PubMed Posts

This study aims to compare surgical outcomes and in-hospital cost between robotic-assisted surgery (RAS), laparoscopic and open approaches for benign gynaecology, colorectal and urological patients and to explore the association between cost and surgical complexity. This retrospective cohort study included consecutive patients undergoing RAS, laparoscopic or open surgery for benign gynaecology, colorectal or urological conditions between July 2018 and June 2021 at a major public hospital in Sydney. Patients’ characteristics, surgical outcomes and in-hospital cost variables were extracted from the hospital medical records using routinely collected diagnosis-related groups (DRG) codes. Comparison of the outcomes within each surgical discipline and according to surgical complexity were performed using non-parametric statistics. Of the 1,271 patients included, 756 underwent benign gynaecology (54 robotic, 652 laparoscopic, 50 open), 233 colorectal (49 robotic, 123 laparoscopic, 61 open) and 282 urological surgeries (184 robotic, 12 laparoscopic, 86 open). Patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery (robotic or laparoscopic) presented with a significantly shorter length of hospital stay when compared to open surgical approach (P < 0.001). Rates of postoperative morbidity were significantly lower in robotic colorectal and urological procedures when compared to laparoscopic and open approaches. The total in-hospital cost of robotic benign gynaecology, colorectal and urological surgeries were significantly higher than other surgical approaches, independent of the surgical complexity. RAS resulted in better surgical outcomes, especially when compared to open surgery in patients presenting with benign gynaecology, colorectal and urological diseases. However, the total cost of RAS was higher than laparoscopic and open surgical approaches

Reoperative valve surgery is being performed with increasing frequency in the last decades. This is mainly due to the increasing use of bioprosthetic valves, a growing population of patients presenting with prosthetic valve endocarditis, and an ageing population. Reoperative valve surgery has been historically associated with poorer outcomes than primary valve surgery. However, continuous advancements in modern cardiac surgery techniques and perioperative care have led to considerable improvement in postoperative outcomes. This review outlines considerations for reoperative heart valve surgery including preoperative assessment, perioperative management, and technical surgical aspects to maximize the chances of successful outcomes in this challenging patient population.

Objectives: Perivalvular abscesses with destruction of the aortomitral junction (AMJ) are a severe complication of infective endocarditis (IE) and are associated with high mortality and complex management. The Hemi-Commando procedure is a mitral valve (MV) sparing alternative to the Commando procedure in suitable patients with complex IE and paravalvular destruction. This study reviews the mid-term outcomes in patients undergoing the Hemi-Commando procedure for treating IE with destruction of the AMJ.

Methods: The clinical outcomes of patients with IE and AMJ involvement who underwent the Hemi-Commando procedure between 2015 and 2021 at the Leipzig Heart Center were retrospectively analyzed. Primary outcomes were 30-day mortality and 1-year survival. Secondary outcome was 1-year freedom from reoperation.

Results: A total of 22 patients underwent the Hemi-Commando procedure during the study period. The patients’ mean age was 59.8 ± 18.3 years. The study population was predominantly male (86.4%). Preoperative-sepsis was present in 6 (27.3%) patients, and the median EuroScore II was 28.5%. Almost two-thirds (N = 14; 63.6%) of the patients presented with native IE. Streptococci were the most common pathogens (N = 8; 36.4%). Paravalvular abscess was found intraoperatively in 16 (72.7%) patients. The 30-day mortality was 13.6%. The estimated 1- and 3-year survival rates were 77.5% and 66.4%, respectively. The estimated freedom from reoperation at 1 and 3 years was 92.3%.

Conclusion: The Hemi-Commando procedure offers an acceptable mid-term survival chance with low reoperation rates and is, therefore, a reasonable MV-sparing alternative to the Commando procedure in suitable patients with extensive IE and perivalvular involvement.

Background: Early results have illustrated the multiportal robotic approach to be safe and oncologically efficacious in the treatment of thoracic malignancies. Industry leaders have improved upon the lessons learned during the early multiportal studies and have now come to establish the feasibility of the biportal, and subsequently the uniportal robotic-assisted approach, all in an effort to offer patients equivalent or better outcomes with less surgical trauma. No current, coherent body of evidence currently exists outlining the early-term outcomes of patients undergoing uniportal robotic-assisted thoracic surgery. This systematic review and meta-analysis sought to clarify the early-phase outcomes of these patients.

Methods: An electronic search of four databases was performed to identify relevant studies outlining the immediate post-operative outcomes of patients undergoing uniportal robotic-assisted thoracic surgeries. The primary endpoint was defined as technical success (i.e., no conversion to secondary robotic, video-assisted thoracoscopic, or open approaches). Secondary endpoints of interest included post-operative outcomes and complication rates. A meta-analysis using a random effects model of proportions or means was applied, as appropriate.

