Thoracoabdominal Normothermic Regional Perfusion Using Mobile Closed Extracorporeal Circuit in Circulatory Death Determination Heart Donors.

Thoracoabdominal normothermic regional perfusion (TA-NRP) is increasingly implemented in donation after circulatory determination of death (DCD). Thoracoabdominal normothermic regional perfusion allows thoracic and abdominal organs to be perfused with warm, oxygenated blood after declaration of death, interrupting ischemia. Evidence is accumulating supporting the use of TA-NRP to improve the outcome of grafts from DCD donors. Thoracoabdominal normothermic regional perfusion may restore and maintain a near-physiological environment during procurement. Moreover, during TA-NRP it is feasible to evaluate the heart in situ. Thoracoabdominal normothermic regional perfusion could be performed through different cannulation techniques, central or peripheral, and, with different extracorporeal circuits. The use of conventional cardiopulmonary bypass and extracorporeal life support (ECLS) devices equipped with open circuits has been described. We report the use of a fully mobile, closed ECLS circuit to implement TA-NRP. The procedure was successfully performed in a peripheral center without a cardiac surgery program through a percutaneous cannulation approach. This strategy resulted in combined heart, liver, and kidney recovery despite a significantly prolonged functional warm ischemia time. The feasibility of TA-NRP using modified but still closed fully mobile ECLS circuits could furtherly support the expansion of DCD programs, increasing the availability of heart for transplantation, and the quality of the grafts, improving recipients' outcome.

Post-cardiotomy extracorporeal life support: A cohort of cannulation in the general ward.

OBJECTIVES: Post-cardiotomy extracorporeal life support (ECLS) cannulation might occur in a general post-operative ward due to emergent conditions. Its characteristics have been poorly reported and investigated This study investigates the characteristics and outcomes of adult patients receiving ECLS cannulation in a general post-operative cardiac ward. METHODS: The Post-cardiotomy Extracorporeal Life Support (PELS) is a retrospective (2000-2020), multicenter (34 centers), observational study including adult patients who required ECLS for post-cardiotomy shock. This PELS sub-analysis analyzed patients´ characteristics, in-hospital outcomes, and long-term survival in patients cannulated for veno-arterial ECLS in the general ward, and further compared in-hospital survivors and non-survivors. RESULTS: The PELS study included 2058 patients of whom 39 (1.9%) were cannulated in the general ward. Most patients underwent isolated coronary bypass grafting (CABG, n = 15, 38.5%) or isolated non-CABG operations (n = 20, 51.3%). The main indications to initiate ECLS included cardiac arrest (n = 17, 44.7%) and cardiogenic shock (n = 14, 35.9%). ECLS cannulation occurred after a median time of 4 (2-7) days post-operatively. Most patients' courses were complicated by acute kidney injury (n = 23, 59%), arrhythmias (n = 19, 48.7%), and postoperative bleeding (n = 20, 51.3%). In-hospital mortality was 84.6% (n = 33) with persistent heart failure (n = 11, 28.2%) as the most common cause of death. No peculiar differences were observed between in-hospital survivors and nonsurvivors. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that ECLS cannulation due to post-cardiotomy emergent adverse events in the general ward is rare, mainly occurring in preoperative low-risk patients and after a postoperative cardiac arrest. High complication rates and low in-hospital survival require further investigations to identify patients at risk for such a complication, optimize resources, enhance intervention, and improve outcomes.

Reoperative aortic root surgery: single-center long-term outcomes and literature review.

