Incidence Rates of Penn Classes and Class-Specific Mortality in Acute Type A Aortic Dissection Patients: An Epidemiologic Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) is a life-threatening emergency that is associated with a high morbidity and mortality rate. One of the complications is end-organ ischemia, a known predictor of mortality. The primary aims of this meta-analysis were to summarize the findings of observational studies investigating the utility of the Penn classification system and to analyze the incidence rates and mortality patterns within each class. The electronic databases PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase were searched through to April 2023. These were filtered by multiple reviewers to give 10 studies that met the inclusion criteria. The extracted data included patient characteristics, and primary outcomes were the incidence rates of different Penn classes, along with the corresponding mortality for each class. Out of 1,512 studies identified during the initial search, 10 studies, including 4,494 patients, met the inclusion criteria. The pooled incidence of Penn A was highest at 0.55 (95% CI 0.52, 0.58), followed by Penn B at 0.21 (95% CI 0.17, 0.25), and finally Penn C at 0.14 (95% CI 0.11, 0.17). Patients with Penn BC were found to be at the highest risk of death, as their early mortality rates were 0.36 (95% CI 0.31, 0.41). Within those populations, the subtype with the highest individual mortality was Penn C at 0.21 (95% CI 0.15, 0.27), followed by Penn B at 0.19 (95% CI 0.15, 0.23) and Penn A at 0.07 (95% CI 0.05, 0.10). Among patients presenting with ATAAD, class A was most frequently observed, followed by classes B, C, and BC. These findings indicate an incremental increase in mortality rates with the progression of Penn classification.

TEM Classification of Aortic Dissection-The Evolving Scoring System: A Literature Review.

Aortic dissection is an acute presentation that, if unnoticed, poses a significant risk to life. Anatomically, it is defined as a tear in the intimal layer of the aorta, but management differs significantly based on the location of this tear. Traditionally the Stanford and DeBakey classifications have been used to distinguish tear types and thus guide the most favourable management option, be it medical optimisation or surgery. Recently, a new Type-Entry-Malperfusion classification has been proposed to more accurately define and thus risk stratify patients with aortic dissection. This review summarises the Type-Entry-Malperfusion classification and highlights its potential advantages and limitations compared to other classifications. Clinical insights and potential barriers to adopting this classification are also described in this review.

Local versus General Anaesthesia for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI): A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Trial Sequential Analysis of Randomised and Propensity-Score Matched Studies.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a common practice for severe aortic stenosis, but the choice between general (GA) and local anesthesia (LA) remains uncertain. We conducted a comprehensive literature review until April 2023, comparing the safety and efficacy of LA versus GA in TAVI procedures. Our findings indicate significant advantages of LA, including lower 30-day mortality rates (RR: 0.69; 95% CI [0.58, 0.82]; p < 0.001), shorter in-hospital stays (mean difference: -0.91 days; 95% CI [-1.63, -0.20]; p = 0.01), reduced bleeding/transfusion incidents (RR: 0.64; 95% CI [0.48, 0.85]; p < 0.01), and fewer respiratory complications (RR: 0.56; 95% CI [0.42, 0.76], p<0.01). Other operative outcomes were comparable. Our findings reinforce prior evidence, presenting a compelling case for LA's safety and efficacy. While patient preferences and clinical nuances must be considered, our study propels the discourse towards a more informed anaesthesia approach for TAVI procedures.

