Preoperative continuation of aspirin before isolated heart valve surgery and postoperative bleeding and transfusion: a single-center retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: The risks and benefits of preoperative aspirin continuation in patients undergoing isolated heart valve replacement surgery are unclear. We investigated the effect of aspirin continuation on the risk of bleeding and transfusion in these patients. METHODS: In this single center, retrospective study, among 474 adult patients who underwent isolated heart valve surgery between April 2013 and June 2018, 269 continued aspirin within 5 days before surgery (aspirin group) and 205 patients did not take or stopped aspirin no later than 5 days before surgery (non-aspirin group). The chi-square test, the Mann-Whitney U-test, and the Student's T-test were used to compare data between the groups. Univariate and Multivariate logistic regressions were used to assess crude and adjusted relationships between outcome and exposure. RESULTS: The primary outcome, red blood cell (RBC) transfusion, occurred in 59 patients (22%) of the aspirin group and in 24 patients (12%) of the non-aspirin group (p = 0.004). After adjustment for confounding factors, continuation of aspirin was no longer associated with RBC transfusion (aOR1.8;95%CI,0.98-3.2;p = 0.06). The amount of allogenic blood products, the incidence of surgical re-exploration for bleeding, the volume of re-transfused cell-saved blood, and the cumulative chest tube drainage during the first 24 postoperative hours were similar between groups. CONCLUSION: Preoperative continuation of aspirin in patients undergoing isolated heart valve surgery is neither associated with a higher incidence of RBC transfusion, nor with larger perioperative blood loss, or more frequent surgical revision for bleeding. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05151796).

[Aortic valve repair surgery : state of the art and clinical experience of the university hospital center of Liege]. / Chirurgie de réparation de la valve aortique : statut actuel de la technique et expérience clinique du CHU de Liège.

In the past 20 years, there has been a real development of aortic valve repair techniques with an increasing number of publications describing the long-term benefits of aortic valve repair in terms of survival, freedom from major adverse valve related-events and reoperations. Aortic valve repair can now be considered as a valuable alternative to prosthetic valve replacement in patients with dystrophic ascending aorta pathology associated or not to aortic insufficiency with pliable leaflets. In this paper, the authors describe the state of the art of aortic valve repair and present their clinical experience with aortic valve repair surgery in the university hospital center of Liege from April 2021 to September 2022.

Les techniques de réparation de la valve aortique se sont considérablement développées ces 20 dernières années. Plusieurs publications confirment les bénéfices à long terme de ces techniques en termes de survie, d'absence de complications majeures et de réinterventions pour récidive d'insuffisance aortique. La réparation de la valve aortique apparaît ainsi comme une véritable alternative au remplacement valvulaire aortique prothétique chez certains patients qui présentent une pathologie dystrophique de l'aorte ascendante associée ou non à une insuffisance aortique sur valve souple. Dans cet article, les auteurs parcourent la littérature actuelle sur le sujet et décrivent leur expérience clinique avec la chirurgie de réparation de la valve aortique au sein du centre hospitalier universitaire de Liège d'avril 2021 à septembre 2022.

Surgery of the ascending aorta via a right anterior minithoracotomy: initial surgical experience of a single center.

OBJECTIVES: Full median sternotomy (FMS) is the common surgical access for patients undergoing replacement of the ascending aorta (AA) with or without aortic valve replacement (AVR). The right anterior mini-thoracotomy (RAMT) approach has been increasingly adopted for AVR. This approach has been shown to decrease blood loss and hospital length of stay (LOS) compared with FMS. The RAMT approach may also be beneficial in selected patients requiring AA procedures with or without AVR. We present our initial clinical experience of patients who have undergone a RAMT for supracommissural replacement of the tubular AA with or without AVR. METHODS: This is a single-center retrospective review of 10 patients who underwent an elective RAMT for replacement of the tubular AA with or without AVR between November 2019 and January 2022. Clinical outcomes evaluated include 30-day mortality, intensive care and hospital LOS, time to extubation, operative times, as well as postoperative complications such as stroke and bleeding. RESULTS: Median cross-clamp and cardiopulmonary bypass times were 109 and 148 min, respectively. Median time to extubation was 2.5 h and median intensive care unit and hospital stay were 2 and 10 days, respectively. There were two re-thoracotomies for postoperative bleeding and two cases of sub-xiphoidal pericardial drainage for pericardial effusion. There were no strokes and no in-hospital nor 30-day mortalities. CONCLUSIONS: The replacement of the AA with or without concomitant AVR can be performed through a RAMT in carefully selected patients. However, the safety of this approach, as compared to full/partial median sternotomy, remains to be proven.

Key questions: Can ascending aorta surgery with or without aortic valve replacement be safely performed via right thoracotomy?Key Findings: A good experience of right thoracotomy approach helps performing ascending aorta surgery via that access in carefully selected patients.Take home message: Center with expertise in right thoracotomy can performed ascending aorta surgery through that access in carefully selected patients. However, the safety of this approach, as compared to full or partial median sternotomy, remains to be proven.

Bilateral subcostal transversus abdominis plane block does not improve the postoperative analgesia provided by multimodal analgesia after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A randomised placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy might be considered minor surgery, but it may result in severe postoperative pain. Subcostal transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block, which produces long-lasting supra-umbilical parietal analgesia, might improve analgesia after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. OBJECTIVE: We investigated whether subcostal TAP block would reduce opioid consumption and pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patients provided with multimodal analgesia. DESIGN: A randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind study. SETTING: The study was conducted at a university teaching hospital from December 2017 to June 2018. PATIENTS: Sixty patients scheduled for laparoscopic cholecystectomy were included. Anaesthesia and postoperative analgesia (etoricoxib, paracetamol, ketamine and dexamethasone) were standardised. INTERVENTION: After induction of anaesthesia, patients were allocated into two groups: ultrasound-guided bilateral subcostal TAP block with 20 ml of levobupivacaine 0.375% and epinephrine 5 µg ml or 0.9% saline with epinephrine 5 µg ml. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Opioid consumption in the recovery room and during the first 24 h after surgery were recorded. Postoperative somatic and visceral pain scores, fatigue and nausea were measured. Intra-operative end-tidal concentrations of sevoflurane (FETSEVO) were also recorded. RESULTS: Twenty-four hour postoperative opioid consumption were similar in both groups: 21.2 mg (95% CI 15.3 to 27.1) vs. 25.2 (95% CI 15.1 to 35.5) oral morphine equivalent in the levobupivacaine and 0.9% saline groups, respectively; P = 0.48. No significant between-group differences were observed with regards to parietal (P = 0.56) and visceral (P = 0.50) pain scores, fatigue and nausea. FETSEVO was slightly lower in the levobupivacaine group (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Subcostal TAP block does not improve the analgesia provided by multimodal analgesia after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. It allows for a small reduction in intra-operative sevoflurane requirements. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT0339153.