Background and Objective: Reoperative aortic root surgery has become more and more common over the years and is considered high-risk, with significantly worse outcomes compared to first-procedure root surgery. At our institution, this kind of surgery is frequently performed. The aim of the present review is to describe currently available literature on reoperative surgery on the aortic root in terms of patients' population, indications for surgery and outcomes and to present our center's experience on the matter. Methods: A literature review was performed in order to identify pertinent studies. They were then compared and described. We also described preoperative characteristics, operative strategies and outcomes of all the patients who underwent redo aortic root surgery from January 1986 to December 2022 at our center. Key Content and Findings: Our literature review identified 12 pertinent studies, with a total of 16,627 considered patients. The most frequent indications for redo surgery were endocarditis (35.5%), aneurysm, dissection and pseudoaneurysm. Mean cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) and cross-clamp times were 218 and 152 minutes, respectively. In-hospital mortality was 12%. When analyzing our center's data, 344 procedures were identified. Aortic root dilation was the most frequent indication (36.9%). Mean CPB and cross-clamp times were 218.0±78.8 and 158.2±49.7 minutes, respectively. In-hospital mortality was 9.6%. Survival at 5 and 15 years was 76.1% and 51.4% respectively. Freedom from further aortic reintervention was 88.1% after 5 years and 64.9% after 15 years. Conclusions: Reoperative aortic root surgery is a difficult cardiac procedure which is linked to significantly higher mortality than first-time root replacement. If it is performed by experienced surgeons with a careful preoperative planning its result can still be satisfactory. Our results showed acceptable rates of mortality and reinterventions at follow-up. Endocarditis, however, was linked to worse outcomes.

Marfan and Loeys-Dietz aortic phenotype: A potential tool for diagnosis and management.

Objective: In heritable aortic diseases, different vascular involvement may occur with potential variable implications in aortic dilation/dissection risk. This study aimed to analyze the aortic anatomy of individuals with Marfan syndrome and Loeys-Dietz syndrome to identify possible morphological differences. Methods: Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging of the thoracoabdominal aorta from the proximal supra-aortic vessels to the femoral bifurcation level of 114 patients with Marfan and Loeys-Dietz syndromes and 20 matched control subjects were examined. Aortic diameters, areas, length, and tortuosity were measured in different aortic segments using specific vessel analysis software. Results: Patients with Marfan syndrome showed a higher prevalence of ascending aorta and aortic root dilation (P = .011), larger and longer aortic roots (P = .013) with pear-shaped phenotype, larger isthmus/descending aorta diameter ratio (P = .015), and larger suprarenal aorta and iliac arteries. Patients with Loeys-Dietz syndrome showed longer indexed segments and a significantly longer arch (P = .006) with type 2/3 arch prevalence (P = .097). Measurement ratios analysis provided cut-off values (aortic root to ascending aorta length/aortic root diameter, aortic root/sinotubular junction, aortic root/ascending aorta diameter) differentiating patients with Marfan syndrome from patients with Loeys-Dietz syndrome, even in the early stage of the disease. Conclusions: Both syndromes show peculiar anatomic patterns at different aortic levels irrespective of aortic dilation and disease severity. These features may represent the expression of different genetic mutations on aortic development, with a potential impact on prognosis and possibly contributing to better management of the diseases. The systematic adoption of whole body imaging with magnetic resonance or computed tomography should always be considered, because they allow a complete vascular assessment with practical indicators of differential diagnosis.

Prognostic Value of APACHE IV Score in Patients Bridged to Heart Transplantation on ECMO.

BACKGROUND: Methods for risk stratification of candidates for heart transplantation (HTx) supported by extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) are limited. We evaluated the reliability of the APACHE IV score to identify the risk of mortality in this patient subset in a multicenter study. METHODS: Between January 2010 and December 2022, 167 consecutive ECMO patients were bridged to HTx; they were divided into two groups, according to a cutoff value of APACHE IV score, obtained by receiver operating characteristic curve analysis for 90-day mortality. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were plotted, and compared through the log-Rank test. Cox regression model was used to estimate which factors were associated with survival. RESULTS: The 90-day mortality prediction of the APACHE IV score showed an area under the curve of 0.87 (95% CI: 0.80-0.94), with a cutoff value of 49 (specificity 91.7%-sensibility 69.6%). 125 patients (74.8%) showed an APACHE IV score value < 49 (Group A), and 42 (25.2%) ≥ 49 (Group B). 90-day mortality was 11.2% in Group A and 76.2% in Group B (p < 0.01). Survival at 1 and 5 years was 85.5%, 77% versus 23.4%, 23.4% (p < 0.01) in Groups A and B. Mortality correlated at univariable analysis with recipient age, body mass index, mechanical ventilation, APACHE IV score, and platelets number. At multivariable analysis only APACHE IV score (HR: 1.07 [1.05-1.09, 95% CI]) independently affected survival. CONCLUSIONS: The APACHE IV score represents a powerful predictor of survival in patients bridged to HTx on ECMO support, and could guide candidacy of patients on ECMO.

