RESUMEN
Shifts from deep to moderate hypothermic circulatory arrest (HCA) in aortic arch surgery necessitate an examination of their differential impacts on neurocognitive functions, especially structured verbal memory, given its significance for patient recovery and quality of life. This study evaluates and synthesizes evidence on the effects of deep (≤20.0 °C), low-moderate (20.1-24.0 °C), and high-moderate (24.1-28.0 °C) hypothermic temperatures on structured verbal memory preservation and overall cognitive health in patients undergoing aortic arch surgery. We evaluated the latest literature from major medical databases such as PubMed and Scopus, focusing on research from 2020 to 2024, to gather comprehensive insights into the current landscape of temperature management during HCA. This comparative analysis highlights the viability of moderate hypothermia (20.1-28.0 °C), supported by recent trials and observational studies, as a method to achieve comparable neuroprotection with fewer complications than traditional deep hypothermia. Notably, low-moderate and high-moderate temperatures have been shown to support substantial survival rates, with impacts on structured verbal memory preservation that necessitate careful selection based on individual surgical risks and patient profiles. The findings advocate for a nuanced approach to selecting hypothermic protocols in aortic arch surgeries, emphasizing the importance of tailoring temperature management to optimize neurocognitive outcomes and patient recovery. This study fills a critical gap in the literature by providing evidence-based recommendations for temperature ranges during HCA, calling for ongoing updates to clinical guidelines and further research to refine these recommendations. The implications of temperature on survival rates, complications, and success rates underpin the necessity for evolving cardiopulmonary bypass techniques and cerebral perfusion strategies to enhance patient outcomes in complex cardiovascular procedures.
RESUMEN
Background: Ischemic heart disease (IHD) is a major global health issue and a leading cause of death. This study compares the effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in the management of IHD, focusing on their impact on revascularization, myocardial infarction (MI), and post-procedural stroke. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of PCI and CABG in treating IHD based on an exhaustive literature review of the past 5 years, emphasizing recent advancements and outcomes in IHD management. Methods: A comprehensive literature review analyzed 32 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) retrieved from databases such as PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar. The study specifically assessed the incidences of revascularization, stroke, and MI in patients treated with either PCI or CABG. The comparison between CABG and PCI exclusively focused on lesions with a SYNTAX score exceeding 32. Results: Our findings highlight CABG's significant efficacy over PCI in reducing revascularization and MI. The aggregated Mantel-Haenszel (M-H) value for revascularization was 1.85 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.65 - 2.07), signifying CABG's advantage. Additionally, CABG demonstrated superior performance in diminishing MI occurrences (M-H = 2.71, 95% CI: 1.13 - 6.53). In contrast, PCI was more effective in reducing stroke (M-H = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.60 - 1.10). Conclusion: The study confirms CABG's superiority in reducing revascularization and MI in IHD patients, highlighting PCI's effectiveness in reducing stroke risk. These findings underscore the importance of personalized treatment strategies in IHD management and emphasize the need for ongoing research and evidence-based guidelines to aid in treatment selection for IHD patients.
RESUMEN
In the realm of cardiovascular health, isolated left ventricular noncompaction (LVNC) stands out for its distinct morphological features and the clinical challenges it presents, particularly in adults. This literature review explores the intricacies of LVNC, aiming to unravel its epidemiological spread, diagnostic hurdles, and therapeutic strategies. Despite technological advancements in cardiac imaging that have improved the recognition of LVNC, a significant gap persists alongside a fragmented understanding of its pathogenesis. The studies scrutinized reveal a broad spectrum of prevalence rates influenced by diverse diagnostic tools and demographic variables. This variation underscores the complexity of accurately identifying LVNC and the resultant implications for clinical management. The review succinctly addresses the need for precise guidelines to navigate the diagnosis of LVNC and outlines the imperative for tailored clinical management approaches that cater to the wide array of patient presentations, from asymptomatic cases to those with severe cardiac dysfunction. By highlighting the critical gaps in current literature-namely the absence of standardized diagnostic criteria and a comprehensive pathogenic model-the review sets the stage for future research directions. These endeavors are essential for enhancing diagnostic accuracy, refining management protocols, and ultimately improving patient outcomes in this complex subset of cardiomyopathy, thus contributing significantly to the advancement of cardiovascular medicine.