Cellular heterogeneity of pluripotent stem cell-derived cardiomyocyte grafts is mechanistically linked to treatable arrhythmias

Preclinical data have confirmed that human pluripotent stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes (PSC-CMs) can remuscularize the injured or diseased heart, with several clinical trials now in planning or recruitment stages. However, because ventricular arrhythmias represent a complication following engraftment of intramyocardially injected PSC-CMs, it is necessary to provide treatment strategies to control or prevent engraftment arrhythmias (EAs). Here, we show in a porcine model of myocardial infarction and PSC-CM transplantation that EAs are mechanistically linked to cellular heterogeneity in the input PSC-CM and resultant graft. Specifically, we identify atrial and pacemaker-like cardiomyocytes as culprit arrhythmogenic subpopulations. Two unique surface marker signatures, signal regulatory protein α (SIRPA)+CD90CD200+ and SIRPA+CD90CD200, identify arrhythmogenic and non-arrhythmogenic cardiomyocytes, respectively. Our data suggest that modifications to current PSC-CM-production and/or PSC-CM-selection protocols could potentially prevent EAs. We further show that pharmacologic and interventional anti-arrhythmic strategies can control and potentially abolish these arrhythmias.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of two decades of reported outcomes for robotic coronary artery bypass grafting

Background: Despite the well-documented safety and feasibility of robotic coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), widespread adoption of this approach remains limited by its steep learning curve, high procedural costs and paucity of data on longer-term efficacy. This current meta-analysis aims to provide a systematic overview of the outcomes of robot-assisted CABG, with a focus on long term graft patency and freedom from major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE).

Methods: A systematic literature search of three electronic databases was conducted for studies reporting outcomes of robotic-assisted CABG, and were grouped based on whether patients underwent robot-assisted minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (RA-MIDCAB), totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass (TECAB) or were mixed. Perioperative and mid-to-long term results from included studies were pooled using meta-analysis of proportion or means in a random effects model.

Results: In the quantitative analysis, thirty-nine eligible studies included 6,152 patients who underwent RA-MIDCAB, 1,729 patients who underwent TECAB and 21,642 patients who underwent either form of robot-assisted CABG. A high level of heterogeneity was observed amongst baseline characteristics. Perioperative mortality and complication rates were low. Conversion rate to full sternotomy overall was less than 3.2% [95% confidence interval (CI): 2.1-5.2%, I2=39%]. At a mean follow-up duration of 5.2 years, overall graft patency was 96% for both RA-MIDCAB and TECAB, and freedom from major adverse cardiac events (MACE) or MACCE was 83.2% (95% CI: 72.0-90.4%; I2=90%) for RA-MIDCAB and 91.6% (95% CI: 86.6-94.9%; I2=76%) for TECAB.

Conclusions: Robot-assisted CABG is observed to have acceptable perioperative and mid-to-long term outcomes with promising overall graft patency.

Predictors of surgical intervention in first episode primary spontaneous pneumothorax requiring chest drain insertion

Background: Primary spontaneous pneumothorax occurs in patients with no underlying lung disease and guidelines recommend chest tube drainage for the first episode, with surgical intervention reserved for recurrent episodes, persistent air leak or failure of lung re-expansion. Modern surgical management is associated with reduced length of hospital stay and superior freedom from recurrence compared with chest tube drainage alone. The objective of this study was to identify risk factors for failed chest tube drainage in patients who present with first episode primary spontaneous pneumothorax.

Methods: A retrospective analysis of patients who presented to Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Australia with first episode PSP and underwent chest tube insertion was performed. Patient demographics and size of pneumothorax were examined in relation to the primary outcome, a composite of failed chest tube drainage and recurrent ipsilateral pneumothorax.

Results: Fifty-five patients underwent chest tube drainage for first episode primary spontaneous pneumothorax between 1st January 2017 and 31st December 2020. Complete lung collapse on admission chest x-ray was associated with an increased risk of the primary outcome (63% versus 19%, OR 7.3 [96% CI 2.0-27.4), P = 0.004).

