Staged bilateral lung volume reduction surgery - the benefits of a patient-led strategy.

OBJECTIVE: Lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) is conventionally a one-staged bilateral operation. We hypothesised that a more conservative staged bilateral approach determined by the patient not the surgeon would reduce operative risk and prolong the overall benefit. METHODS: In a population of 114 consecutive patients who were identified as suitable for bilateral LVRS an initial cohort of 26 patients (15 male; 11 female, median age: 58 years) underwent one-staged bilateral surgery: 18 by median sternotomy and eight by video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) (group OB). A subsequent cohort of 88 patients had unilateral VATS LVRS with the contralateral operation not scheduled until the patient requested this. Longitudinal follow-up included analysis of lung function, health status (SF 36) and survival. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 2.8 (range: 0-9.9) years, staged bilateral LVRS was performed in 16 patients (10 male; 6 female, median age: 59 years) (group SB) at a median interval of 3.9 (range: 0.7-5.9) years after the first operation. Unilateral LVRS has been performed in 73 patients (43 male; 30 female, median age: 60 years) (group U). There were significant improvements in forced expiratory volume in 1s (FEV1) for 6 months in groups OB and U; in group SB there was a second improvement at 4 years (p<0.05). There were significant reductions in residual volume (RV) and total lung capacity (TLC) in groups OB and U for 2 years; in group SB there was a further significant reduction lasting up to 6 years in TLC (p<0.05) and RV (p<0.01). There were significant improvements in health status lasting up to 1 year in groups OB and U. However, in group SB these improvements lasted for 4 years in the domain of physical functioning and 6 years in the domains of social functioning and energy/vitality. There was no significant difference (p=0.07) in 30-day mortality among groups OB (7.7%), SB (13%) and U (4.1%). Similarly, there was no difference between groups OB and SB/U in 3-year survival (81% vs 77%) or 5-year survival (54% vs 66%). CONCLUSION: A staged bilateral approach to LVRS dictated by patients' perception of their condition appears to lead to a more prolonged overall benefit than one-staged LVRS without compromising survival.

Two-center prospective randomized controlled trial of Blake versus Portex drains after cardiac surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of two drain types after cardiac surgery in a randomized controlled trial, with primary outcome measure being depth of pericardial effusion 3 to 5 days after drain removal. METHODS: A prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted at two university hospitals. A total of 199 patients undergoing first-time cardiac procedures were randomized at surgery to receive either small-bore flexible Blake drains (19F) or larger Portex drains (28F). Drains were removed according to the study protocol and patients underwent echocardiography 3 to 5 days after drain removal to measure residual pericardial effusion. RESULTS: Ninety patients received Blake drains and 109 patients received Portex drains. There were no statistically significant differences in preoperative variables between the groups. There was no difference in the number of drains inserted per patient between groups (Blake 2.1 +/- 0.4 vs Portex 2.0 +/- 0.5). Mean difference in size of pericardial effusion between groups was 1.96 mm (95% confidence interval -0.02, 3.95 mm), which did not exceed the predefined non-inferiority margin of 10 mm. There was no significant difference in the mean maximal hourly drainage rate between groups (Blake 94.7 mL vs Portex 123.1 mL; P = .070) or in the total drainage rates (Blake 541 mL vs Portex 679 mL; P = .066). Although the Blake group had a higher percentage of patients with detectable effusion (46.3% vs 27.4%; P = .011) than the Portex group, there was no difference in need for late drainage of pericardial effusions (1.1% vs 1.9%) or insertion of further chest drains (8.8% vs 7.2%). CONCLUSION: The performance of small-bore Blake drains is not inferior to that of standard Portex drains after cardiac surgery.

Aspire porcine bioprosthesis: ten years' experience.

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: Clinical results of this multicenter study of the Aspire porcine valve were reported previously at eight years; the present report provides an update of valve performance to 10 years postoperatively. METHODS: A total of 749 patients (60% males; mean age 73+/-7 years) underwent implantation with the Aspire (Tissuemed) porcine bioprosthesis between 1991 and 2002, at three institutions. Follow up was complete for 98% of the cohort. The mean follow up period was 51.6+/-39.6 months (range: 0-181 months); total follow up was 3,159 patient-years (pt-yr). RESULTS: There were 617 aortic valve replacements (AVR), 96 mitral valve replacements (MVR) and 32 double valve replacements. There were 62 deaths (8.3%), one of which was valve-related. The late mortality rate was 9.3% per pt-yr (1.2%/pt-yr valve-related). Actuarial freedom from complications at 10 years was: thromboembolism 76+/-4% (2.6%/pt-yr); hemorrhage 73+/-4% (2.8%/pt-yr); structural valve deterioration (SVD) 96+/-2% (0.2%/pt-yr); non-structural deterioration 99+/-1% (0.1%/pt-y); prosthetic valve endocarditis 97+/-1% (0.3%/pt-yr); and reoperation 97+/-1% (0.4%/pt-yr). In patients aged >70 years, the 10-year actuarial freedom from SVD was 98+/-2% for AVR and 93+/-7% for MVR. Preoperative atrial fibrillation (AF) was a significant predictor of late mortality (p <0.001), thromboembolism (p = 0.05) and hemorrhage (p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: The Aspire porcine bioprostheses is a reliable choice for a tissue valve, for both the aortic and mitral positions, especially in patients aged >70 years. In elderly patients the presence of AF is a significant predictor of early and late mortality and morbidity.