Transcatheter edge-to-edge repair in mitral regurgitation: A comparison of device systems and recommendations for tailored device selection. A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Mitral valve transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (M-TEER) is a minimally invasive method for the treatment of mitral regurgitation (MR) in patients with prohibitive surgical risks. The traditionally used device, MitraClip, showed both safety and effectiveness in M-TEER. PASCAL is a newer device that has emerged as another feasible option to be used in this procedure. METHODS: We searched for observational studies that compared PASCAL to MitraClip devices in M-TEER. The electronic databases searched for relevant studies were PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Embase. The primary outcomes were technical success and the grade of MR at follow-up. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, bleeding, device success and reintervention. RESULTS: Technical success (PASCAL: 96.5% vs MitraClip: 97.6%, p = 0.24) and MR ≤ 2 at 30-day follow-up (PASCAL: 89.4vs MitraClip 89.9%, p = 0.51) were comparable between both groups. Both devices showed similar outcomes including all-cause mortality (RR: 0.68 [0.34, 1.38]; P = 0.28), major bleeding (RR: 1.87 [0.68, 5.10]; P = 0.22) and reintervention (RR: 1.02 [0.33, 3.16]; P = 0.97). Device success was more frequent with PASCAL device (PASCAL: 86% vs MitraClip 68.5%; P = 0.44), however, the results did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSION: Clinical outcomes of PASCAL were comparable to those of MitraClip with no significant difference in safety and effectiveness. The choice between MitraClip and PASCAL devices should be guided by various factors, including mitral valve anatomy, etiology of regurgitation, and device-specific characteristics.

Aortic Valve Replacement and Repair With or Without Concomitant Ascending Aorta Replacement: Impact on Outcomes: A Systematic Review.

Aortic valve surgery is a common procedure used to treat significant aortic valve stenosis or insufficiency. Some of these patients have coexisting pathology affecting the ascending aorta requiring ascending aorta replacement (AAR). Although the outcomes of these procedures are independently positive, it is proposed that concomitant AAR improves outcomes and minimizes the chances of future ascending aorta replacement. A comprehensive literature search for relevant studies published since 2010 comparing outcomes of aortic valve repair and replacement with or without concomitant ascending aorta replacement was undertaken using electronic databases PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase Ovid, and SCOPUS. Major exclusion criteria were (1) conference posters, literature reviews, editorials; (2) aortic root surgery, aortic arch surgery, or other surgeries (3) case series with less than 5 participants. A total of 1189 patients from 6 retrospective cohort studies were included in the final review, from which clinical outcomes such as mortality and complications were compared. Mortality rates were similar in both intervention groups. No significant differences were found between the 2 groups in reexploration rates due to bleeding, stroke, postoperative dialysis, and atrial fibrillation. Survival rates varied but had no significant difference between interventions. Both isolated aortic valve surgery and concomitant AAR procedures offer comparable favourable outcomes in terms of mortality, survival rates, and complication risks. However, the evidence is limited by the lack of randomized controlled trials. We recommend that future studies should standardize reporting on postoperative recovery, complications, long-term freedom from reoperations, and long-term changes to aorta dimensions.

COVID-19 and Multiorgan Response: The Long-Term Impact.

In late December 2019, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type-2 (SARS-CoV-2) was discovered following a cluster of pneumonia cases in Wuhan, China. During the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, it was unclear how this virus would manifest into a multiorgan impacting disease. After over 750 million cases worldwide, it has become increasingly evident that SARS-CoV-2 is a complex multifaceted disease we continue to develop our understanding of the pathophysiology of COVID-19 and how it affects these systems has many theories, ranging from direct viral infection via ACE2 receptor binding, to indirect coagulation dysfunction, cytokine storm, and pathological activation of the complement system. Since the onset of the pandemic, disease presentation, management, and manifestation have changed significantly. This paper intends to expand on the long-term impacts of COVID-19 on the cardiovascular, respiratory, urinary, gastrointestinal, and vascular systems of the body and the changes in clinical management. It is evident that the pharmacological, nonpharmacological and psychological management of COVID-19 patients require clearer guidelines to improve the survival odds and long-term clinical outcomes of those presenting with severe disease.

