=0.01) were independently associated with graft failure, whereas statins were associated with a protective effect (aOR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.63-0.88]; P<0.001). Graft failure was associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction or repeat revascularization occurring between CABG and imaging assessment (8.0% in patients with graft failure versus 1.7% in patients without graft failure; aOR, 3.98 [95% CI, 3.54-4.47]; P<0.001). Graft failure was also associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction or repeat revascularization occurring after imaging (7.8% versus 2.0%; aOR, 2.59 [95% CI, 1.86-3.62]; P<0.001). All-cause death after imaging occurred more frequently in patients with graft failure compared with patients without graft failure (11.0% versus 2.1%; aOR, 2.79 [95% CI, 2.01-3.89]; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In contemporary practice, graft failure remains common among patients undergoing CABG and is strongly associated with adverse cardiac events.

No-touch saphenous vein: current understanding of the conduit 'less handled'.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The no-touch technique is an established method to harvest the saphenous vein (NT-SV), which is the most commonly used conduit in coronary artery bypass grafting. Herein, we summarize the foundational evidence, as well as highlight recent innovations and ongoing clinical trials involving NT-SV. RECENT FINDINGS: Through preservation of perivascular tissue for atraumatic handling and omission of manual distension, the NT-SV maintains endothelial nitrous oxide synthase levels and experiences less vascular smooth muscle cell activation, which translates to slower progression of atherosclerosis and less size mismatch of the graft and target vessel. These biomolecular advantages allow NT-SV to provide superior graft patency compared to conventional skeletonized saphenous vein and approximating that of the radial artery. Nonetheless, the clinical benefits of NT-SV for mortality and reduction in major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events are insufficiently studied in the long-term. The drawback of NT-SV is the short-term harvest site complications, which may potentially be addressed by the advent of endoscopic no-touch technique. SUMMARY: NT-SV is a promising conduit, and its role will be further clarified in upcoming clinical trials and as follow-up lengthens. However, conduit selection and harvest technique should ultimately be personalized to the individual patient.

Cusp overlap method for self-expanding transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

BACKGROUND: Conduction disturbances and the need for permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation remains a common complication for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), particularly when self-expanding (SE) valves are used. AIMS: We compared in-hospital and 30-day rates of new PPM implantation between patients undergoing TAVR with SE valves using the conventional three-cusp coplanar implantation technique and the cusp-overlap technique. METHODS: We retrospectively compared patients without a pre-existing PPM who underwent a TAVR procedure with SE Evolut R or PRO valves using the cusp-overlap technique from July 2018 to September 2020 (n = 519) to patients who underwent TAVR using standard three-cusp technique from April 2016 to March 2017 (n = 128) in two high volume Canadian centers. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in baseline RBBB between the groups (10.4% vs. 13.2; p = 0.35). The rate of in-hospital new complete heart block (9.4% vs. 23.4%; p ≤ 0.001) and PPM implantation (8% vs. 21%; p ≤ 0.001) were significantly reduced when using the cusp-overlap technique. The incidence of new LBBB (30.4% vs. 29%; p = 0.73) was similar. At 30 days, the rates of new complete heart block (11% vs. 23%; p ≤ 0.001) and PPM implantation (10% vs. 21%, p ≤ 0.001) remained significantly lower in the cusp-overlap group, while the rate of new LBBB (35% vs. 30%; p = 0.73) was similar. CONCLUSION: Cusp-overlap approach offers several potential technical advantages compared to standard three-cusp view, and may result in lower PPM rates in TAVR with SE Evolut valve.

Fragility indices for only sufficiently likely modifications.

The fragility index is a clinically meaningful metric based on modifying patient outcomes that is increasingly used to interpret the robustness of clinical trial results. The fragility index relies on a concept that explores alternative realizations of the same clinical trial by modifying patient measurements. In this article, we propose to generalize the fragility index to a family of fragility indices called the incidence fragility indices that permit only outcome modifications that are sufficiently likely and provide an exact algorithm to calculate the incidence fragility indices. Additionally, we introduce a far-reaching generalization of the fragility index to any data type and explain how to permit only sufficiently likely modifications for nondichotomous outcomes. All of the proposed methodologies follow the fragility index concept.

ESC/EACTS vs. ACC/AHA guidelines for the management of severe aortic stenosis.