Results: The search strategy ultimately yielded 12 relevant studies for inclusion. A total of 240 patients (52% male) split across cohort studies and case reports were identified. The mean age of the two groups was 59.7±3.0 and 58.1±6.8 years, respectively. The mean operative time was 133.8±38.2 and 150.0±52.2 minutes, respectively. Length of hospital stay was 4.4±1.6 and 4.3±1.1 days, respectively. The mean blood loss was 80.0±25.1 mL The majority of identified procedures were lobectomies, segmentectomies, and wedge resections, though complex sleeve resections and anterior mediastinal mass resections were also completed. Cumulative technical success was 99.9%.

Conclusions: The uniportal robotic-assisted approach, when completed in expert hands, has been illustrated to have exceedingly low rates of conversion to secondary procedures, along with short length of stay (LOS), minimal blood loss, and short procedural times (variable depending on operation type). Current evidence on the feasibility of this approach will be bolstered by upcoming multi-institutional series

Objectives: Minimally invasive access has become the preferred choice in mitral and/or tricuspid valve surgery (MVR±TVR). Reported outcomes are at least similar to classic sternotomy although aortic cross-clamp times are usually longer.

Methods: We analyzed the largest registry of MVR±TVR patients (MMIR) for the relationship between aortic cross-clamp times, mortality and other outcomes. From 2015-2021, 7,513 consecutive patients underwent mini-MVR±TVR in 17 international Heart-Valve-Centres. Data were collected according to MVARC definitions and 6878 patients with one cross-clamp period were analysed. Uni- and multivariable regression analyses were used to assess outcomes in relation to aortic cross-clamp times.

Results: Median age was 65 years (57% male). Median EuroSCORE II was 1.3% (IQR: 0.80-2.63). Minimally invasive access was either by direct vision (28%), video-assisted (41%) or totally endoscopic/robotic (31%). Femoral cannulation was used in 93%. Three quarters were repairs with 17% additional TVR and 19% AF-ablation. Cardiopulmonary bypass and cross-clamp times were 135 min (IQR : 107-173) and 85 min (IQR : 64-111), respectively. Postoperative events were death (1.6%), stroke (1.2%), bleeding requiring revision (6%), low cardiac output syndrome (3.5%) and acute kidney injury (6.2%, mainly stage I). Statistical analyses identified significant associations between cross-clamp time and mortality, low cardiac output syndrome and acute kidney injury (all p < 0.001). Age, low ejection fraction and emergent surgery were risk factors, but variables of “increased complexity” (redo, endocarditis, concomitant procedures) were not.

Conclusions: Aortic cross-clamp time is associated with mortality as well as postoperatively impaired cardiac and renal function. Thus, implementing measures to reduce cross-clamp time may improve outcomes.

Objectives: Cardiac surgical procedures are associated with a high incidence of periprocedural blood loss and blood transfusion. Although both may be associated with a range of postoperative complications there is disagreement on the impact of blood transfusion on long-term mortality. This study aims to provide a comprehensive review of the published outcomes of perioperative blood transfusion, examined as a whole and by index procedure.

Methods: A systematic review of perioperative blood transfusion cardiac surgical patients was conducted. Outcomes related to blood transfusion were analysed in a meta-analysis and aggregate survival data were derived to examine long-term survival.

Results: Thirty-nine studies with 180,074 patients were identified, the majority (61.2%) undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery. Perioperative blood transfusions were noted in 42.2% of patients and was associated with significantly higher early mortality (OR 3.87, p < 0.001). After a median of 6.4 years (range 1-15), mortality remained significantly higher for those who received a perioperative transfusion (OR 2.01, p < 0.001). Pooled hazard ratio for long-term mortality similar for patients who underwent coronary surgery compared to isolated valve surgery. Differences in long-term mortality for all comers remained true when corrected for early mortality and when only including propensity matched studies.

Conclusions: Perioperative red blood transfusion appears to be associated with a significant reduction in long-term survival for patients after cardiac surgery. Strategies such as preoperative optimisation, intraoperative blood conservation, judicious use of postoperative transfusions, and professional development into minimally invasive techniques should be utilised where appropriate to minimise the need for perioperative transfusions.

Objective: With the popularization of catheter-based mitral valve procedures, evaluating risk-specific differentiated clinical outcomes after contemporary mitral valve surgery is crucial. In this study, we assessed the operative results of minimally invasive mitral valve operations across different patient risk profiles and evaluated the value of EuroSCORE II predicted risk of mortality model for risk prediction, in the large cohort of Mini-Mitral International Registry (MMIR).