Transseptal vs Transapical Transcatheter Mitral Valve-in-Valve and Valve-in-Ring Implantation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Transcatheter mitral valve replacement has become a useful alternative for patients with failed mitral prosthesis or annuloplasty rings who are deemed high risk for redo surgery. We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes following transseptal (TS) and transapical (TA) approaches in transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve and valve-in-ring implantation (TMViV/R). Electronic databases PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase were searched through November 2022. Both clinical trials and observational studies comparing patients undergoing TS and TA TMViV/R were eligible for inclusion. Primary outcomes were 30-day and 1-year mortality. Postoperative stroke, left ventricle outlet tract (LVOT) obstruction, mitral valve pressure gradient (MVPG), bleeding, and length of hospital stay were also evaluated. Seven observational studies were included comparing patients undergoing TS (n = 1875) and TA (n = 1120) TMViV/R. The TS group had significantly lower 30-day mortality (OR: 0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.47, 0.94]; P = 0.02, I²â€¯= 0%) and lower one-year mortality risk group (HR: 0.79; 95% CI [0.63, 0.99]; P = 0.04, I²â€¯= 0%) compared to the TA group. The TS group had consistent shorter in-hospital stay (MD = -3.79; 95% CI [-5.23, -2.34] days; P < 0.0001, I²â€¯= 75%). Postoperative stroke, bleeding and LVOT obstruction tended to be lower in the TS but the results did not reach statistical significance. Postoperative MVPG was similar between both groups. The TS approach has lower early mortality, lower 1-year death hazard, shorter in-hospital stay, and a trend toward lower complication rates when compared to TA TMViV/R. Further controlled trials may support the evidence and provide long-term outcomes.

The effects of ischaemic conditioning on lung ischaemia-reperfusion injury.

Ischaemia-reperfusion injury (IRI) encompasses the deleterious effects on cellular function and survival that result from the restoration of organ perfusion. Despite their unique tolerance to ischaemia and hypoxia, afforded by their dual (pulmonary and bronchial) circulation as well as direct oxygen diffusion from the airways, lungs are particularly susceptible to IRI (LIRI). LIRI may be observed in a variety of clinical settings, including lung transplantation, lung resections, cardiopulmonary bypass during cardiac surgery, aortic cross-clamping for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, as well as tourniquet application for orthopaedic operations. It is a diagnosis of exclusion, manifesting clinically as acute lung injury (ALI) or acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Ischaemic conditioning (IC) signifies the original paradigm of treating IRI. It entails the application of short, non-lethal ischemia and reperfusion manoeuvres to an organ, tissue, or arterial territory, which activates mechanisms that reduce IRI. Interestingly, there is accumulating experimental and preliminary clinical evidence that IC may ameliorate LIRI in various pathophysiological contexts. Considering the detrimental effects of LIRI, ranging from ALI following lung resections to primary graft dysfunction (PGD) after lung transplantation, the association of these entities with adverse outcomes, as well as the paucity of protective or therapeutic interventions, IC holds promise as a safe and effective strategy to protect the lung. This article aims to provide a narrative review of the existing experimental and clinical evidence regarding the effects of IC on LIRI and prompt further investigation to refine its clinical application.

The effect of surgical technique, age, and Trisomy 21 on early outcome of surgical management of complete atrioventricular canal defect.

BACKGROUND: The optimal timing, surgical technique, and the influence of Trisomy 21 on the outcome of surgical repair of Complete Atrioventricular Canal Defect remains uncertain. We reviewed our experience in the repair of CAVC to identify the influence of these factors on operative outcomes. METHODS: A prospective study included 70 patients, who underwent repair of CAVC at our institute between July, 2016 and October, 2019. Primary endpoint was mortality and the secondary endpoint was a degree of left atrioventricular valve regurgitation. RESULTS: No significant difference was noted between patients operated on, at the first 6 months of age versus later, regarding mortality or LAVV regurgitation. Surgical repair by modified single-patch technique showed a significant reduction in bypass time (71.13 ± 13.507 min versus 99.19 ± 27.092 min, p-value = 0.001). Compared to closure of cleft only, posterior annuloplasty used for repair of LAVV resulted in significant reduction in the occurrence of post-operative valve regurgitation during the early period (LAVV 2 + 43 versus 7 %, p-value = 0.03) and at 6 months of follow-up (LAVV 2 + 35.4 versus 0 %, p-value = 0.01), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Early intervention, in the first 6 months in patients with CAVC by surgical repair gives comparable acceptable results to later repair; Trisomy 21 was not found to be a risk factor for early intervention. Repair of common AV valve by cleft closure with posterior LAVV annuloplasty showed better results with a significant decrease in post-operative LAVV regurgitation and early mortality in comparison to the closure of cleft only.

