Left Ventricular Reconstruction after Dor-Sailing Close to the Wind?

Postinfarction left ventricular aneurysm (LVA) still remains a complication after myocardial infarction with a poor prognosis. Its incidence has decreased due to improved treatment, however, it may have experienced a renaissance due to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. In this retrospective, single-center cohort study, we analyzed n = 17 patients who underwent left ventricular reconstruction after Dor. The results show a mean intensive care unit stay of 8 ± 16 days and a 30-day mortality rate of 6%. Mean postoperative ejection fraction was 44 ± 8% indicating an increase in all but three cases. This suggests that patients with an LVA can be successfully treated, and it is safe when performed by experienced surgeons. Therefore, they should still be considered for surgery early on.

Impella 5.5 Support for Delayed Surgical Ventricular Septal Defect Repair-A Paradigm Shift?

BACKGROUND: Ventricular septal defects (VSDs) remain a rare but life-threatening complication of myocardial infarction. Although the incidence has decreased due to better treatment options, the mortality rate remains high. The timing of VSD repair remains critical to outcome. The use of mechanical circulatory support is rarely described in the literature, although it may help to delay repair to allow tissue stabilization. While Impella is currently considered contraindicated due to the potential worsening of the right-to-left shunt and possible systemic embolization of necrotic debris, there is no comprehensive evidence for this. Therefore, we aimed to analyze whether the use of Impella 5.5 as a first choice for patients undergoing VSD repair should be considered for discussion. METHODS: This retrospective study analyses four consecutive patients who underwent delayed ventricular septal repair after prior implantation of Impella 5.5 (Abiomed Inc., Danvers, Massachusetts, United States). RESULTS: A total of 75% of patients (n = 3) presented with acute right heart failure prior to implantation with a mean systolic pulmonary artery pressure of 64 ± 3.0 mmHg. Implantation was performed under local anesthesia in three cases. The mean time to surgery was 9.8 ± 3.1 days. All patients remained on the Impella 5.5 device postoperatively. Weaning from Impella 5.5 was successful in 75% (n = 3). The mean length of stay in the intensive care unit was 22.3 ± 7.5 days. CONCLUSION: Preoperative implantation of the Impella 5.5 device is a safe and feasible option for patients undergoing VSD repair. Outcomes may be improved by performing Impella implantation under local anesthesia and continuing Impella support after VSD repair. However, it is important to note that these patients represent a high-risk cohort and the mortality rate remains high.

Impact of pulmonary hypertension on short-term outcomes in patients undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement for severe aortic valve stenosis.

OBJECTIVES: In patients with left heart disease and severe aortic stenosis (AS), pulmonary hypertension (PH) is a common comorbidity and predictor of poor prognosis. Untreated AS aggravates PH leading to an increased right ventricular afterload and, in line to right ventricular dysfunction. The surgical benefit of aortic valve replacement (AVR) in elderly patients with severe AS and PH could be limited due to the multiple comorbidities and poor outcomes. Therefore, we purposed to investigate the impact of PH on short-term outcomes in patients with moderate to severe AS who underwent surgical AVR in our heart center. METHODS: In this study we retrospectively analyzed a cohort of 99 patients with severe secondary post-capillary PH who underwent surgical AVR (AVR + PH group) at our heart center between 2010 and 2021 with a regard to perioperative outcomes. In order to investigate the impact of PH on short-term outcomes, the control group of 99 patients without pulmonary hypertension who underwent surgical AVR (AVR group) at our heart center with similar risk profile was accordingly analyzed regarding pre-, intra- and postoperative data. RESULTS: Atrial fibrillation occurred significantly more often (p = .013) in patients who suffered from PH undergoing AVR. In addition, the risk for cardiac surgery (EUROSCORE II) was significantly higher (p < .001) in the above-mentioned group. Likewise, cardiopulmonary bypass time (p = .018), aortic cross-clamp time (p = .008) and average operation time (p = .009) were significantly longer in the AVR + PH group. Furthermore, the in-hospital survival rate was significantly higher (p = .044) in the AVR group compared to the AVR + PH group. Moreover, the dialysis rate was significantly higher (p < .001) postoperatively in patients who suffered PH compared to the patients without PH undergoing AVR. CONCLUSION: In our study, patients with severe PH and severe symptomatic AS who underwent surgical aortic valve replacement showed adverse short-term outcomes compared to patients without PH.

Impact of thrombocytopenia on short-term outcomes in patients undergoing mobile extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support.

INTRODUCTION: The prolonged use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support is associated with increased consumption of platelets and hemolysis. The prognostic impact of thrombocytopenia prior to and during ECMO support on patient's short-, mid- and long-term outcomes has been critically evaluated and discussed over the last years. However, only few data have been published on thrombocytopenia caused by mobile ECMO support. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of thrombocytopenia on short-term outcomes and predictors of in-hospital mortality in patients supported by mobile ECMO for transportation and subsequent weaning in a tertiary centre. METHODS: This retrospective single-centre study analyzed a total of 117 patients requiring mobile veno-arterial (va) ECMO support and subsequent transportation from referral hospitals to our department from January 2015 until December 2021. A total of 15 patients had to be excluded from the analysis for missing data regarding baseline platelet count. Patients were divided into two groups: thrombocytopenia group (<130 × 109/L, n = 44) and non-thrombocytopenia group (≥130 × 109/L, n = 58). The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were successful ECMO-weaning, and the incidence of associated complications (bleeding, acute hepatic failure, acute renal failure, dialysis, and septic shock). RESULTS: The dialysis rate before ECMO initiation was significantly higher (p = .041) in the thrombocytopenia group compared to the non-thrombocytopenia group. The rates of bleeding complications (p = .032) and limb ischemia (p = .003) were significantly higher in patients with low platelet count. Moreover, complication rates of acute hepatic failure (p < .001), acute renal failure (p < .001) and dialysis (p = .033) were significantly higher in the thrombocytopenia group. Also, in-hospital mortality was significantly higher (p = .002) in patients with low platelet count before initiation of ECMO support. CONCLUSION: Based on the results of the present study, patients with thrombocytopenia prior to mobile vaECMO support may be at significantly higher risk for associated complications and short-term mortality.

Low Left-Ventricular Ejection Fraction as a Predictor of Intraprocedural Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has become an established alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR) for patients with moderate-to-high perioperative risk. Periprocedural TAVR complications decrease with growing expertise of implanters. Nevertheless, TAVR can still be accompanied by life-threatening adverse events such as intraprocedural cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). This study analyzed the role of a reduced left-ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in intraprocedural complications during TAVR. Perioperative and postoperative outcomes from patients undergoing TAVR in a high-volume center (600 cases per year) were analyzed retrospectively with regard to their left-ventricular ejection fraction. Patients with a reduced left-ventricular ejection fraction (EF ≤ 40%) faced a significantly higher risk of perioperative adverse events. Within this cohort, patients were significantly more often in need of mechanical ventilation (35% vs. 19%). These patients also underwent CPR (17% vs. 5.8%), defibrillation due to ventricular fibrillation (13% vs. 5.4%), and heart-lung circulatory support (6.1% vs. 2.5%) more often. However, these intraprocedural adverse events showed no significant impact on postoperative outcomes regarding in-hospital mortality, stroke, or in-hospital stay. A reduced preprocedural LVEF is a risk factor for intraprocedural adverse events. With respect to this finding, the identified patient cohort should be treated with more caution to prevent intraprocedural incidents.