Aortic stenosis (AS) is a serious and complex condition, for which optimal management continues to evolve rapidly. An understanding of current clinical practice guidelines is critical to effective patient care and shared decision-making. This state of the art review of the 2021 European Society of Cardiology/European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery Guidelines and 2020 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Guidelines compares their recommendations for AS based on the evidence to date. The European and American guidelines were generally congruent with the exception of three key distinctions. First, the European guidelines recommend intervening at a left ventricular ejection fraction of 55%, compared with 60% over serial imaging by the American guidelines for asymptomatic patients. Second, the European guidelines recommend a threshold of ≥65 years for surgical bioprosthesis, whereas the American guidelines employ multiple age categories, providing latitude for patient factors and preferences. Third, the guidelines endorse different age cut-offs for transcatheter vs. surgical aortic valve replacement, despite limited evidence. This review also discusses trends indicating a decreasing proportion of mechanical valve replacements. Finally, the review identifies gaps in the literature for areas including transcatheter aortic valve implantation in asymptomatic patients, the appropriateness of Ross procedures, concomitant coronary revascularization with aortic valve replacement, and bicuspid AS. To summarize, this state of the art review compares the latest European and American guidelines on the management of AS to highlight three areas of divergence: timing of intervention, valve selection, and surgical vs. transcatheter aortic valve replacement criteria.

Methodological Standards for the Design, Implementation, and Analysis of Randomized Trials in Cardiac Surgery: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

Cardiac surgery presents specific methodological challenges in the design, implementation, and analysis of randomized controlled trials. The purposes of this scientific statement are to review key standards in cardiac surgery randomized trial design and implementation, and to provide recommendations for conducting and interpreting cardiac surgery trials. Recommendations include a careful evaluation of the suitability of the research question for a clinical trial, assessment of clinical equipoise, feasibility of enrolling a representative patient cohort, impact of practice variations on the safety and efficacy of the study intervention, likelihood and impact of crossover, and duration of follow-up. Trial interventions and study end points should be predefined, and appropriate strategies must be used to ensure adequate deliverability of the trial interventions. Every effort must be made to ensure a high completeness of follow-up; trial design and analytic techniques must be tailored to the specific research question and trial setting.

2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Coronary Artery Revascularization: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

AIM: The executive summary of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions coronary artery revascularization guideline provides the top 10 items readers should know about the guideline. In the full guideline, the recommendations replace the 2011 coronary artery bypass graft surgery guideline and the 2011 and 2015 percutaneous coronary intervention guidelines. This summary offers a patient-centric approach to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with significant coronary artery disease undergoing coronary revascularization, as well as the supporting documentation to encourage their use. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2019 to September 2019, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, CINHL Complete, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through May 2021, were also considered. Structure: Recommendations from the earlier percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass graft surgery guidelines have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians in caring for patients undergoing coronary revascularization. This summary includes recommendations, tables, and figures from the full guideline that relate to the top 10 take-home messages. The reader is referred to the full guideline for graphical flow charts, supportive text, and tables with additional details about the rationale for and implementation of each recommendation, and the evidence tables detailing the data considered in the development of this guideline.

The Use of Intraoperative Transit Time Flow Measurement for Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery: Systematic Review of the Evidence and Expert Opinion Statements.

Transit time flow measurement (TTFM) allows quality control in coronary artery bypass grafting but remains largely underused, probably because of limited information and the lack of standardization. We performed a systematic review of the evidence on TTFM and other methods for quality control in coronary artery bypass grafting following PRISMA standards and elaborated expert recommendations by using a structured process. A panel of 19 experts took part in the consensus process using a 3-step modified Delphi method that consisted of 2 rounds of electronic voting and a final face-to-face virtual meeting. Eighty percent agreement was required for acceptance of the statements. A 2-level scale (strong, moderate) was used to grade the statements based on the perceived likelihood of a clinical benefit. The existing evidence supports an association between TTFM readings and graft patency and postoperative clinical outcomes, although there is high methodological heterogeneity among the published series. The evidence is more robust for arterial, rather than venous, grafts and for grafts to the left anterior descending artery. Although TTFM use increases the duration and the cost of surgery, there are no data to quantify this effect. Based on the systematic review, 10 expert statements for TTFM use in clinical practice were formulated. Six were approved at the first round of voting, 3 at the second round, and 1 at the virtual meeting. In conclusion, although TTFM use may increase the costs and duration of the procedure and requires a learning curve, its cost/benefit ratio seems largely favorable, in view of the potential clinical consequences of graft dysfunction. These consensus statements will help to standardize the use of TTFM in clinical practice and provide guidance in clinical decision-making.

