Surgical ablation, left atrial appendage occlusion or both? Nationwide registry analysis of cardiac surgery patients with underlying atrial fibrillation.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate in-hospital outcomes and long-term survival of patients undergoing cardiac surgery with preoperative atrial fibrillation (AF). We compared different strategies, including no-AF treatment, left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) alone, concomitant surgical ablation (SA) alone or both. METHODS: A retrospective analysis using the KROK registry included all patients with preoperative diagnosis of AF who underwent cardiac surgery in Poland between between January 2012 and December 2022. Risk adjustment was performed using regression analysis with inverse probability weighting of propensity scores. We assessed 6-year survival with Cox proportional hazards models. Sensitivity analysis was performed based on index cardiac procedure. RESULTS: Initially, 42 510 patients with preoperative AF were identified, and, after exclusion, 33 949 included in the final analysis. A total of 1107 (3.26%) received both SA and LAAO, 1484 (4.37%) received LAAO alone, 3921 (11.55%) SA alone and the remaining 27 437 (80.82%) had no AF-directed treatment. As compared to no treatment, all strategies were associated with survival benefit over 6-year follow-up. A gradient of treatment was observed with the highest benefit associated with SA + LAAO followed by SA alone and LAAO alone (log-rank P < 0.001). Mortality benefits were reflected when stratified by surgery type with the exception of aortic valve surgery where LAAO alone fare worse than no treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with preoperative AF undergoing cardiac surgery, surgical management of AF, particularly SA + LAAO, was associated with lower 6-year mortality. These findings support the benefits of incorporating SA and LAAO in the management of AF during cardiac surgery.

Additional bypass graft or concomitant surgical ablation? Insights from the HEIST registry.

BACKGROUND: Surgical ablation for atrial fibrillation at the time of isolated coronary artery bypass grafting is reluctantly attempted. Meanwhile, complete revascularization is not always possible in these patients. We attempted to counterbalance the long-term benefits of surgical ablation against the risks of incomplete revascularization. METHODS: Atrial fibrillation patients undergoing isolated coronary artery bypass grafting for multivessel disease between 2012 to 2022 and included in the HEart surgery In atrial fibrillation and Supraventricular Tachycardia registry were divided into complete revascularization, complete revascularization with additional grafts, and incomplete revascularization cohorts; these were further split into surgical ablation and non-surgical ablation subgroups. RESULTS: A total of 8,405 patients (78% men; age 69.3 ± 7.9) were included; of those, 5,918 (70.4%) had complete revascularization, and 556 (6.6%) had surgical ablation performed. Number of anastomoses was 2.7 ± 1.2. The median follow-up was 5.1 [interquartile range 2.1-8.8] years. In patients in whom complete revascularization was achieved, surgical ablation was associated with long-term survival benefit: hazard ratio 0.69; 95% confidence intervals (0.50-0.94); P = .020 compared with grafting additional lesions. Similarly, in patients in whom complete revascularization was not achieved, surgical ablation was associated with a long-term survival benefit of 0.68 (0.49-0.94); P = .019. When comparing surgical ablation on top of incomplete revascularization against complete revascularization without additional grafts or surgical ablation, there was no difference between the 2: 0.84 (0.61-1.17); P = .307, which was also consistent in the propensity score-matched analysis: 0.75 (0.39-1.43); P = .379. CONCLUSION: To achieve complete revascularization is of utmost importance. However, when facing incomplete revascularization at the time of coronary artery bypass grafting in a patient with underlying atrial fibrillation, concomitant surgical ablation on top of incomplete revascularization is associated with similar long-term survival as complete revascularization without surgical ablation.

Prognostic impact of preoperative atrial fibrillation in patients undergoing heart surgery in cardiogenic shock.

Surgical intervention in the setting of cardiogenic shock (CS) is burdened with high mortality. Due to acute condition, detailed diagnoses and risk assessment is often precluded. Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a risk factor for perioperative complications and worse survival but little is known about AF patients operated in CS. Current analysis aimed to determine prognostic impact of preoperative AF in patients undergoing heart surgery in CS. We analyzed data from the Polish National Registry of Cardiac Surgery (KROK) Procedures. Between 2012 and 2021, 332,109 patients underwent cardiac surgery in 37 centers; 4852 (1.5%) patients presented with CS. Of those 624 (13%) patients had AF history. Cox proportional hazards models were used for computations. Propensity score (nearest neighbor) matching for the comparison of patients with and without AF was performed. Median follow-up was 4.6 years (max.10.0), mean age was 62 (± 15) years and 68% patients were men. Thirty-day mortality was 36% (1728 patients). The origin of CS included acute myocardial infarction (1751 patients, 36%), acute aortic dissection (1075 patients, 22%) and valvular dysfunction (610 patients, 13%). In an unadjusted analysis, patients with underlying AF had almost 20% higher mortality risk (HR 1.19, 95% CIs 1.06-1.34; P = 0.004). Propensity score matching returned 597 pairs with similar baseline characteristics; AF remained a significant prognostic factor for worse survival (HR 1.19, 95% CI 1.00-1.40; P = 0.045). Among patients with CS referred for cardiac surgery, history of AF was a significant risk factor for mortality. Role of concomitant AF ablation and/or left atrial appendage occlusion or more aggressive perioperative circulatory support should be addressed in the future.

Validation of EuroSCORE II in atrial fibrillation heart surgery patients from the KROK Registry.

