Minimally Invasive Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation: A Comparative Study.

Left ventricular assist device (LVAD) is now a routine therapy for advanced heart failure. Minimally invasive approach via thoracotomy for LVAD implantation is getting popular due to its potential advantage over the conventional sternotomy approach in terms of reduced risk at re-operation due to sternal sparing. We compared the approaches (thoracotomy and sternotomy) to determine the superiority. Minimally invasive approach involved fitting of the LVAD inflow cannula into left ventricle apex via left anterior thoracotomy and anastomosis of outflow graft to ascending aorta via right anterior thoracotomy. In the sternotomy approach, both the procedures were performed via sternotomy. Outcomes in patients after LVAD implantation were compared depending on these approaches for the surgery. Two hundred and five continuous flow LVAD implantations performed between July 2006 and June 2015 at a single center were divided based on surgical approach, that is, sternotomy (n = 180) and thoracotomy (n = 25) groups. There was no significant difference between the groups in relation to patient demographics, preoperative hemodynamic parameters, laboratory markers, or risk factors. There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of postoperative hemodynamic parameters, laboratory markers, bleeding and requirement of blood products, intensive care unit, and hospital stay or complications of LVAD surgery. There were no significant differences in terms of long-term survival (Log-Rank P = 0.953), however, thoracotomy, compared to sternotomy approach, incurred significantly less requirement of temporary right ventricular assist (4 vs. 19.4%, P = 0.041). Minimally invasive bilateral thoracotomy approach for LVAD implantation in addition to benefits of sternal sparing avoids dilatation of right ventricle and reduces chances of right ventricular failure requiring temporary right ventricular assist.

Impact of concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting on in-hospital outcome in octogenarians undergoing aortic valve replacement.

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: Abundant data are available reporting excellent in-hospital outcomes after surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR) in octogenarians. However, there is a paucity of studies reporting the in-hospital outcome of concomitant AVR and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in this group of patients. Hence, a comparison was made of the impact of concomitant AVR and CABG versus isolated AVR on in-hospital outcome in octogenarians. METHODS: Between January 2001 and October 2011, a total of 114 consecutive octogenarians undergoing combined AVR and CABG were compared with a control group of octogenarians (n = 68) undergoing isolated AVR. A retrospective analysis was performed of a prospectively collected cardiac surgery database. In addition, the medical notes and charts of all study patients were reviewed. RESULTS: The two groups had a similar mean age (AVR 82.3 +/- 2.4 years versus AVR + CABG 82.6 +/- 2.1 years; p = 0.91), demographics and EuroSCORE (AVR 11.4 versus AVR + CABG 13.2; p = 0.12). The aortic cross-clamp and cardiopulmonary bypass times were longer for AVR + CABG patients (p < 0.001). In-hospital mortality (7.4% after isolated AVR, 9.6% after AVR + CABG; p = 0.35 between groups) and major clinical outcomes for the two groups were found to be similar except for an increased need for hemofiltration in AVR + CABG patients (p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: In-hospital outcomes for concomitant AVR and CABG in octogenarians are comparable to those of isolated AVR, justifying the performance of combined AVR and CABG in this high-risk group of carefully selected patients.

Concomitant off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting results in improved in-hospital outcomes for patients with ischemic mitral regurgitation undergoing surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Surgical management of ischemic mitral regurgitation (IMR) has primarily consisted of revascularization with or without the addition of mitral valve repair or replacement. We hypothesize that performing off-pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) grafting before fixing MR improves in-hospital outcomes for patients with IMR undergoing surgery. METHODS: From January 2000 through December 2010, a total of 96 consecutive patients with moderate or severe IMR, as determined by preoperative echocardiography, underwent on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) (n = 66) or OPCAB (n = 30) revascularization with concomitant mitral valve repair or replacement. A retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected cardiac surgery database (PATS; Dendrite Clinical Systems, Oxford, UK) was performed. In addition, medical notes and charts were reviewed for all study patients. RESULTS: The 2 groups had similar preoperative demographic and EuroSCORE risk-stratification characteristics. The operative mortality rate for the entire cohort was 9.4%. Patients who underwent OPCAB grafting had a lower operative mortality than those who underwent CABG (3.3% versus 12.1%; P = .006). The mean ±SD cardiopulmonary bypass time (82.7 ± 34.7 minutes versus 160.7 ± 45.2 minutes; P < .001) and cross-clamp time (49.0 ± 22.4 minutes versus 103.4 ± 39.5 minutes; P < .001) were significantly shorter in the off-pump group than in the on-pump group. The OPCAB group also had significantly less in-hospital morbidity and shorter stays in the intensive care unit and the hospital. CONCLUSION: Our analysis shows that OPCAB grafting (compared with conventional CABG) before repairing MR is associated with favorable in-hospital outcomes for patients undergoing surgery for IMR.

