Extra credit for disruption: trend of disruption in radiology academic journals.

AIM: To identify the most disruptive publications, which are those that are cited more frequently than their own references, in academic radiology journals and their characteristics, such as the number of authors and relative time to publication. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was undertaken to identify the 100 most disruptive publications in the field of radiology. Subsequently, statistical analysis was applied to establish the distribution of disruptive scores of the isolated publications using a non-parametric probability density function. The relation between disruptive scores and citation counts was then determined, with the aid of a correlation coefficient. Finally, data regarding any significant connection between disruption scores and time of publication, number of authors, and study design were examined. RESULTS: Analysing the top 100 papers in increments of 10-year periods showed no significant difference in the distribution of disruption scores over time. No correlation between an article's citation count and disruption score was established. Additionally, no significant relation between the number of authors/study design and disruption scores was identified. CONCLUSION: The disruption score highlights significant impact elements not entirely accounted for by citation count. Its potential benefit in assessing scientific impact should be contemplated.

Post-cardiac surgery outcomes following COVID-19 infection in unvaccinated patients.

The provision of cardiac surgery services nationwide has been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. We noticed a high COVID-19 mortality rate in unvaccinated patients who were diagnosed with COVID-19 after recent cardiac surgery. All the patients were tested negative for COVID-19 before surgery. We conducted a review of our hospital data and reported our findings. We identified 15 patients and reported 7 deaths (46.7%). All the patients died from COVID-19 or its complications. We recommend that cardiac centres actively promote vaccination before cardiac surgery and also enhance infection control measures to prevent nosocomial infections.

Minimally invasive "pocket incision" aortic valve surgery.

A minimally invasive approach to aortic valve surgery through a transverse incision ("pocket incision") at the right second intercostal space was examined. Sixteen patients with a mean age of 30 years underwent this approach. The third costal cartilage was either excised (n = 5) or dislocated (n = 11). The right internal mammary artery was preserved. Cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) was established with aortic-right atrial cannulation in all except the first case. Aortic valve replacements (AVR) were performed in 15 patients and one had aortic valve repair with concomitant ventricular septal defect closure. There was no mortality and no major complications. The aortic cross-clamp, CPB and operative times were 72 +/- 19 mins, 105 +/- 26 mins and 3 hrs 00 min +/- 29 mins respectively. The mean time to extubation was 5.7 +/- 4.0 hrs, ICU stay of 27 +/- 9 hrs and postoperative hospital stay of 5.1 +/- 1.2 days. Minimally invasive "pocket incision" aortic valve surgery is technically feasible and safe. It has the advantages of central cannulation for CPB, preservation of the internal mammary artery and avoiding sternotomy. This approach is cosmetically acceptable and allows rapid patient recovery.