The study aimed to validate the European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation score (EuroSCORE II) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). All data were retrieved from the National Registry of Cardiac Surgery Procedures (KROK). EuroSCORE II calibration and discrimination performance was evaluated. The final cohort consisted of 44,172 patients (median age 67, 30.8% female, 13.4% with AF). The in-hospital mortality rate was 4.14% (N = 1830), and 5.21% (N = 2303) for 30-day mortality. EuroSCORE II significantly underestimated mortality in mild- and moderate-risk populations [Observed (O):Expected (E)-1.1, 1.16). In the AF subgroup, it performed well [O:E-0.99), whereas in the very high-risk population overestimated mortality (O:E-0.9). EuroSCORE II showed better discrimination in AF (-) [area under curve (AUC) 0.805, 95% CI 0.793-0.817)] than in AF (+) population (AUC 0.791, 95%CI 0.767-0.816), P < 0.001. The worst discriminative performance for the AF (+) group was for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) (AUC 0.746, 95% CI 0.676-0.817) as compared with AF (-) population (AUC 0.798, 95% CI 0.774-0.822), P < 0.001. EuroSCORE II is more accurate for patients with AF. However, it underestimated mortality rates for low-to-moderate-risk patients and had a lower ability to distinguish between high- and low-risk patients with AF, particularly in those undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting.

Functional aortic annulus 3-dimensional remodelling during bicuspid aortic valve repair: complete external and internal annuloplasty.

The internal geometric ring provides full three-dimensional annular stability while minimizing the dissection of the aortic root, pulmonary artery and right ventricle and avoids reimplanting the coronaries. The external annuloplasty provides a secondary stabilization of the easily accessed fibrous portion of the annulus using the sutures for the internal annuloplasty device and minimizes the sutures above the leaflets. Together they form a complete remodelling of the ventriculo-aortic junction following its exact course. The junction together with stabilization of the subcommissural triangles defines functional aortic annulus remodelling. External annuloplasty supports the virtual basal ring.

Comparison of Repair vs Replacement in Calcific and Rheumatic Mitral Disease.

BACKGROUND: The benefit of repair over replacement of rheumatic or calcified mitral valve (MV) is debatable. METHODS: Patients who underwent MV repair or replacement for rheumatic or calcified MV disease between 2006 and 2020 were identified in the Polish National Registry of Cardiac Surgery Procedures. Patients who underwent additional procedures other than coronary artery bypass grafting or tricuspid valve surgery, as well as redo or emergency cases, were excluded. The long-term survival was verified based on National Health Fund registry data. The survival was compared between MV repair and replacement in the whole cohort and after propensity score matching. RESULTS: We included 4338 patients: 1859 (43%) with pure mitral regurgitation and 2479 (57%) with mitral stenosis. MV was repaired in 543 patients (29%) with pure regurgitation and 126 (5.1%) with stenosis (P < .001). In total, 984 (23%) patients underwent concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting and 1358 (32%) tricuspid valve surgery. MV repair improved survival (hazard ratio 0.81; 95% CI 0.68-0.97; P = .022) in patients with no mitral stenosis, and had no effect in mitral stenosis (hazard ratio 1.17; 95% CI 0.85-1.59; P = .332). The results were confirmed in propensity-matched cohorts. The freedom from MV reoperation at 10 years was 95.5% ± 1.2% after repair and 96.0% ± 0.7% after MV replacement (P = .416) in the absence of stenosis and 91.8% ± 3.4% after repair vs 95.9% ± 0.5% after replacement in patients with mitral stenosis (P = .065). CONCLUSIONS: Repair of rheumatic/calcified mitral valve should be a preferred option in patients with no mitral stenosis, but confers no benefit if mitral stenosis is present.

Tricuspid intervention for less-than-severe regurgitation simultaneously with minimally invasive mitral valve surgery in patients with atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: While tackling moderate tricuspid regurgitation (TR) simultaneously with left-side heart surgery is recommended by the guidelines, the procedure is still seldom performed, especially in the minimally invasive setting. Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a known marker of both mortality and TR progression after mitral valve surgery. AIMS: This study aimed to investigatev the safety of performing tricuspid intervention and minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS) in patients with preoperative AF. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data from the Polish National Registry of Cardiac Surgery Procedures collected between 2006 and 2021. We included all patients who underwent MIMVS (mini-thoracotomy, totally thoracoscopic, or robotic surgery) and had presented with moderate tricuspid regurgitation and AF preoperatively. The primary endpoint was death from any cause at 30 days and at the longest available follow-up after MIMVS with tricuspid intervention vs. MIMVS alone. We used propensity score (PS) matching to account for baseline differences between groups. RESULTS: We identified 1545 patients with AF undergoing MIMVS, 54.7% were men aged 66.7 (mean [standard deviation, SD], 9.2) years. Of those, 733 (47.4%) underwent concomitant tricuspid valve intervention. At 13 years of follow-up, the addition of tricuspid intervention was associated with 33% higher mortality as compared to MIMVS alone (hazard ratio [HR], 1.33; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.69; P = 0.02). PS matching resulted in identifying 565 well-balanced pairs. Concomitant tricuspid intervention did not influence long-term follow-up (HR, 1.01; 95 CI, 0.74-1.38; P = 0.94). CONCLUSIONS: After adjusting for baseline confounders, the addition of tricuspid intervention for moderate tricuspid regurgitation to MIMVS did not increase perioperative mortality nor influence long-term survival.