Conclusion: This small retrospective study found that patients that undergo chest drain insertion for first episode primary spontaneous pneumothorax who present with complete lung collapse on admission are at high risk of requiring pleurodesis and therefore may benefit from early surgical referral.

Comparison of modified Del Nido and Custodiol® cardioplegia in minimally invasive mitral valve surgery

Objectives: In this study, we evaluated if modified Del Nido cardioplegia delivers comparable cardiac protection in comparison to Custodiol® in patients undergoing isolated minimally invasive mitral valve repair.

Methods: From January 2018 to October 2021, all patients undergoing non-emergent isolated minimally invasive mitral valve repair were included in this study. The cardioplegia was chosen at the surgeons’ discretion. The primary end points of this study were peak postoperative cardiac enzyme levels. Secondary end points were in-hospital mortality, hospital stay, occurrence of cardiac arrhythmias, pacemaker implantations, postoperative lactate and sodium levels and postoperative incidence of renal failure requiring dialysis.

Results: A total of 355 patients were included in this study. The mean age of patients was 57. After propensity score matching, a total of 156 pairs were identified. There was no difference in cross-clamp time between both groups. Postoperative creatine kinase levels were higher in patients receiving Custodiol on the 1st and 2nd postoperative days. Creatine kinase isoenzyme MB levels were higher in patients receiving Custodiol on the 2nd postoperative day (0.5 ± 0.2 vs 0.4 ± 0.1 µmol/l s; P < 0.001). Postoperative Troponin T concentrations were similar between both groups. Maximum lactate concentrations were higher in patients receiving Custodiol on the day of surgery (2.4 ± 1.9 vs 2.0 ± 1.1 mmol/l; P = 0.04). The overall hospital stay was longer in patients receiving Del Nido cardioplegia (10.6 ± 3.2 vs 8 ± 4.1 days; P < 0.01).

Conclusions: Modified Del Nido cardioplegia based on Ionosteril® solution offers equivalent protection compared to Custodiol for isolated minimally invasive mitral valve repair.

Extrapleural pneumonectomy for sarcoma: Outcomes of adult patients at a specialized center

Background: Extrapleural pneumonectomy (EPP) is a complex surgical procedure involving en-bloc resection of the parietal and visceral pleura, lung, pericardium, and ipsilateral diaphragm. Small case series of pleural-based sarcoma of predominantly pediatric patients suggest EPP may be a life-prolonging surgical option. We aimed to describe the characteristics and outcomes of adults who underwent EPP at a specialized sarcoma center.

Methods: Clinicopathologic variables, surgical details, and follow-up information were extracted for patients undergoing EPP for pleural-based sarcoma between August 2017 and December 2020. Primary outcomes were event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) from the date of EPP. Secondary outcomes were disease-free interval (DFI) prior to EPP, and early and late postoperative complications.

Results: Eight patients were identified, seven with soft tissue sarcoma and one with bone sarcoma. Patients had either localized disease with a primary thoracic sarcoma, sarcoma recurrent to the thorax, or de novo metastatic disease. All patients underwent resection of their pleural-based sarcoma by an experienced cardiothoracic surgeon, and some patients had pre or postoperative treatment. The perioperative morbidity was comparable with previously published reports of EPP performed in mesothelioma patients. At median follow-up of 22.5 months, median EFS was 6.0 months and OS was 20.7 months. Six patients (75%) had disease recurrence; five (62.5%) died of progressive disease. Two patients (25%) had not recurred: one died of a radiation-related esophageal rupture, and one was alive with no evidence of disease at 37.0 months. Characteristics of those with the longest EFS included low-grade histology and achieving a metabolic response to preoperative chemotherapy.

Conclusions: In adults with pleural-based sarcoma, EPP is rarely curative but appears to be a feasible salvage procedure when performed at specialized centers. Patient selection is critical with strong consideration given to multimodal therapy to optimize patient outcomes. In the absence of a confirmed response to neoadjuvant treatment, long term survival is poor and EPP should not be recommended

Early and long-term outcomes following redo mitral valve surgery in patients with prior minimally invasive mitral valve surgery

Objectives: The frequency of minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MVS) has steadily increased over the last decades and therefore surgeons are now encountering an increasing number of patients requiring mitral valve (MV) reoperations post-minimally invasive MVS. The aim of this study was to analyse the early postoperative outcomes and the long-term survival in patients who undergo reoperative MVS following previous minimally invasive surgery.