Methods: The MMIR database was used to analyze mini-mitral operations between 2015 and 2021. Patients were categorized as low- (<4%), intermediate- (4% to < 8%), high- (8% to < 12%) and extreme risk (≥12%) according to EuroSCORE II. The observed to expected (O: E) mortality ratio was calculated for each risk group.

Results: A total of 6541 patients were included in the analysis. Of those, 5546 (84.8%) were classified as low risk, 615 (9.4%) as intermediate risk, 191 (2.9%) as high risk and 189 (2.9%) as extreme risk. Overall operative mortality and stroke rates were 1.7% and 1.4%, respectively, and were significantly associated with patient’s risk. The observed mortality was significantly lower than expected -according to the EuroSCORE II- in all risk categories (O: E ratio < 1).

Conclusions: The present study provides an international contemporary benchmark for operative outcomes after minimally invasive mitral surgery. Operative results were excellent in low-, intermediate- and high risk patients, but were less satisfactory in extreme risk. The EuroSCORE II model overestimated the in-hospital mortality. We believe findings from the MMIR may assist surgeons and cardiologists in clinical decision-making and treatment allocation for patients with mitral valve disease.

Background: There is ongoing debate regarding the optimal strategy and timing for the surgical management of patients with severe concomitant carotid and coronary artery disease. Anaortic off-pump coronary artery bypass (anOPCAB), which avoids aortic manipulation and cardiopulmonary bypass, has been shown to reduce the risk of perioperative stroke. We present the outcomes of a series of synchronous carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and anOPCAB.

Methods: A retrospective review was performed. The primary endpoint was stroke at 30 days post-operation. Secondary endpoints included transient ischaemic attack, myocardial infarction and mortality 30 days post-operation.

Results: From 2009 to 2016, 1,041 patients underwent anOPCAB with a 30-day stroke rate of 0.4%. The majority of patients had preoperative carotid-subclavian duplex ultrasound screening and 39 were identified with significant concomitant carotid disease who underwent synchronous CEA-anOPCAB. The mean age was 71±7.5 years. Nine patients (23.1%) had previous neurological events. Thirty (30) patients (76.9%) underwent an urgent operation. For CEA, a conventional longitudinal carotid endarterectomy with patch angioplasty was performed in all patients. For anOPCAB, total arterial revascularisation rate was performed in 84.6% and the mean number of distal anastomoses was 2.9±0.7. In the 30-day postoperative period, there was one stroke (2.63%), two deaths (5.26%), two transient ischemic attacks (TIAs) (5.26%) and no myocardial infarction. Two patients experienced acute kidney injury (5.26%), one of which required haemodialysis (2.63%). Mean length of stay was 11.37±7.9 days.

Conclusion: Synchronous CEA and anOPCAB is a safe and effective option for patients’ severe concomitant disease. Preoperative carotid-subclavian ultrasound screening allows identification of these patients.

Objectives: The objective of the European Multicenter Registry to Assess Outcomes in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) patients (DuraGraft Registry) was to determine clinical outcomes and quality of life (QoL) after contemporary CABG that included isolated CABG and combined CABG/valve procedures, using an endothelial damage inhibitor (DuraGraft) intraoperatively for conduit preservation. Here, we report outcomes in the patient cohort undergoing isolated CABG.

Methods: The primary outcome was the composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), or repeat revascularization (RR) [major adverse cardiac events (MACE)] at 1 year. Secondary outcomes included the composite of all-cause death, MI, RR, or stroke [major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE)], and QoL. QoL was assessed with the EuroQol-5 Dimension questionnaire. Independent risk factors for MACE at 1 year were determined using Cox regression analysis.

Results: A total of 2532 patients (mean age, 67.4±9.2 years; 82.5% male) underwent isolated CABG. The median EuroScore II was 1.4 [interquartile range (IQR), 0.9-2.3]. MACE and MACCE rates at 1 year were 6.6% and 7.8%, respectively. The rates of all-cause death, MI, RR, and stroke were 4.4, 2.0, 2.2, and 1.9%, respectively. The 30-day mortality rate was 2.3%. Age, extracardiac arteriopathy, left ventricular ejection fraction less than 50%, critical operative state, and left main disease were independent risk factors for MACE. QoL index values improved from 0.84 [IQR, 0.72-0.92] at baseline to 0.92 [IQR, 0.82-1.00] at 1 year (P<0.0001).

Conclusion: Contemporary European patients undergoing isolated CABG have a low 1-year clinical event rate and an improved QoL.