The increase in body mass index observed after lung volume reduction may act as surrogate marker of improved health status.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) on body mass index (BMI). METHODS: Prospective data was collected on a series of 63 patients undergoing LVRS (bilateral in 22 patients, unilateral in 41 patients). Median age was 58 (41-70) years. The peri-operative effects of LVRS on BMI, lung function and health status (assessed by SF 36 questionnaire) were recorded at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months. RESULTS: We found an overall increase in BMI after LVRS, which was significant up to 2 years. These changes correlated with the changes in FEV1 (R = 0.3, P < 0.01 6 months after LVRS) and diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCO) (R = 0.5, P < 0.01 6 months after LVRS). At 6 months, when the best results in health status were found, the patients were divided in a responders group (improved SF 36 score) and a non-responders group (same or worse SF 36 score) for each of the 8 domains of the SF 36. In 6 domains the non-responders showed no increase in BMI. In 6 domains the responders showed a significant increase in BMI. CONCLUSION: LVRS significantly improves postoperative BMI, which correlates with improvements in DLCO and reflects changes in health status.

The long-term health status improvements seen after lung volume reduction surgery.

OBJECTIVES: To correlate the long-term changes in respiratory physiology, body mass index (BMI) and health status after lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS). PATIENTS/METHODS: From 1995 to 2002 77 patients; 48 male: 29 female, median age 59 (41-72) years, have undergone LVRS (simultaneous bilateral in 27; staged bilateral in 3; unilateral in 47). FEV(1), total lung capacity (TLC), residual volume (RV) and RV/TLC ratio were measured preoperatively and at 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, 3 years and 4 years post surgery. At the same time interval health status was assessed by Euroquol and Short Form 36 (SF 36) questionnaires. Seventeen patients have died within 4 years of their operation (30 day mortality 5%). RESULTS: The changes in FEV(1) are only significantly improved for 1 year post LVRS, while the improvements in TLC and RV remain significant up to 3 years postoperatively. The improvements in BMI also persist for 3 years. The best scores in Euroquol and SF 36 are obtained 6 months after LVRS but are only significantly improved up to 1 year. CONCLUSION: The physiological effects of volume LVRS are lasting but initial improvements in health status decline more rapidly.

Mitral valve relpair and revascularization for ischemic mitral regurgitation: predictors of operative mortality and survival.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS OF THE STUDY: Surgery for ischemic mitral regurgitation (IMR) is required in 4-5% of patients subjected to coronary artery surgery, and may be challenging. The study aim was to determine outcome following mitral valve repair and myocardial revascularization for moderate-to-severe IMR. METHODS: A total of 102 patients (mean age 68+/-7 years) underwent mitral valve repair for IMR between 1998 and 2001 at the authors' unit. Among patients, 28 had acute and 74 chronic mitral regurgitation (MR). Valve repair was achieved with an annuloplasty ring in all 102 patients, while 99 underwent concomitant myocardial revascularization. Preoperatively, 69 patients had MR grade III-IV, 62 had CCS angina class III-IV, 59 were in NYHA class II-IV, 81 had impaired left ventricular function, and 10 were in cardiogenic shock. Follow up was 100% complete (mean 14+/-7 months; range: 0-38 months). RESULTS: Overall operative mortality was 8.8% (n = 9) (17.8% for acute IMR, 5.4% for chronic, p = 0.048). On multiple logistic regression analysis, cardiogenic shock (p = 0.028) was the only significant risk factor for operative death. There were 11 late deaths. Kaplan-Meier survival at one and three years was 82+/-4% and 79+/-4%, respectively. On Cox proportional hazards regression model, preoperative left ventricular end-systolic diameter (LVESD) >4.5 cm (p = 0.01) and NYHA class III-IV (p = 0.02) were independent adverse predictors of survival. Three patients required reoperation. Kaplan-Meier three-year freedom from reoperation was 97+/-2%. CONCLUSION: Surgery for IMR carries a considerable, but acceptable, operative risk and provides satisfactory freedom from reoperation and mid-term survival. Cardiogenic shock before surgery is the major determinant of an unfavorable in-hospital outcome. LVESD >4.5 cm and poor preoperative NYHA status limit the probability of late survival. The study results support early surgical intervention for IMR, before ventricular dilatation occurs.