Methods: Patients who underwent redo MVS following prior minimally invasive MVS between January 2002 and December 2021 were included in our analysis. Study data were prospectively collected and retrospectively analysed. The primary outcomes were 30-day mortality and long-term survival.

Results: Among the 187 included patients, 34 (18.2%) underwent repeat MV repair and 153 (81.8%) MV replacement. The median age was 66 years (interquartile range 56-74) and 80 (42.8%) patients were female. Redo MVS was performed through median sternotomy in 169 patients (90.4%). A total of 77 (41.2%) patients had additional concomitant procedures. The median intensive care unit stay was 1 day (1-5). The 30-day mortality was 6.4% (12/187). Estimated survival at 5 and 12 years was 61.8% and 38.3%, respectively. Preoperative stroke (hazard ratio 3.28, 95% confidence interval 1.37-7.85, P = 0.007) as well as infective endocarditis (hazard ratio 1.85; 95% confidence interval 1.09-3.11, P = 0.021) were independent predictors of long-term mortality.

Conclusions: Redo MVS following prior minimally invasive MVS can be performed safely with low early perioperative mortality and acceptable long-term survival. Preoperative stroke, infective endocarditis and concomitant tricuspid valve surgery are independent predictors of long-term mortality.

Pacemaker implantation after concomitant tricuspid valve repair in patients undergoing minimally invasive mitral valve surgery: Results from the Mini-Mitral International Registry

Objective: Randomized evidence suggests a high risk of pacemaker implantation for patients undergoing mitral valve (MV) surgery with concomitant tricuspid valve repair (cTVR). We investigated the impact of cTVR on outcomes in the Mini-Mitral International Registry.

Methods: From 2015 to 2021, 7513 patients underwent minimally invasive MV with or without cTVR in 17 international centers (MV: n = 5609, cTVR: n = 1113). Propensity matching generated 1110 well-balanced pairs. Multivariable analysis was applied.

Results: Patients with cTVR were older and had more comorbidities. Propensity matching eliminated most differences except for more TR in patients who underwent cTVR (77.2% vs 22.1% MV, P < .001). Mean matched age was 71 years, and 45% were male. European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II was still 2.68% (interquartile range [IQR], 0.80-2.63) vs 1.9% (IQR, 1.12-3.9) in matched MV (P < .001). MV replacement (30%) and atrial fibrillation surgery (32%) were similar in both groups. Cardiopulmonary bypass (161 minutes [IQR, 133-203] vs MV: 130 minutes [IQR, 103-166]; P < .001) and crossclamp times (93 minutes [IQR, 66-123] vs MV: 83 minutes [IQR, 64-107]; P < .001) were longer with cTVR. Although in-hospital mortality was similar (cTVR: 3.3% vs MV: 2.2%; P = .5), postoperative pacemaker implantations (9% vs MV: 5.8%; P = .02), low cardiac output syndrome (7.7% vs MV: 4.4%; P = .02), and acute kidney injury (13.8% vs MV: 10%; P = .01) were more frequent with cTVR. cTVR eliminated relevant TR in most patients (greater-than-moderate TR: 6.8%). Multivariable analysis identified MV replacement, atrial fibrillation, and cTVR as risk factors of postoperative pacemaker implantation.

Conclusions: cTVR in minimally invasive MV surgery is an independent risk factor for pacemaker implantation in this international registry. It is also associated with more bleeding, low output syndrome, and acute kidney injury. It remains unclear whether technical or patient factors (or both) explain these differences.

Risk of Bias in Randomized Clinical Trials Comparing Transcatheter and Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Importance: Recent European Society of Cardiology/European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (ESC/EACTS) guidelines highlighted some concerns about the randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for aortic stenosis. Quantification of these biases has not been previously performed.

Objective: To assess whether randomization protects RCTs comparing TAVI and SAVR from biases other than nonrandom allocation.

Data sources: A systematic review of the literature between January 1, 2007, and June 6, 2022, on MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was performed. Specialist websites were also checked for unpublished data.