Sternal sparing bilateral symmetrical thoracotomy for implantation of left ventricular assist device.

Reopening the chest in patients with left ventricular assist devices at the time of a heart transplant is challenging due to adhesions and the possibility of injury to vital structures. The sternal sparing bilateral thoracotomy approach utilized to implant a left ventricular assist device minimizes the chances of such injuries and offers a cosmetically better outcome. We demonstrate a procedure for implanting a left ventricular assist device in a 54-year-old man diagnosed with dilated cardiomyopathy who suffered rapid decompensation despite maximum medical therapy.

Comparison of temporary ventricular assist devices and extracorporeal life support in post-cardiotomy cardiogenic shock.

OBJECTIVES: Post-cardiotomy cardiogenic shock (PCCS) results in substantial morbidity and mortality, whereas refractory cases require mechanical circulatory support (MCS). The aim of the study was to compare extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and ventricular assist devices (VADs) utilized in the management of PCCS. METHODS: In total, 56 consecutive patients who developed PCCS from 2005 to 2014 required MCS as a bridge to decision-24 were supported with a VAD and 32 with an ECMO. Groups were compared with respect to pre- and intraoperative characteristics and early and long-term outcomes to evaluate the impact of the type of MCS on complications and survival. Data are mean ± standard deviation and median with quartiles. RESULTS: EuroSCORE II was significantly higher in the VAD group than in the ECMO group (28 ± 20 vs 13 ± 16, P = 0.020) corresponding to significantly higher New York Heart Association (P = 0.031) class and Canadian Cardiovascular Society class (P = 0.040) in the cohort. The median duration of support was 10 (4-23) and 7 (4-10) days in the VAD and ECMO groups, respectively. There were no significant differences in ITU (P = 0.262), hospital stay (P = 0.193) and incidences of most postoperative complications. A significantly higher proportion of patients was successfully weaned/upgraded in the VAD group [13 (54%) vs 4 (13%), P = 0.048] with a trend towards higher discharge rate [9 (38%) vs 5 (16%), P = 0.061]. Overall cumulative survival in early follow-up [Breslow (Generalized Wilcoxon) P = 0.017] and long-term follow-up [Log-rank (Mantel-Cox) p = 0.015] was significantly better in the VAD group. CONCLUSIONS: VAD and ECMO represent essential tools to support patients with PCCS. Our preliminary results might indicate some benefits of using VAD in this group of patients; however, this evidence should be further assessed in larger multicentre trials.

A Simple and Effective Technique for Anatomical Approximation of the Upper Pericardium Using Hemostatic Clips.

Closure of the pericardium is important to protect bypass grafts, the great vessels, and the heart from injury due to sternal dehiscence. Furthermore, it is reported to reduce the formation of pericardial adhesions and thus facilitate entry into the chest at resternotomy. We here describe a simple, reproducible, and effective technique for tension-free approximation of the upper pericardium by applying small hemostatic clips to the preserved thymic fascia overlying the pericardium.

Long-term follow-up of off-pump and on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting.

OBJECTIVE: Despite increasing recognition of the benefits of off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), concerns persist regarding its impact on long-term mortality and freedom from reintervention. In this study, we assessed the impact of off-pump CABG on long-term outcomes. METHODS: From January 2002 to December 2002, a total of 307 consecutive patients who underwent isolated multivessel off-pump CABG at our institution were compared with a control group of 397 patients who underwent multivessel on-pump CABG during the same period. Perioperative data were prospectively collected and compared. In addition, univariate and risk-adjusted comparisons between the two groups were performed at 10 years. RESULTS: After adjusting for clinical covariates, off-pump CABG did not emerge as a significant independent predictor of long-term mortality [hazard ratio (HR), 0.91; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.70-1.12], readmission to hospital for cardiac cause (HR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.78-1.10), or the need for reintervention (HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.87-1.05). CONCLUSIONS: At long-term follow-up, off-pump CABG remains a safe and effective myocardial revascularization strategy with no adverse impact on survival or freedom from reintervention.

