Completely portal robotic Pancoast tumour resection with en bloc resection of the left upper lobe and chest wall.

The current gold standard for the treatment of Pancoast tumours is considered to be neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by radical resection of the affected upper lobe en bloc with resection of the chest wall. Shaw and Paulson first described the most commonly used approach in 1961 via an extended posterolateral thoracotomy. However, because this approach comes with significant soft tissue damage and occasionally provides only suboptimal exposure, especially for anterior superior sulcus tumours, other approaches have been published in recent years, including open anterior approaches (Dartevelle and Gruenenwald) in addition to rare case reports of minimally invasive assisted hybrid procedures. Because we routinely perform robotic anatomical lung resections as well as three-port robotic first rib resections for thoracic inlet/outlet syndrome in our department, combining both techniques with our accumulated experience seemed to be the next logical step. We describe step-by-step what is (to our knowledge) one of the first reported cases of a fully portal robotic-assisted Pancoast tumour resection consisting of a left upper lobe resection en bloc with the first rib after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy. This approach proved to be safe and allowed for excellent exposure, especially of the thoracic outlet.

Final 3-Year Outcomes of a Randomized Trial Comparing a Self-Expanding to a Balloon-Expandable Transcatheter Aortic Valve.

BACKGROUND: In the SCOPE I trial (Safety and Efficacy of the Symetis ACURATE Neo/TF Compared to the Edwards SAPIEN 3 Bioprosthesis), transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the self-expanding ACURATE neo (NEO) did not meet noninferiority compared with the balloon-expandable SAPIEN 3 (S3) device regarding a composite end point at 30 days due to higher rates of prosthetic valve regurgitation and acute kidney injury. Data on long-term durability of NEO are scarce. Here, we report whether early differences between NEO and S3 translate into differences in clinical outcomes or bioprosthetic valve failure 3 years after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. METHODS: Patients with severe aortic stenosis were randomized to transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation with NEO or S3 at 20 European centers. Clinical outcomes at 3 years are compared using Cox proportional or Fine-Gray subdistribution hazard models by intention-to-treat. Bioprosthetic valve failure is reported for the valve-implant cohort. RESULTS: Among 739 patients, 84 of 372 patients (24.3%) had died in the NEO and 85 of 367 (25%) in the S3 group at 3 years. Comparing NEO with S3, the 3-year rates of all-cause death (hazard ratio, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.73-1.33]), stroke (subhazard ratio, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.56-1.92]), and hospitalization for congestive heart failure (subhazard ratio, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.51-1.07]) were similar between the groups. Aortic valve reinterventions were required in 4 NEO and 3 S3 patients (subhazard ratio, 1.32 [95% CI, 0.30-5.85]). New York Heart Association functional class ≤II was observed in 84% (NEO) and 85% (S3), respectively. Mean gradients remained lower after NEO at 3 years (8 versus 12 mm Hg; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Early differences between NEO and S3 did not translate into significant differences in clinical outcomes or bioprosthetic valve failure throughout 3 years. REGISTRATION: URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov, Unique identifier: NCT03011346.

Effect of Paroxetine-Mediated G-Protein Receptor Kinase 2 Inhibition vs Placebo in Patients With Anterior Myocardial Infarction: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Left ventricular remodeling following acute myocardial infarction results in progressive myocardial dysfunction and adversely affects prognosis. Objective: To investigate the efficacy of paroxetine-mediated G-protein-coupled receptor kinase 2 inhibition to mitigate adverse left ventricular remodeling in patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction. Design, Setting, and Participants: This double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial was conducted at Bern University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland. Patients with acute anterior ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of 45% or less were randomly allocated to 2 study arms between October 26, 2017, and September 21, 2020. Interventions: Patients in the experimental arm received 20 mg of paroxetine daily; patients in the control group received a placebo daily. Both treatments were provided for 12 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the difference in patient-level improvement of LVEF between baseline and 12 weeks as assessed by cardiac magnetic resonance tomography. Secondary end points were changes in left ventricular dimensions and late gadolinium enhancement between baseline and follow-up. Results: Fifty patients (mean [SD] age, 62 [13] years; 41 men [82%]) with acute anterior myocardial infarction were randomly allocated to paroxetine or placebo, of whom 38 patients underwent cardiac magnetic resonance imaging both at baseline and 12 weeks. There was no difference in recovery of LVEF between the experimental group (mean [SD] change, 4.0% [7.0%]) and the control group (mean [SD] change, 6.3% [6.3%]; mean difference, -2.4% [95% CI, -6.8% to 2.1%]; P = .29) or changes in left ventricular end-diastolic volume (mean difference, 13.4 [95% CI, -12.3 to 39.0] mL; P = .30) and end-systolic volume (mean difference, 11.4 [95% CI, -3.6 to 26.4] mL; P = .13). Late gadolinium enhancement as a percentage of the total left ventricular mass decreased to a larger extent in the experimental group (mean [SD], -13.6% [12.9%]) compared with the control group (mean [SD], -4.5% [9.5%]; mean difference, -9.1% [95% CI, -16.6% to -1.6%]; P = .02). Conclusions and Relevance: In this trial, treatment with paroxetine did not improve LVEF after myocardial infarction compared with placebo. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03274752.