Posterior left pericardiotomy for the prevention of atrial fibrillation after cardiac surgery: an adaptive, single-centre, single-blind, randomised, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation is the most common complication after cardiac surgery and is associated with extended in-hospital stay and increased adverse outcomes, including death and stroke. Pericardial effusion is common after cardiac surgery and can trigger atrial fibrillation. We tested the hypothesis that posterior left pericardiotomy, a surgical manoeuvre that drains the pericardial space into the left pleural cavity, might reduce the incidence of atrial fibrillation after cardiac surgery. METHODS: In this adaptive, randomised, controlled trial, we recruited adult patients (aged ≥18 years) undergoing elective interventions on the coronary arteries, aortic valve, or ascending aorta, or a combination of these, performed by members of the Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery from Weill Cornell Medicine at the New York Presbyterian Hospital in New York, NY, USA. Patients were eligible if they had no history of atrial fibrillation or other arrhythmias or contraindications to the experimental intervention. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1), stratified by CHA2DS2-VASc score and using a mixed-block randomisation approach (block sizes of 4, 6, and 8), to posterior left pericardiotomy or no intervention. Patients and assessors were blinded to treatment assignment. Patients were followed up until 30 days after hospital discharge. The primary outcome was the incidence of atrial fibrillation during postoperative in-hospital stay, which was assessed in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. Safety was assessed in the as-treated population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02875405, and is now complete. FINDINGS: Between Sept 18, 2017, and Aug 2, 2021, 3601 patients were screened and 420 were included and randomly assigned to the posterior left pericardiotomy group (n=212) or the no intervention group (n=208; ITT population). The median age was 61·0 years (IQR 53·0-70·0), 102 (24%) patients were female, and 318 (76%) were male, with a median CHA2DS2-VASc score of 2·0 (IQR 1·0-3·0). The two groups were balanced with respect to clinical and surgical characteristics. No patients were lost to follow-up and data completeness was 100%. Three patients in the posterior left pericardiotomy group did not receive the intervention. In the ITT population, the incidence of postoperative atrial fibrillation was significantly lower in the posterior left pericardiotomy group than in the no intervention group (37 [17%] of 212 vs 66 [32%] of 208 [p=0·0007]; odds ratio adjusted for the stratification variable 0·44 [95% CI 0·27-0·70; p=0·0005]). Two (1%) of 209 patients in the posterior left pericardiotomy group and one (<1%) of 211 in the no intervention group died within 30 days after hospital discharge. The incidence of postoperative pericardial effusion was lower in the posterior left pericardiotomy group than in the no intervention group (26 [12%] of 209 vs 45 [21%] of 211; relative risk 0·58 [95% CI 0·37-0·91]). Postoperative major adverse events occurred in six (3%) patients in the posterior left pericardiotomy group and in four (2%) in the no intervention group. No posterior left pericardiotomy related complications were seen. INTERPRETATION: Posterior left pericardiotomy is highly effective in reducing the incidence of atrial fibrillation after surgery on the coronary arteries, aortic valve, or ascending aorta, or a combination of these without additional risk of postoperative complications. FUNDING: None.

Is the world ready for the STICH 3.0 trial?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Coronary artery disease (CAD) is responsible for >50% of heart failures cases. Patients with ischemic left ventricular systolic dysfunction (iLVSD) are known to have poorer outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) compared to patients with a normal ejection fraction. Nevertheless, <1% of patients in coronary revascularization trials to date had iLVSD. The purpose of this review is to describe coronary revascularization modalities in patients with iLVSD and highlight the need for randomized controlled trial evidence comparing these treatments in this patient population. RECENT FINDINGS: Network meta-analytic findings of observational studies suggest that PCI is associated with higher rates of mortality, cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularization but not stroke compared to CABG in iLVSD. In recent years, outcomes for patients undergoing PCI have improved as a result of advances in technologies and techniques. SUMMARY: The optimal coronary revascularization modality in patients with iLVSD remains unknown. In observational studies, CABG appears superior to PCI; however, direct randomized evidence is absent and developments in PCI techniques have improved post-PCI outcomes in recent years. The Surgical Treatment for Ischemic Heart Failure 3.0 consortium of trials will seek to address the clinical equipoise in coronary revascularization in patients with iLVSD.