Impella versus VA-ECMO for the treatment of patients with cardiogenic shock: the Impella Network Project - observational study protocol for cost-effectiveness and budget impact analyses.

INTRODUCTION: The treatment of patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) encompasses several health technologies including Impella pumps and venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO). However, while they are widely used in clinical practice, information on resource use and quality of life (QoL) associated with these devices is scarce. The aim of this study is, therefore, to collect and comparatively assess clinical and socioeconomic data of Impella versus VA-ECMO for the treatment of patients with severe CS, to ultimately conduct both a cost-effectiveness (CEA) and budget impact (BIA) analyses. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a prospective plus retrospective, multicentre study conducted under the scientific coordination of the Center for Research on Health and Social Care Management of SDA Bocconi School of Management and clinical coordination of Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS) San Raffaele Scientific Institute in Milan. The Impella Network stemmed for the purposes of this study and comprises 17 Italian clinical centres from Northern to Southern Regions in Italy. The Italian network qualifies as a subgroup of the international Impella Cardiac Surgery Registry. Patients with CS treated with Impella pumps (CP, 5.0 or 5.5) will be prospectively recruited, and information on clinical outcomes, resource use and QoL collected. Economic data will be retrospectively matched with data from comparable patients treated with VA-ECMO. Both CEA and BIA will be conducted adopting the societal perspective in Italy. This study will contribute to generate new socioeconomic evidence to inform future coverage decisions. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: As of May 2024, most of the clinical centres submitted the documentation to their ethical committee (N=13; 76%), six centres received ethical approval and two centres started to enrol patients. Study results will be published in peer-reviewed publications and disseminated through conference presentations.

Open, endovascular or hybrid repair of aortic arch disease: narrative review of diverse strategies with diverse options.

OBJECTIVES: The management of aortic arch disease is complex. Open surgical management continues to evolve, and the introduction of endovascular repair is revolutionizing aortic arch surgery. Although these innovative techniques have generated the opportunity for better outcomes in select patients, they have also introduced confusion and uncertainty regarding best practices. METHODS: In New York, we developed a collaborative group, the New York Aortic Consortium, as a means of cross-linking knowledge and working together to better understand and treat aortic disease. In our meeting in May 2023, regional aortic experts and invited international experts discussed the contemporary management of aortic arch disease, differences in interpretation of the available literature and the integration of endovascular technology into disease management. We summarized the current state of aortic arch surgery in this review article. RESULTS: Approaches to aortic arch repair have evolved substantially, whether it be methods to reduce cerebral ischaemia, improve haemostasis, simplify future operations or expand options for high-risk patients with endovascular approaches. However, the transverse aortic arch remains challenging to repair. Among our collaborative group of cardiac/aortic surgeons, we discovered a wide disparity in our practice patterns and our management strategies of patients with aortic arch disease. CONCLUSIONS: It is important to build unique institutional expertise in the context of complex and evolving management of aortic arch disease with open surgery, endovascular repair and hybrid approaches, tailored to the risk profiles and anatomical specifics of individual patients.

[Stroke and stroke prevention in cardiac and thoracic aortic surgery]. / Ictus e prevenzione dell'ictus in cardiochirurgia e in chirurgia dell'aorta toracica.

Perioperative stroke and neurological injuries in general are complications that can occur during and after cardiac surgery, particularly in aortic surgery that involves the aortic arch. The overall incidence of early and delayed stroke is about 1% according to recent meta-analyses. This incidence depends on interindividual risk factor profile and type of surgery. In order to reduce cerebrovascular complications during cardiac surgery, a number of preventative measures can be taken, including the evaluation of atherosclerotic plaques, the site of cannulation and neuroprotection strategies. During aortic arch surgery, main strategies for cerebral protection are represented by deep hypothermic circulatory arrest, retrograde and antegrade cerebral perfusion.

