Off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting with clampless aortic anastomosis devices: Aortic sealing devices versus automated anastomosis punching.

Objectives: Clampless aortic anastomosis devices aim to lower stroke risk in off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting. Two main strategies for clampless anastomosis devices emerged with automated anastomosis punching and aortic sealing devices, prompting the question of perioperative outcome differences. Methods: All consecutive patients undergoing elective off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting with a clampless aortic anastomosis device between September 2014 and December 2021 in 2 centers were retrospectively included. Cohorts were divided by the use of an automated anastomosis punching device or an aortic sealing device to achieve proximal anastomosis on the ascending aorta. To reach group comparability propensity score matching was performed. The primary end point was defined as a composite of all-cause mortality, stroke and rethoracotomy. Secondary end points were perioperative outcome parameters. Results: A total of 3703 patients were enrolled of whom 575 and 3128 were included in the automated anastomosis punching and the aortic sealing device group, respectively. By propensity score matching a total of 1150 patients were included with 575 in each group. The primary composite endpoint showed no significant difference with 6.3% versus 5.9% events (odds ratio, 0.9; 95% confidence interval, 0.58-1.53, P = .81). All-cause mortality (P = .36), stroke (P = .81), and rethoracotomy (P = .89) also exhibit no disparity. Operation time was significantly longer in the aortic sealing device cohort with 220.0 ± 50.8 minutes and 204.6 ± 53.8 minutes (P < .01). Conclusions: Clampless aortic anastomosis strategies aortic sealing device and automated anastomosis punching did not differ in perioperative outcome parameters, whereas the implementation of aortic sealing devices were associated with a prolonged operation time without inducing any inferior clinical outcome.

Early and late outcomes after minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass vs. full sternotomy off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting.

Objectives: Minimally-invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) is a less-invasive alternative to full sternotomy off-pump coronary artery bypass (FS-OPCAB) revascularization of the left anterior descending artery (LAD). Some studies suggested that MIDCAB is associated with a greater risk of graft occlusion and repeat revascularization than FS-OPCAB LIMA-to-LAD grafting. Data comparing MIDCAB to FS-OPCAB with regard to long-term follow-up is scarce. We compared short- and long-term results of MIDCAB vs. FS-OPCAB revascularization over a maximum follow-up period of 10 years. Patients and methods: From December 2009 to June 2020, 388 elective patients were included in our retrospective study. 229 underwent MIDCAB, and 159 underwent FS-OPCAB LIMA-to-LAD grafting. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to adjust for selection bias and to estimate treatment effects on short- and long-term outcomes. IPTW-adjusted Kaplan-Meier estimates by study group were calculated for all-cause mortality, stroke, the risk of repeat revascularization and myocardial infarction up to a maximum follow-up of 10 years. Results: MIDCAB patients had less rethoracotomies (n = 13/3.6% vs. n = 30/8.0%, p = 0.012), fewer transfusions (0.93 units ± 1.83 vs. 1.61 units ± 2.52, p < 0.001), shorter mechanical ventilation time (7.6 ± 4.7 h vs. 12.1 ± 26.4 h, p = 0.005), and needed less hemofiltration (n = 0/0% vs. n = 8/2.4%, p = 0.004). Thirty-day mortality did not differ significantly between the two groups (n = 0/0% vs. n = 3/0.8%, p = 0.25). Long-term outcomes did not differ significantly between study groups. In the FS-OPCAB group, the probability of survival at 1, 5, and 10 years was 98.4%, 87.8%, and 71.7%, respectively. In the MIDCAB group, the corresponding values were 98.4%, 87.7%, and 68.7%, respectively (RR1.24, CI0.87-1.86, p = 0.7). In the FS group, the freedom from stroke at 1, 5, and 10 years was 97.0%, 93.0%, and 93.0%, respectively. In the MIDCAB group, the corresponding values were 98.5%, 96.9%, and 94.3%, respectively (RR0.52, CI0.25-1.09, p = 0.06). Freedom from repeat revascularization at 1, 5, and 10 years in the FS-OPCAB group was 92.2%, 84.7%, and 79.5%, respectively. In the MIDCAB group, the corresponding values were 94.8%, 90.2%, and 81.7%, respectively (RR0.73, CI0.47-1.16, p = 0.22). Conclusion: MIDCAB is a safe and efficacious technique and offers comparable long-term results regarding mortality, stroke, repeat revascularization, and freedom from myocardial infarction when compared to FS-OPCAB.

Early and Late Results after Surgical Mitral Valve Repair: A High-Volume Center Experience.

BACKGROUND: Surgical mitral valve repair is the gold standard treatment of severe primary mitral regurgitation (MR). In the light of rapidly evolving percutaneous technologies, current surgical outcome data are essential to support heart-team-based decision-making. METHODS: This retrospective, high-volume, single-center study analyzed in 1779 patients with primary MR early morbidity and mortality, postoperative valve function, and long-term survival after mitral valve (MV) repair. Surgeries were performed between 2009 and 2022. Surgical approaches included full sternotomy (FS) and right-sided minithoracotomy (minimally invasive cardiac [MIC] surgery). RESULTS: Of the surgeries (mean age: 59.9 [standard deviation:11.4] years; 71.5% males), 85.6% (n = 1,527) were minithoracotomies. Concomitant procedures were performed in 849 patients (47.7%), including tricuspid valve and/or atrial septal defect repair, cryoablation, and atrial appendage closure. The majority of patients did not need erythrocyte concentrates. Mediastinitis and rethoracotomy for bleeding rates were 0.1 and 4.3%, respectively. Reoperation before discharge for failed repair was necessary in 12 patients (0.7%). Freedom from more than moderate MR was > 99%. Thirty-day mortality was 0.2% and did not differ significantly between groups (p = 0.37). Median follow-up was 48.2 months with a completeness of 95.9%. Long-term survival was similar between groups (p = 0.21). In the FS and MIC groups, 1-, 5-, and 10-year survival rates were 98.8 and 98.8%, 92.9 and 94.4%, and 87.4 and 83.1%, respectively. CONCLUSION: MV surgery, both minimally invasive and via sternotomy, is associated with high repair rates, excellent perioperative outcomes, and long-term survival. Data underscore the effectiveness of surgical repair in managing MR, even in the era of advancing interventional techniques.

Resection of hypertrophic papillary muscles and mitral valve replacement in a patient with midventricular hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy - a new approach.

Midventricular hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy (HOCM) is characterized by hypertrophy of the interventricular septum (IVS) and - in rare cases - of the papillary muscles (PM), which subsequently can cause dynamic left ventricular outflow tract obstruction (LVOTO) and severe heart failure symptoms. We report on a rare case of a 44-year-old patient suffering from midventricular HOCM with hypertrophic anterolateral PM and an additional chorda between the PM and the IVS.We describe a new surgical approach via right anterolateral thoracotomy in 3-dimensional (3D) video-assisted minimal-invasive technique with resection of hypertrophic PMs as well as the entire mitral valve-apparatus and valve replacement avoiding septal myectomy and potentially associated complications. After an uneventful procedure clinical symptoms improved from NYHA III-IV at baseline to NYHA 0-I postoperatively and remained stable over a follow-up period of 24 months. Therefore, the presented technique may be considered as a new and alternative approach in patients with hypertrophic PMs and hypertrophic IVS as subtype of midventricular HOCM.