Harvesting internal mammary artery: a narrative review.

INTRODUCTION: Scientific literature has highlighted the development of surgical procedures with studies investigating optimal selection of arterial conduit, ideal harvesting method and type of graft. There have also been studies on the utility and efficiency of harvesting the internal mammary artery (IMA) through minimally invasive techniques such as endoscopic and robotic assisted methods. In the pursuit of a more total and complete revascularization of the coronary arteries, surgeons have also explored more extensive anastomosis techniques, i.e. sequential and no-touch. This review analyzes the literature in order to better understand the various methods for harvesting and using the IMA in coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) through outlining the pros and cons of each methodology. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Literature search on PubMed and Google Scholar was performed using search terms such as "CABG," "IMA," "internal thoracic artery," "harvesting," "technique," and "approach." Manuscripts in languages other than English were not considered. Manuscripts that assess outcomes of IMA harvesting are reviewed and included. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: A review of 48 studies, narrowed down from 150 articles that were retrieved, were used to evaluate current evidence for different IMA harvesting techniques. This includes evidence comparing various techniques: skeletonized and pedicled harvesting, minimally invasive techniques for harvesting; free arterial and in-situ grafts; no-aortic touch technique sequential grafting. CONCLUSIONS: Each technique and harvesting method is associate with various advantages and disadvantages. Common patterns in patient outcomes were identified for many of the techniques. This review provides a summary and overview of the current evidence base for CAGB surgery and identifies gaps in the evidence base to direct future research.

The optimal diagnostic methods for COVID-19.

As the world continues to study and understand coronavirus disease (COVID-19), existing investigations and tests have been used to try and detect the virus to slow viral transmission and its global spread. A 'gold-standard' investigation has not yet been identified for detection and monitoring. Initially, computed tomography (CT) was the mainstay investigation as it shows the disease severity and recovery, and its images change at different stages of the disease. However, CT has been found to have limited sensitivity and negative predictive value in the early stages of the disease, and the value of its use has come under debate due to whether its images change the treatment plan, the risk of radiation, as well as its practicality with infection control. Therefore, there has been a shift to the use of other imaging modalities and tests, such as chest X-rays and ultrasound. Furthermore, the use of nucleic acid-based testing such as reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have proven useful with direct confirmation of COVID-19 infection. In this study, we aim to review and analyse current literature to compare RT-PCR, immunological biomarkers, chest radiographs, ultrasound and chest CT scanning as methods of diagnosing COVID-19.

COVID-19: Unique public health issues facing Black, Asian and minority ethnic communities.

The 2019 coronavirus disease is a serious public health emergency, with serious adverse implications for populations, healthcare systems, and economies globally. Recently, concerns have been raised about possible association between ethnicity, incidence and outcomes of COVID-19 arisen from early government data. In this review, we will explore the possible association using both recent COVID-19 studies and studies of previous pandemics. We call for data on ethnicity to be routinely collected by governments, as part of an international collaboration, alongside other patient demographics and further research to robustly determine the magnitude of association. Moreover, governments must learn from previous pandemics and recommended strategies to mitigate risks on minority ethnicities due to socioeconomic disadvantages.