Sweet victory: Optimizing glycemic control after coronary artery bypass grafting.

Poor glycemic control, regardless of patients' diabetic status, is associated with worse outcomes after coronary artery bypass grafting. As a result, in the perioperative and postoperative setting, the use of insulin is recommended to maintain glucose levels below 180 mg/dl (10.0 mmol/L). However, challenges exist and errors may occur that can prohibit adequate glucose management. In this commentary, we highlight a real-world example of an educational intervention to empower health workers in managing patients' glucose levels after coronary artery bypass grafting in order to improve postoperative outcomes. We discuss the current evidence and guidelines on peri- and postoperative glycemic control for patients undergoing cardiac surgery and present further quality improvement opportunities that may be introduced.

The association between coronary graft patency and clinical status in patients with coronary artery disease.

The concept of a direct association between coronary graft patency and clinical status is generally accepted. However, the relationship is more complex and variable than usually thought. Key issues are the lack of a common definition of graft occlusion and of a standardized imaging protocol for patients undergoing coronary bypass surgery. Factors like the type of graft, the timing of the occlusion, and the amount of myocardium at risk, as well as baseline patients' characteristics, modulate the patency-to-clinical status association. Available evidence suggests that graft occlusion is more often associated with non-fatal events rather than death. Also, graft failure due to competitive flow is generally a benign event, while graft occlusion in a graft-dependent circulation is associated with clinical symptoms. In this systematic review, we summarize the evidence on the association between graft status and clinical outcomes.

Sex differences in outcomes after coronary artery bypass grafting: a pooled analysis of individual patient data.

AIMS: Data suggest that women have worse outcomes than men after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), but results have been inconsistent across studies. Due to the large differences in baseline characteristics between sexes, suboptimal risk adjustment due to low-quality data may be the reason for the observed differences. To overcome this limitation, we undertook a systematic review and pooled analysis of high-quality individual patient data from large CABG trials to compare the adjusted outcomes of women and men. METHODS AND RESULTS: The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and repeat revascularization (major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, MACCE). The secondary outcome was all-cause mortality. Multivariable mixed-effect Cox regression was used. Four trials involving 13 193 patients (10 479 males; 2714 females) were included. Over 5 years of follow-up, women had a significantly higher risk of MACCE [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04-1.21; P = 0.004] but similar mortality (adjusted HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.94-1.14; P = 0.51) compared to men. Women had higher incidence of MI (adjusted HR 1.30, 95% CI 1.11-1.52) and repeat revascularization (adjusted HR 1.22, 95% CI 1.04-1.43) but not stroke (adjusted HR 1.17, 95% CI 0.90-1.52). The difference in MACCE between sexes was not significant in patients 75 years and older. The use of off-pump surgery and multiple arterial grafting did not modify the difference between sexes. CONCLUSIONS: Women have worse outcomes than men in the first 5 years after CABG. This difference is not significant in patients aged over 75 years and is not affected by the surgical technique.