Axillary vs Femoral Arterial Cannulation in Acute Type A Dissection: International Multicenter Data.

BACKGROUND: Cannulation strategy in acute type A dissection (ATAD) varies widely without known gold standards. This study compared ATAD outcomes of axillary vs femoral artery cannulation in a large cohort from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD). METHODS: The study retrospectively reviewed 2145 patients from the IRAD Interventional Cohort (1996-2021) who underwent ATAD repair with axillary or femoral cannulation (axillary group: n = 1106 [52%]; femoral group: n = 1039 [48%]). End points included the following: early mortality; neurologic, respiratory, and renal complications; malperfusion; and tamponade. All outcomes are presented as axillary with respect to femoral. RESULTS: The proportion of patients younger than 70 years in both groups was similar (n = 1577 [74%]), as were bicuspid aortic valve, Marfan syndrome, and previous dissection. Patients with femoral cannulation had slightly more aortic insufficiency (408 [55%] vs 429 [60%]; P = .058) and coronary involvement (48 [8%] vs 70 [13%]; P = .022]. Patients with axillary cannulation underwent more total aortic arch (156 [15%] vs 106 [11%]; P = .02) and valve-sparing root replacements (220 [22%] vs 112 [12%]; P < .001). More patients with femoral cannulation underwent commissural resuspension (269 [30.9%] vs 324 [35.3%]; P = .05). Valve replacement rates were not different. The mean duration of cardiopulmonary bypass was longer in the femoral group (190 [149-237] minutes vs 196 [159-247] minutes; P = .037). In-hospital mortality was similar between the axillary (n = 165 [15%]) and femoral (n = 149 [14%]) groups (P = .7). Furthermore, there were no differences in stroke, visceral ischemia, tamponade, respiratory insufficiency, coma, or spinal cord ischemia. CONCLUSIONS: Axillary cannulation is associated with a more stable ATAD presentation, but it is a more extensive intervention compared with femoral cannulation. Both procedures have equivalent early mortality, stroke, tamponade, and malperfusion outcomes after statistical adjustment.

Pacemaker implantation after concomitant tricuspid valve repair in patients undergoing minimally invasive mitral valve surgery: Results from the Mini-Mitral International Registry.

Objective: Randomized evidence suggests a high risk of pacemaker implantation for patients undergoing mitral valve (MV) surgery with concomitant tricuspid valve repair (cTVR). We investigated the impact of cTVR on outcomes in the Mini-Mitral International Registry. Methods: From 2015 to 2021, 7513 patients underwent minimally invasive MV with or without cTVR in 17 international centers (MV: n = 5609, cTVR: n = 1113). Propensity matching generated 1110 well-balanced pairs. Multivariable analysis was applied. Results: Patients with cTVR were older and had more comorbidities. Propensity matching eliminated most differences except for more TR in patients who underwent cTVR (77.2% vs 22.1% MV, P < .001). Mean matched age was 71 years, and 45% were male. European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II was still 2.68% (interquartile range [IQR], 0.80-2.63) vs 1.9% (IQR, 1.12-3.9) in matched MV (P < .001). MV replacement (30%) and atrial fibrillation surgery (32%) were similar in both groups. Cardiopulmonary bypass (161 minutes [IQR, 133-203] vs MV: 130 minutes [IQR, 103-166]; P < .001) and crossclamp times (93 minutes [IQR, 66-123] vs MV: 83 minutes [IQR, 64-107]; P < .001) were longer with cTVR. Although in-hospital mortality was similar (cTVR: 3.3% vs MV: 2.2%; P = .5), postoperative pacemaker implantations (9% vs MV: 5.8%; P = .02), low cardiac output syndrome (7.7% vs MV: 4.4%; P = .02), and acute kidney injury (13.8% vs MV: 10%; P = .01) were more frequent with cTVR. cTVR eliminated relevant TR in most patients (greater-than-moderate TR: 6.8%). Multivariable analysis identified MV replacement, atrial fibrillation, and cTVR as risk factors of postoperative pacemaker implantation. Conclusions: cTVR in minimally invasive MV surgery is an independent risk factor for pacemaker implantation in this international registry. It is also associated with more bleeding, low output syndrome, and acute kidney injury. It remains unclear whether technical or patient factors (or both) explain these differences.

