In a large-volume multidisciplinary setting individual surgeon volume does not impact LVAD outcomes.

BACKGROUND: In complex operations surgeon volume may impact outcomes. We sought to understand if individual surgeon volume affects left ventricular assist device (LVAD) outcomes. METHODS: We reviewed primary LVAD implants at an experienced ventricular assist devices (VAD)/transplant center between 2013 and 2019. Cases were dichotomized into a high-volume group (surgeons averaging 11 or more LVAD cases per year), and a low-volume group (10 or less per year). Propensity score matching was performed. Survival to discharge, 1-year survival, and incidence of major adverse events were compared between the low- and high-volume groups. Predictors of survival were identified with multivariate analysis. RESULTS: There were 315 patients who met inclusion criteria-45 in the low-volume group, 270 in the high-volume group. There was no difference in survival to hospital discharge between the low (91.9%) and high (83.3%) volume matched groups (p = .22). Survival at 1-year was also similar (85.4% vs. 80.6%, p = .55). There was no difference in the incidence of major adverse events between the groups. Predictors of mortality in the first year included: age (hazards ratio [HR]: 1.061, p < .001), prior sternotomy (HR: 1.991, p = .01), increasing international normalized ratio (HR: 4.748, p < .001), increasing AST (HR: 1.001, p < .001), increasing bilirubin (HR: 1.081, p = .01), and preoperative mechanical ventilation (HR: 2.662, p = .005). Individual surgeon volume was not an independent predictor of discharge or 1-year survival. CONCLUSION: There was no difference in survival or adverse events between high and low volume surgeons suggesting that, in an experienced multidisciplinary setting, low-volume VAD surgeons can achieve similar outcomes to their high-volume colleagues.

Combination plate and band fixation for primary closure in bilateral lung transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Sternal complications are common following transverse thoracosternotomy in patients undergoing bilateral lung transplantation. We present a single-institution experience using a next generation rigid fixation system for primary sternal closure following transverse sternotomy for bilateral lung transplantation. METHODS: Retrospective review was performed on all patients who had bilateral sequential lung transplants utilizing a transverse thoracosternotomy from 2016 to 2020. Demographics, baseline characteristics, peri-operative data, and outcomes were collected, reviewed and summarized. Two groups of patients were identified: wire cerclage (Group A), combination plate-and-band rigid fixation (Group B). The primary outcome was sternal complications, which were divided into mechanical and non-mechanical. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients met inclusion criteria. Three patients (13.6%) were in Group A, nineteen patients (86.4%) in Group B. Two patients in each Group A (66.6%) and Group B (10.5%) experienced a sternal complication. Sternal complications included sternal dehiscence (2), sternal malunion (1), and surgical site infection (1). One patient with plate-and-band fixation (5.2%) had a mechanical sternal complication. Three patients required reoperation secondary to sternal complication. CONCLUSIONS: The utilization of a combination plate-and-band rigid fixation system for primary closure is safe and may be an effective method to reduce sternal complications following transverse thoracosternotomy for lung transplantation.

Does Tracheostomy Improve Outcomes in Those Receiving Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation?

Patients receiving venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) often require extended periods of ventilation. We examined the role of tracheostomy on outcomes of patients supported with VV-ECMO. We reviewed all patients at our institution who received VV-ECMO between 2013 and 2019. Patients who received a tracheostomy were compared with VV-ECMO-supported patients without tracheostomy. The primary outcome measure was survival to hospital discharge. Secondary outcome measures included length of intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital stay and adverse events related to the tracheostomy procedure. Multivariable analysis was performed to identify predictors of in-hospital mortality. We dichotomized patients receiving tracheostomy into an "early" and "late" group based on median days to tracheostomy following ECMO cannulation and separate analysis was performed. One hundred and fifty patients met inclusion criteria, 32 received a tracheostomy. Survival to discharge was comparable between the groups (53.1% vs. 57.5%, p = 0.658). Predictors of mortality on multivariable analysis included Respiratory ECMO Survival Prediction (RESP) score (odds ratio [OR] = 0.831, p = .015) and blood urea nitrogen (BUN) (OR = 1.026, p = 0.011). Tracheostomy performance was not predictive of mortality (OR = 0.837, p = 0.658). Bleeding requiring intervention occurred in 18.7% of patients following tracheostomy. Early tracheostomy (<7 days from the initiation of VV-ECMO) was associated with shorter ICU (25 vs. 36 days, p = 0.04) and hospital (33 vs. 47, p = 0.017) length of stay compared with late tracheostomy. We conclude that tracheostomy can be performed safely in patients receiving VV-ECMO. Mortality in these patients is predicted by severity of the underlying disease. Performance of tracheostomy does not impact survival. Early tracheostomy may decrease length of stay.