Association of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy With Ticagrelor With Vein Graft Failure After Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Importance: The role of ticagrelor with or without aspirin after coronary artery bypass graft surgery remains unclear. Objective: To compare the risks of vein graft failure and bleeding associated with ticagrelor dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) or ticagrelor monotherapy vs aspirin among patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Data Sources: MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases from inception to June 1, 2022, without language restriction. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing the effects of ticagrelor DAPT or ticagrelor monotherapy vs aspirin on saphenous vein graft failure. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Individual patient data provided by each trial were synthesized into a combined data set for independent analysis. Multilevel logistic regression models were used. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary analysis assessed the incidence of saphenous vein graft failure per graft (primary outcome) in RCTs comparing ticagrelor DAPT with aspirin. Secondary outcomes were saphenous vein graft failure per patient and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding events. A supplementary analysis included RCTs comparing ticagrelor monotherapy with aspirin. Results: A total of 4 RCTs were included in the meta-analysis, involving 1316 patients and 1668 saphenous vein grafts. Of the 871 patients in the primary analysis, 435 received ticagrelor DAPT (median age, 67 years [IQR, 60-72 years]; 65 women [14.9%]; 370 men [85.1%]) and 436 received aspirin (median age, 66 years [IQR, 61-73 years]; 63 women [14.5%]; 373 men [85.5%]). Ticagrelor DAPT was associated with a significantly lower incidence of saphenous vein graft failure (11.2%) per graft than was aspirin (20%; difference, -8.7% [95% CI, -13.5% to -3.9%]; OR, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.35 to 0.74]; P < .001) and was associated with a significantly lower incidence of saphenous vein graft failure per patient (13.2% vs 23.0%, difference, -9.7% [95% CI, -14.9% to -4.4%]; OR, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.35 to 0.74]; P < .001). Ticagrelor DAPT (22.1%) was associated with a significantly higher incidence of BARC type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding events than was aspirin (8.7%; difference, 13.3% [95% CI, 8.6% to 18.0%]; OR, 2.98 [95% CI, 1.99 to 4.47]; P < .001), but not BARC type 3 or 5 bleeding events (1.8% vs 1.8%, difference, 0% [95% CI, -1.8% to 1.8%]; OR, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.37 to 2.69]; P = .99). Compared with aspirin, ticagrelor monotherapy was not significantly associated with saphenous vein graft failure (19.3% vs 21.7%, difference, -2.6% [95% CI, -9.1% to 3.9%]; OR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.58 to 1.27]; P = .44) or BARC type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding events (8.9% vs 7.3%, difference, 1.7% [95% CI, -2.8% to 6.1%]; OR, 1.25 [95% CI, 0.69 to 2.29]; P = .46). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery, adding ticagrelor to aspirin was associated with a significantly decreased risk of vein graft failure. However, this was accompanied by a significantly increased risk of clinically important bleeding.

Considerations for Reduction of Risk of Perioperative Stroke in Adult Patients Undergoing Cardiac and Thoracic Aortic Operations: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

Perioperative stroke is one of the most severe and feared complications of cardiac surgery. Based on the timing of onset and detection, perioperative stroke can be classified as intraoperative or postoperative. The pathogenesis of perioperative stroke is multifactorial, which makes prediction and prevention challenging. However, information on its incidence, mechanisms, diagnosis, and treatment can be helpful in minimizing the perioperative neurological risk for individual patients. We herein provide suggestions on preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative strategies aimed at reducing the risk of perioperative stroke and at improving the outcomes of patients who experience a perioperative stroke.

Impact of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Durability on Life Expectancy in Low-Risk Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis.

BACKGROUND: Recent clinical trial results showed that transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is noninferior and may be superior to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for mortality, stroke, and rehospitalization. However, the impact of transcatheter valve durability remains uncertain. METHODS: Discrete event simulation was used to model hypothetical scenarios of TAVR versus SAVR durability in which TAVR failure times were varied to determine the impact of TAVR valve durability on life expectancy in a cohort of low-risk patients similar to those in recent trials. Discrete event simulation modeling was used to estimate the tradeoff between a less invasive procedure with unknown valve durability (TAVR) and that of a more invasive procedure with known durability (SAVR). Standardized differences were calculated, and a difference >0.10 was considered clinically significant. In the base-case analysis, patients with structural valve deterioration requiring reoperation were assumed to undergo a valve-in-valve TAVR procedure. A sensitivity analysis was conducted to determine the impact of TAVR valve durability on life expectancy in younger age groups (40, 50, and 60 years). RESULTS: Our cohort consisted of patients with aortic stenosis at low surgical risk with a mean age of 73.4±5.9 years. In the base-case scenario, the standardized difference in life expectancy was <0.10 between TAVR and SAVR until transcatheter valve prosthesis failure time was 70% shorter than that of surgical prostheses. At a transcatheter valve failure time <30% compared with surgical valves, SAVR was the preferred option. In younger patients, life expectancy was reduced when TAVR durability was 30%, 40%, and 50% shorter than that of surgical valves in 40-, 50-, and 60-year-old patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: According to our simulation models, the durability of TAVR valves must be 70% shorter than that of surgical valves to result in reduced life expectancy in patients with demographics similar to those of recent trials. However, in younger patients, this threshold for TAVR valve durability was substantially higher. These findings suggest that durability concerns should not influence the initial treatment decision concerning TAVR versus SAVR in older low-risk patients on the basis of current evidence supporting TAVR valve durability. However, in younger low-risk patients, valve durability must be weighed against other patient factors such as life expectancy.