Is surgical risk of aortic arch aneurysm repair underestimated? A novel perspective based on 30-day versus 1-year mortality.

OBJECTIVES: The decision to undergo aortic aneurysm repair balances the risk of operation with the risk of aortic complications. The surgical risk is typically represented by perioperative mortality, while the aneurysmal risk relates to the 1-year risk of aortic events. We investigate the difference in 30-day and 1-year mortality after total arch replacement for aortic aneurysm. METHODS: This was an international two-centre study of 456 patients who underwent total aortic arch replacement for aneurysm between 2006 and 2020. Our primary end-point of interest was 1-year mortality. Our secondary analysis determined which variables were associated with 1-year mortality. RESULTS: The median age of patients was 65.4 years (interquartile range 55.1-71.1) and 118 (25.9%) were female. Concomitantly, 91 (20.0%) patients had either an aortic root replacement or aortic valve procedure. There was a drop in 1-year (81%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 78-85%) survival probability compared to 30-day (92%, 95% CI 90-95%) survival probability. Risk hazards regression showed the greatest risk of mortality in the first 4 months after discharge. Stroke [hazard ratio (HR) 2.54, 95% CI (1.16-5.58)], renal failure [HR 3.59 (1.78-7.25)], respiratory failure [HR 3.65 (1.79-7.42)] and reoperation for bleeding [HR 2.97 (1.36-6.46)] were associated with 1-year mortality in patients who survived 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: There is an increase in mortality up to 1 year after aortic arch replacement. This increase is prominent in the first 4 months and is associated with postoperative complications, implying the influence of surgical insult. Mortality beyond the short term may be considered in assessing surgical risk in patients who are undergoing total arch replacement.

Long-Term Atrioventricular Block Following Valve Surgery: Electrocardiographic and Surgical Predictors.

BACKGROUND: Bradyarrhythmia requiring pacemaker implantation among patients undergoing valve surgery may occur even after several years, with unclear predictors. Our aim was to investigate the incidence of pacemaker implantation at different follow-up times and identify associated predictors. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study evaluating 1046 consecutive patients who underwent valve surgery at the Cardiac Surgery Division of Bologna University Hospital from 2005 to 2010. RESULTS: During 10 ± 4 years of follow-up, 11.4% of these patients required pacemaker implantation. Interventions on both atrioventricular valves independently predicted long-term pacemaker implantation (SHR 2.1, 95% CI 1.2-3.8, p = 0.014). Preoperative atrioventricular conduction disease strongly predicted long-term atrioventricular block, with right bundle branch block as the major predictor (SHR 7.0, 95% CI 3.9-12.4, p < 0.001), followed by left bundle branch block (SHR 4.9, 95% CI 2.4-10.1, p < 0.001), and left anterior fascicular block (SHR 3.9, 95% CI 1.8-8.3, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing valvular surgery have a continuing risk of atrioventricular block late after surgery until the 12-month follow-up, which was clearly superior to the rate of atrioventricular block observed at long-term. Pre-operative atrioventricular conduction disease and combined surgery on both atrioventricular valves are strong predictors of atrioventricular block requiring pacemaker implantation.