Miniaturized extracorporeal circulation versus off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Controversies exist whether off-pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) is superior to miniaturized extracorporeal circulation (MECC) in reducing deleterious effects of cardiopulmonary bypass as only a number of smaller randomized controlled trials (RCT) currently provide a limited evidence base. The main purpose of conducting the present meta-analysis was to overcome the expected low power in RCTs in an attempt to establish whether MECC is comparable to OPCAB. METHODS: A MEDLINE/PubMed search was conducted to identify eligible RCTs. A pooled summary effect estimate was calculated by means of Mantel-Haenszel method. RESULTS: The search yielded 7 RCTs included in this meta-analysis enrolling 271 patients in the OPCAB group and 279 in the MECC group. The OPCAB and MECC groups were comparable in terms of incidence of in-hospital mortality (Risk Difference [RD] 0.01; 95%CI -0.02, 0.03; P = 0.55; I(2) = 0%), stroke (RD -0.01; 95%CI -0.05, 0.04; P = 0.69; I(2) = 0%), need for renal replacement therapy (RD 0.00; -0.06, 0.06; P = 1; I(2) = 0%), postoperative atrial fibrillation (RD -0.03; -0.17, 0.10; P = 0.64; I(2) = 0%), re-exploration for bleeding (RD -0.01; 95%CI -0.03, 0.02; P = 0.65; I(2) = 0%), transfusion rate (RD -0.01; 95%CI -0.03, 0.02; P = 0.65; I(2) = 0%) and the amount of blood loss (weighted mean difference -25 mL; 95%CI -71, 21; P = 0.28; I(2) = 0%). CONCLUSIONS: Using a meta-analytic approach, MECC achieves clinical results comparable to OPCAB including postoperative blood loss and blood transfusion requirement. On the basis of our findings, MECC should be considered as a valid alternative to OPCAB in order to reduce surgical morbidity of conventional cardiopulmonary bypass.

The impact of arterial cannulation strategy on operative outcomes in aortic surgery: evidence from a comprehensive meta-analysis of comparative studies on 4476 patients.

OBJECTIVES: There is a growing perception that peripheral cannulation through the femoral artery, by reversing the flow in the thoracoabdominal aorta, may increase the risk of retrograde brain embolization in aortic surgery. Central cannulation sites, including the right axillary artery, have been reported to improve operative outcomes by allowing antegrade blood flow. However, peripheral cannulation still remains largely used because a consensus for the routine use of central cannulation approaches has not been reached. METHODS: A meta-analysis of comparative studies reporting operative outcomes using central cannulation versus peripheral cannulation was performed. Pooled weighted incidence rates for end points of interest were obtained using an inverse variance model. RESULTS: A total of 4476 patients were included in the final analysis. Central cannulation was used in 2797 patients, and peripheral cannulation was used in 1679 patients. Central cannulation showed a protective effect on in-hospital mortality (risk ratio, 0.59; 95% confidence interval, 0.48-0.7; P < .001) and permanent neurologic deficit (risk ratio, 0.71; 95% confidence interval, 0.55-0.90; P = .005) when compared with peripheral cannulation. A trend toward an increased benefit in terms of reduced in-hospital mortality was observed when only the right axillary artery was used as the central cannulation approach (risk ratio, 0.35; 95% confidence interval, 0.22-0.55; P < .001; I(2) = 0%). CONCLUSIONS: Central cannulation was superior to peripheral cannulation in reducing in-hospital mortality and the incidence of permanent neurologic deficit. This superiority was particularly evident when the axillary artery was used for central cannulation.

Optimal intraoperative anticoagulation strategy in patients undergoing off-pump coronary artery bypass.

A best evidence topic in cardiac surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was what the optimal intraoperative anticoagulation strategy should be in patients undergoing off-pump coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. A total of 157 papers were identified using the reported search, of which 8 were judged to represent the best evidence. The authors, journal, date, country of publication, study type, patient group studied, relevant outcomes and results were tabulated. The quality of clinical trials was assessed. Off-pump CABG is currently considered as a safe and effective alternative to CABG with the use of cardiopulmonary bypass, especially in the presence of off-pump expertise and certain pathologies. Although most technical steps in off-pump revascularization are standardized, it appears that there is inconsistency in intraoperative anticoagulation practice. Surveys conducted in the USA and Europe confirm the lack of uniform policy, with heparin dose ranging between 70 and 500 U/kg and from full-dose protamine to no reversal of anticoagulation. Although the quality of evidence is low, there is a trend for utilization of heparin at 150 U/kg, followed by half-dose protamine reversal, which appears to provide adequate anticoagulation for the safe conduct of anastomoses and thromboprophylaxis without significantly increasing the risk of postoperative bleeding. However, more research is necessary before firm recommendations can be made.