RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: A considerable number of patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting surgery suffer from atrial fibrillation and should be treated concomitantly. This manuscript evaluates the impact of on-pump versus off-pump bypass grafting on the applied lesion-set and rhythm outcome. METHODS: Between January 2017 and April 2020 patients who underwent combined bypass grafting and surgical ablation for atrial fibrillation were consecutively enrolled in the German CArdioSurgEry Atrial Fibrillation registry (CASE-AF, 17 centers). Data were prospectively collected. Follow-up was planned after one year. RESULTS: 224 Patients were enrolled. No differences in baseline characteristics were seen between on- and off-pump bypass grafting, especially not in type of atrial fibrillation and left atrial size. In the on-pump group (n = 171, 76%), pulmonary vein isolation and an extended left atrial lesion-set were performed more often compared to off-pump bypass grafting. (58% vs 26%, 33 vs 9%, respectively, p < 0.001). In off-pump bypass grafting a box isolating the atrial posterior wall was the dominant lesion (72% off-pump vs 42% on-pump, p < 0.001). Left-atrial appendage management was comparable in on-pump vs off-pump bypass grafting (94% vs 91%, p = 0.37). Sinus rhythm at follow-up was confirmed in 61% in the on-pump group and in 65% in the off-pump group (p = 0.66). No differences were seen in in-hospital or follow-up complication-rates between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: In coronary artery bypass grafting patients undergoing concomitant atrial fibrillation ablation, our data suggests that the technique applied for myocardial revascularization (off-pump vs on-pump) leads to differences in the ablation lesion set, but not in safety and effectiveness.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In Europe, more than 300,000 persons per year experience out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Despite medical progress, only few patients survive with good neurological outcome. For many issues, evidence from randomized trials is scarce. OHCA often occurs for cardiac causes. Therefore, we established the national, prospective, multicentre German Cardiac Arrest Registry (G-CAR). Herein, we describe the first results of the pilot phase. RESULTS: Over a period of 16 months, 15 centres included 559 consecutive OHCA patients aged ≥ 18 years. The median age of the patients was 66 years (interquartile range 57;75). Layperson resuscitation was performed in 60.5% of all OHCA cases which were not observed by emergency medical services. The initial rhythm was shockable in 46.4%, and 29.1% of patients had ongoing CPR on hospital admission. Main presumed causes of OHCA were acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and/or cardiogenic shock in 54.8%, with ST-elevation myocardial infarction being the most common aetiology (34.6%). In total, 62.9% of the patients underwent coronary angiography; percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was performed in 61.4%. Targeted temperature management was performed in 44.5%. Overall in-hospital mortality was 70.5%, with anoxic brain damage being the main presumed cause of death (38.8%). Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (eCPR) was performed in 11.0%. In these patients, the in-hospital mortality rate was 85.2%. CONCLUSIONS: G-CAR is a multicentre German registry for adult OHCA patients with a focus on cardiac and interventional treatment aspects. The results of the 16-month pilot phase are shown herein. In parallel with further analyses, scaling up of G-CAR to a national level is envisaged. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05142124.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: The German CArdioSurgEry Atrial Fibrillation Registry is a prospective, multicentric registry analysing outcomes of patients undergoing surgical ablation for atrial fibrillation as concomitant or stand-alone procedures. This data sub-analysis of the German CArdioSurgEry Atrial Fibrillation Registry aims to describe the in-hospital and 1-year outcomes after concomitant surgical ablation, based on 2 different ablation approaches, epicardial and endocardial surgical ablation. METHODS: Between January 2017 and April 2020, 17 German cardiosurgical units enrolled 763 consecutive patients after concomitant surgical ablation. In the epicardial group, 413 patients (54.1%), 95.6% underwent radiofrequency ablation. In the endocardial group, 350 patients (45.9%), 97.7% underwent cryoablation. 