Frozen elephant trunk technique using hybrid grafts: 15-year outcomes from a single-centre experience.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the study is to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of the frozen elephant trunk (FET) technique based on 2 different hybrid grafts implanted from January 2007 to July 2022. METHODS: The study includes patients who underwent an elective or emergency FET procedure. Short-term, long-term mortality and freedom from thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) were the primary end points. Analyses were carried out separately for the periods 2007-2012 and 2013-2022. RESULTS: Of the 367 enrolled, 49.3% received E-Vita Open implantation and 50.7% received Thoraflex Hybrid implants. Overall mean age was 61 years [standard deviation (SD) = 11] and 80.7% were male. The average annual volume of FET procedures was 22.7 cases/year. Compared to E-Vita Open, patients implanted with Thoraflex Hybrid grafts were more likely to receive distal anastomosis in zone 2 (68.3% vs 11.6%, P < 0.001) with a shorter stent portion, mean = 103mm (SD = 11.3) vs mean = 149 mm (SD = 12.7; P < 0.001) and they underwent a reduced visceral ischaemia time, mean = 42.5 (SD = 14.2) vs mean= 61.0 (SD = 20.2) min, P < 0.001. In the period 2013-2022, overall survival at 1, 2 and 5 years was 74.8%, 72.5% and 63.2% for Thoraflex and 73.2%, 70.7% and 64.1% for E-Vita, without significant differences between groups (log-rank test = 0.01, P = 0.907). Overall freedom from TEVAR at 1, 2 and 5 years was 66.7%, 57.6% and 39.3% for Thoraflex and 79%, 69.7% and 66% for E-Vita, with significant differences between groups (log-rank test = 5.28, P = 0.029). In a competing risk analysis adjusted for chronic/residual aortic syndromes and stent diameter, the Thoraflex group was more likely to receive TEVAR during follow-up (subdistribution hazard ratio SHR = 2.12, 95% confidence interval 1.06-4.22). CONCLUSIONS: The FET technique addresses acute and chronic arch disease with acceptable morbidity and mortality. Downstream endovascular reinterventions are very common during follow-up.

Frozen elephant trunk in acute aortic dissection: a literature review.

Background: Acute aortic dissection is a life-threatening condition that requires urgent surgical treatment. The frozen elephant trunk (FET) technique, including the Thoraflex hybrid prosthesis, has emerged as an effective strategy for treating complex aortic pathologies. With the widespread application of the FET technique, it continues to evolve, aiming to simplify procedures and reduce complications. These advancements provide improved outcomes and help save lives in patients with acute aortic dissection. Methods: For this review, PubMed databases were utilized from inception to March 2023. A descriptive approach was employed to identify and present the evidence regarding the application of the FET technique in acute settings and its clinical implications on the postoperative course. Results: In the reviewed studies, FET was a commonly used treatment approach for acute type A aortic dissection. A comprehensive analysis of 12 studies, comprising over 4056 FET procedures, revealed varying rates of early mortality (up to 21.1%), perioperative stroke (ranging from 2.7 to 18.0%), and spinal cord ischemia (ranging from 0 to 8.2%). During the follow-up period, which ranged from 6 to 108 months, the mortality rate was reported to be as high as 38%. Conclusions: The surgical management of acute aortic dissection remains challenging, but FET has shown promising results. Experienced teams have achieved acceptable in-hospital mortality and stroke rates, along with a lower risk of spinal cord injury compared to conventional repair. Furthermore, the FET technique has demonstrated positive alterations in the structure of the distal aorta, potentially improving long-term survival and reducing the necessity for future procedures.

Staging TEVAR after FET - an exception or the rule?

Purpose: Frozen elephant trunk (FET) was born as an ideal one-step procedure to treat complex arch and descending thoracic aorta pathology. It was then proved that it frequently needs reintervention, which can often be performed by thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) extension since FET provides a safe proximal landing zone. We hereby describe our experience in TEVAR extension after FET, its main indications, technique, and outcomes. Methods: Between 2007 and 2022, 371 patients underwent FET at our center. Of these, 119 needed TEVAR extension. Some required more than one TEVAR, with a total of 154 procedures. The preoperative characteristics, indications, and outcomes were analyzed retrospectively. Results: Of 154 TEVAR procedures, 15 were performed in an urgent setting. Mean time from FET to TEVAR was 22,2 ± 28,73 months. Two patients died in the operating room; no others died during the hospital stay. Survival after 1, 2, 5, and 10 years was 96.2%, 93.9%, 90.1%, and 70.5% respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in the rates of TEVAR extension for patients in which a Thoraflex™ vs E-vita™ graft was used, nor for zone 2 vs zone 3 anastomosis and stent length. Conclusion: Though TEVAR extension is often required after FET, it is a safe and effective procedure with excellent post-operative outcomes in the short-, mid-, and long-term and allows successful treatment of complex aortic pathologies. Rigorous and specialized follow-up after FET is central to identify the right moment to intervene.