On clinical trial fragility due to patients lost to follow up.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials routinely have patients lost to follow up. We propose a methodology to understand their possible effect on the results of statistical tests by altering the concept of the fragility index to treat the outcomes of observed patients as fixed but incorporate the potential outcomes of patients lost to follow up as random and subject to modification. METHODS: We reanalyse the statistical results of three clinical trials on coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) to study the possible effect of patients lost to follow up on the treatment effect statistical significance. To do so, we introduce the LTFU-aware fragility indices as a measure of the robustness of a clinical trial's statistical results with respect to patients lost to follow up. RESULTS: The analyses illustrate that clinical trials can either be completely robust to the outcomes of patients lost to follow up, extremely sensitive to the outcomes of patients lost to follow up, or in an intermediate state. When a clinical trial is in an intermediate state, the LTFU-aware fragility indices provide an interpretable measure to quantify the degree of fragility or robustness. CONCLUSIONS: The LTFU-aware fragility indices allow researchers to rigorously explore the outcomes of patients who are lost to follow up, when their data is the appropriate kind. The LTFU-aware fragility indices are sensitivity measures in a way that the original fragility index is not.

Decision analysis and personalized clinical tool for cerebrospinal fluid drains in thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms repair.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The routine use of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) drainage in patients undergoing operative repair of thoracoabdominal aneurysms (TAAA) has been associated with decreased rates of spinal cord ischemia. The use of CSF drains is not without consequence, however with complications including subarachnoid hemorrhage, epidural hematoma, meningitis, and, in 1% of cases, death. To date, a decision analysis tool to help clinicians decide when to use and not to use a CSF drain does not exist. In this analysis, we set out to develop a decision analysis tool for CSF drain placement in patients undergoing operative repair of TAAA. METHODS: A Markov state-transition cohort model that compared TAAA repair with adjunctive CSF drain insertion to TAAA repair without drain insertion for the outcome of life expectancy was developed in TreeAge 2020. The cycle length was 1 month and the time horizon was 60 months. RESULTS: The use of a CSF drain was associated with improved 5-year life expectancy (3.21 ± 0.10 vs. 3.09 ± 0.11 life-years gained). In the sensitivity analysis that varied the effectiveness of a CSF drain (odds ratio closer to 1 = less effective), the use of a CSF drain resulted in higher life expectancy in almost all scenarios. CONCLUSIONS: The routine use of a CSF drain in patients undergoing TAAA repair is safe and effective, with few exceptions. This decision analysis tool can be used by clinicians to develop a personalized approach.

Cardiac surgeons' concerns, perceptions, and responses during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had an unprecedented impact on health care and cardiac surgery. We report cardiac surgeons' concerns, perceptions, and responses during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A detailed survey was sent to recruit participating adult cardiac surgery centers in North America. Data regarding cardiac surgeons' perceptions and changes in practice were analyzed. RESULTS: Our study comprises 67 institutions with diverse geographic distribution across North America. Nurses were most likely to be redeployed (88%), followed by advanced care practitioners (69%), trainees (28%), and surgeons (25%). Examining surgeon concerns in regard to COVID-19, they were most worried with exposing their family to COVID-19 (81%), followed by contracting COVID-19 (68%), running out of personal protective equipment (PPE) (28%), and hospital resources (28%). In terms of PPE conservation strategies among users of N95 respirators, nearly half were recycling via decontamination with ultraviolet light (49%), followed by sterilization with heat (13%) and at home or with other modalities (13%). Reuse of N95 respirators for 1 day (22%), 1 week (21%) or 1 month (6%) was reported. There were differences in adoption of methods to conserve N95 respirators based on institutional pandemic phase and COVID-19 burden, with higher COVID-19 burden institutions more likely to resort to PPE conservation strategies. CONCLUSIONS: The present study demonstrates the impact of COVID-19 on North American cardiac surgeons. Our study should stimulate further discussions to identify optimal solutions to improve workforce preparedness for subsequent surges, as well as facilitate the navigation of future healthcare crises.