Does grafting of the left anterior descending artery with the in situ right internal thoracic artery have an impact on late outcomes in the context of bilateral internal thoracic artery usage?

BACKGROUND: Despite their well-established advantages, bilateral internal thoracic arteries (BITA) are still largely underused. This is partly because of the technical complexities associated with the use of the right internal thoracic artery (RITA) to guarantee the universally accepted gold standard left internal thoracic artery (LITA) to left anterior descending artery (LAD) graft. The use of the in situ RITA for LAD grafting is a less technically demanding strategy. The impact of this strategy on early and late outcomes is investigated in the context of BITA usage. METHODS: Among 1667 patients undergoing first-time isolated coronary artery bypass grafting using BITA, in situ RITA for LAD grafting was used in 546 patients compared with in situ LITA to LAD in 1121 patients. Propensity score matching was carried out to investigate the impact of in situ RITA to LAD on early and late outcomes including mortality and need for repeat revascularization. RESULTS: A total of 546 propensity matched pairs were available for comparison. In the propensity matched cohort, the mean follow-up time was 7.8±3.8 years. RITA to LAD did not increase the risk for late death (hazard ratio [HR], 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.48-1.26), the need for repeat revascularization (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.70-2.42), and the composite of death or repeat revascularization (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.64-1.14). CONCLUSIONS: Using in situ BITA with retrosternal in situ RITA for LAD grafting is a technically less demanding, safe, and effective strategy that can increase usage of BITA by avoiding a composite graft configuration or technically challenging retrocaval routing of in situ RITA through the transverse sinus.

Does off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting negatively impact long-term survival and freedom from reintervention?

Recently published evidence has raised concerns about worse late mortality and increasing need for reintervention after off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting. We undertook this study to assess the impact of off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting on survival and freedom from reintervention at 10 years. From January 2002 to December 2002, 307 consecutive patients who had isolated multivessel off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting at our institution were compared to a control group of 397 patients that underwent multivessel on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting during the same period. In addition, univariate and risk-adjusted comparisons between the two groups were performed at 10 years. Kaplan-Meier survival was similar for the two cohorts. After adjusting for clinical covariates, off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting did not emerge as a significant independent predictor of long-term mortality (Hazard Ratio 0.91; 95% Confidence Interval 0.70-1.12), readmission to hospital for cardiac cause (Hazard Ratio 0.96; 95% Confidence Interval 0.78-1.10), or the need for reintervention (Hazard Ratio 0.93; 95% Confidence Interval 0.87-1.05). Off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting compared with on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting does not adversely impact survival or freedom from reintervention at a 10-year follow-up.

Does perioperative furosemide usage reduce the need for renal replacement therapy in cardiac surgery patients?

A best evidence topic was constructed according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was 'Does perioperative furosemide usage reduce the need for renal replacement therapy in cardiac surgery patients?' Forty-seven papers were found using the reported search, of which 10 represented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The authors, journal, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes and results of these papers are tabulated. Current best available evidence to resolve the issue includes a systematic review and nine randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The systematic review of seven RCTs and one observational study has demonstrated that in patients who have undergone cardiac surgery, a more consistent and sustained diuresis is produced by a continuous infusion of furosemide compared with intermittent bolus doses of furosemide. However, there does not appear to be a significant difference in the total urine output or a change in serum electrolyte levels when furosemide is administered as a continuous infusion compared with intermittent bolus doses. Three RCTs recruiting neonatal and paediatric patients after open heart surgery also validated the safety and efficacy of furosemide infusion as well as intermittent bolus doses. Two of the five RCTS in adult cardiac surgery patients showed that furosemide infusion was associated with a reduced need for renal replacement therapy (RRT), while two RCTs failed to show any benefit and one reported an increased incidence of renal impairment. We conclude that continuous furosemide infusion in the perioperative period promotes a gentle and sustained diuresis in cardiac surgery patients. The evidence supporting the benefit of this strategy in terms of reducing the need for RRT is weak. At the same time, current best available evidence, albeit from small RCTs, suggests that the timely introduction of continuous furosemide infusion does not increase the incidence of renal impairment after cardiac surgery.