61.5% of patients in the epicardial group and 49.4% of patients in the endocardial group presenting with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. Pre-, intra- and post-operative data were gathered. RESULTS: Upon discharge, 32.3% (n = 109) of patients after epicardial surgical ablation and 24.0% (n = 72) of patients after endocardial surgical ablation showed recurrence of atrial fibrillation. The in-hospital mortality rate was low, 2.2% (n = 9) in the epicardial and 2.9% (n = 10) in the endocardial group. The overall 1-year procedural success rate was 58.4% in the epicardial and 62.2% in the endocardial group, with significant symptom improvement in both groups. The 1-year mortality rate was 7.7% (n = 30) in epicardial and 5.0% (n = 17) in the endocardial group. CONCLUSIONS: Concomitant surgical ablation is safe and effective with significant improvement in patient symptoms and freedom from atrial fibrillation. Adequate cardiac rhythm monitoring should be prioritized for higher quality data acquisition.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Surgical atrial ablation is evaluated by surgeons in relation to the estimated surgical risk. We analyze whether high-risk patients (HRPs) experience risk escalation by ablation procedures. METHODS: The CASE-Atrial Fibrillation (AF) registry is a prospective, multicenter, all-comers registry of atrial ablation in cardiac surgery. We analyzed the 1-year outcome regarding survival and rhythm endpoints of 1,000 consecutive patients according to the operative risk classification (EuroSCORE II ≤ 2 vs. >2). RESULTS: Higher NYHA (New York Heart Association) score, ischemic heart failure, status poststroke, renal insufficiency, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and diabetes mellitus were strongly represented in HRPs. HRPs exhibit more left ventricular ejection fraction < 40% (19.2 vs. 8.8%; p < 0.001) but identical left atrial diameter and left ventricular end-diastolic diameter compared with low-risk patients (LRPs). CHA2DS-Vasc-score (2.4 ± 1 vs. 3.6 ± 1.5; p < 0.001), sternotomies, combination surgeries, coronary artery bypass graft, and mitral valve procedures were increased in HRPs. LRPs underwent stand-alone ablations as well. Ablation energy did not differ. Left atrial appendage closure was performed in up to 86.1% (mainly cut-and-sew procedures). Mortality corresponded to the original risk class without an escalation that may be related to ablation, stroke rate, or myocardial infarction. A total of 60.6% of HRPs versus 75.1% of LRPs were discharged in sinus rhythm. Long-term EHRA (European Heart Rhythm Association) score symptoms were lower in HRPs. Repeated rhythm therapies were rare. Additional antiarrhythmics received a minority without group dependency. A total of 1.6 versus 4.1% of HRPs (p = 0.042) underwent long-term stroke; excess mortality was not observed. Anticoagulation remained common in HRPs. CONCLUSION: Surgical risk and long-term mortality are determined by the underlying disease. In HRPs, freedom from AF and symptom relief can be achieved. Preoperative risk scores should not lead to withholding an ablation procedure.
RESUMEN
AIMS: We analysed consecutive patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock (CS) who were enrolled into the CULPRIT-SHOCK randomized controlled trial (RCT) and those with exclusion criteria who were included into the accompanying registry. METHODS AND RESULTS: In total, 1075 patients with infarct-related CS were screened for CULPRIT-SHOCK in 83 specialized centres in Europe; 369 of them had exclusion criteria for the RCT and were enrolled into the registry. Patients were followed over 1 year. The mean age was 68 years and 260 (25%) were women. 13.5%, 30.9%, and 55.6% had one-vessel, two-vessel, and three-vessel coronary artery disease (CAD), respectively. Significant left main (LM) coronary artery stenosis was present in 8.0%. 54.2% of the patients had cardiac arrest before admission. Thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) 3 patency of the infarct vessel after percutaneous coronary intervention was achieved in 83.6% of all patients. Mechanical circulatory support was applied in one-third of patients. Total mortality after 30 days and 1 year was 47.6% and 52.9%. Mortality after 1 year was highest in patients with LM coronary artery stenosis (63.5%), followed by three-vessel (56.6%), two-vessel (49.8%), and one-vessel CAD (38.6%), respectively. Mechanical complications were rare (21/1008; 2.1%) but associated with a high mortality of 66.7% after 1 year. CONCLUSION: In specialized centres in Europe, short- and long-term mortality of patients with infarct-related CS treated with an invasive strategy is still high and mainly depends on the extent of CAD. Therefore, there is still a need for improvement of care to improve the prognosis of infarct-related CS.