Study selection: The study included RCTs with random allocation to TAVI or SAVR with a maximum 5-year follow-up.

Data extraction and synthesis: Data extraction was performed by 2 independent investigators following the PRISMA guidelines. A random-effects meta-analysis was used for quantifying pooled rates and differential rates between treatments of deviation from random assigned treatment (DAT), loss to follow-up, and receipt of additional treatments.

Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcomes were the proportion of DAT, loss to follow-up, and patients who were provided additional treatments and myocardial revascularization, together with their ratio between treatments. The measures were the pooled overall proportion of the primary outcomes and the risk ratio (RR) in the TAVI vs SAVR groups.

Results: The search identified 8 eligible trials including 8849 participants randomly assigned to undergo TAVI (n = 4458) or SAVR (n = 4391). The pooled proportion of DAT among the sample was 4.2% (95% CI, 3.0%-5.6%), favoring TAVI (pooled RR vs SAVR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.08-0.36; P < .001). The pooled proportion of loss to follow-up was 4.8% (95% CI, 2.7%-7.3%). Meta-regression showed a significant association between the proportion of participants lost to follow-up and follow-up time (slope, 0.042; 95% CI, 0.017-0.066; P < .001). There was an imbalance of loss to follow-up favoring TAVI (RR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.28-0.55; P < .001). The pooled proportion of patients who had additional procedures was 10.4% (95% CI, 4.4%-18.5%): 4.6% (95% CI, 1.5%-9.3%) in the TAVI group and 16.5% (95% CI, 7.5%-28.1%) in the SAVR group (RR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.15-0.50; P < .001). The imbalance between groups also favored TAVI for additional myocardial revascularization (RR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.24-0.68; P < .001).

Conclusions and relevance: This study suggests that, in RCTs comparing TAVI vs SAVR, there are substantial proportions of DAT, loss to follow-up, and additional procedures together with systematic selective imbalance in the same direction characterized by significantly lower proportions of patients undergoing TAVI that might affect internal validity.

Stay in the loop

Subscribe to our Heart to Heart Newsletter to keep up with the latest developments in heart and lung research from The Baird Institute.

Honour a Loved One

  • Fundraise in memory of someone special to you.

Challenge Yourself

  • Run a marathon
  • Do a long bike ride
  • Walk 10km each day for a month
  • Do 50 sit ups every day for a week
  • Join an organised event such as the City to Surf

Organise a community event

  • Have a backyard sausage sizzle
  • Host a trivia night

Seek sponsorship to help you quit those bad habits

  • Give up smoking
  • Refrain from alcohol for a month or more

Celebrate Through Giving

  • Choose to give on your birthday: Instead of giving you gifts, ask your friends and family to donate to The Baird Institute.
  • Say “I do” to improving the lives of heart and lung patients: Invite guests to donate to The Baird Institute on your wedding day
  • Turn anniversaries or personal milestones into fundraising events.

Create a CrowdRaiser on GiveNow

  1. Go to CrowdRaiser for The Baird Institute.
  2. Click on the button “Fundraise for this cause” – just under the header image.
  3. Create your Crowdraiser. Fill in the requested details.
  4. Customise your campaign. Add images and messages to make your CrowdRaiser unique.
  5. Share the link to your fundraising page via email, social media, or any way you like.
  6. Let us know via [email protected] that you have created a fundraiser so we can say thank you.

Join a community passionate about making a difference. GiveNow provides a dedicated platform for Australian charities, ensuring your efforts directly support our mission.

Start a Facebook Fundraiser

  1. Go to Facebook fundraisers.
  2. Click on the blue button – “Select nonprofit”
  3. Search for and select The Baird Institute
  4. Set your fundraising target
  5. Choose your campaign end date & a title for your Fundraiser
  6. Personalise your fundraiser: Use the existing wording and photos or choose your own.
  7. Click on ‘Create’.
  8. Invite friends and family. Share the link for your fundraiser and encourage others to contribute.
  9. Let us know via [email protected] that you have created a fundraiser so we can say thank you.

Celebrate where your friends and family connect. Leverage your social network to make a real impact.