Rates Of Prolonged Ventilation Research Articles

Isolated surgical tricuspid repair versus replacement: meta-analysis of 15 069 patients

ObjectivesTricuspid valve disease is increasingly encountered, but surgery is rarely performed in isolation, in part because of a reported higher operative risk than other single-valve operations. Although guidelines recommend valve...

Impact of Bleeding Revision on Outcomes After Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation

Few reports have described associations between a bleeding revision and outcomes after implantation of a continuous-flow left ventricular assist device (LVAD). We retrospectively analyzed all adult recipients of a continuous-flow LVAD who were operated on between January 2006 and December 2016 at the Division of Cardiac Surgery, Medical University of Vienna (N=257). LVAD types were HeartWare HVAD (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN), HeartMate II (Abbott [Thoratec], Abbott Park, IL), and HeartMate 3 (Abbott [Thoratec]). The primary outcome variable was survival during LVAD support. Secondary outcome variables were rates of prolonged ventilation, intensive care unit stay, hospital stay, renal replacement therapy, and stroke. We additionally investigated risk factors for a bleeding revision. Thirty-six patients (14%) underwent surgical revision for bleeding. In a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model, bleeding revision was associated with significantly reduced survival during LVAD support (3months: hazard ratio [HR], 2.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.20 to 3.48; 6 months: HR, 1.63; 95% CI, 0.95 to 2.82; 12 months: HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.69 to 2.46; 24 months: HR, 1.04; 95% CI 0.48 to 2.26; overall p= 0.007). Rates of secondary outcome variables were substantially higher in the revision group compared with patients who survived the hospital stay without a bleeding revision. Concomitant implantation of a temporary right ventricular assist device (p= 0.002) and age (p= 0.028) were independent risk factors for a bleeding revision. A bleeding revision is associated with significantly reduced survival and substantially increased morbidity during LVAD support. Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative prophylactic strategies may help to prevent this life-threatening complication.

Acute type A dissection in octogenarians: does emergency surgery impact in-hospital outcome or long-term survival?†

Surgical therapy for acute aortic dissection type A (AADA) in octogenarians carries high morbidity and mortality. The role of isolated medical treatment in this setting is controversial. The aim of this study is to determine whether risk of surgery for AADA outweighs risk of death from medical treatment only. From 2002 to 2015, 90 consecutive octogenarians (mean age, 83.5 ± 3 years) were treated for AADA at three institutions: 67 patients underwent surgery, 23 patients received medical treatment. Analysis of early and late outcome was performed. Patients in the medical treatment group were significantly older than in the surgical group (84.9 ± 3.7 vs 83 ± 2.5 years, P = 0.008) and in a more critical state. In patients undergoing surgical repair, perioperative mortality was 14.9% ( n = 10). Rate of prolonged ventilation (63.2% vs 5.9%; P < 0.001) and renal failure (35.1% vs 5.9%, P = 0.029) was significantly higher in the surgical group. Thirty-day survival was impaired in the medical treatment group (34.8% vs 61.2% in the surgical group; P = 0.032). Coronary artery disease (OR 3.95, 95% CI 1.16-13.49; P = 0.029) and complicated dissections (OR 5.28, 95% CI 1.48-18.88; P = 0.010)-composite variable of preoperative resuscitation, neurological injury and malperfusion-emerged as independent risk factors for 30-day mortality in the surgical group. There was no difference in long-term survival. Emergency surgery for AADA in octogenarians is associated with relatively high intraoperative mortality and may reasonably be avoided in patient with complicated presentation. Despite better immediate survival after surgery, long-term survival does not differ between medical and surgical patients, reflecting the extremely advanced point in life cycle octogenarians.

Redundancy and Variability in Quality and Outcome Reporting for Cardiac and Thoracic Surgery

Health care is evolving into a value-based reimbursement system focused on quality and outcomes. Reported outcomes from national databases are used for quality improvement projects and public reporting. This study compared reported outcomes in cardiac and thoracic surgery from two validated reporting databases—the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) database and the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP)— from January 2011 to June 2012. Quality metrics and outcomes included mortality, wound infection, prolonged ventilation, pneumonia, renal failure, stroke, and cardiac arrest. Comparison was made by chi-square analysis. A total of 737 and 177 cardiac surgery cases and 451 and 105 thoracic surgery cases were captured by the STS database and NSQIP, respectively. Within cardiac surgery, there was a statistically significant difference in the reported rates of prolonged ventilation, renal failure, and mortality. No significant differences were found for the thoracic surgery data. In conclusion, our data indicated a significant discordance in quality reporting for cardiac surgery between the NSQIP and the STS databases. The disparity between databases and duplicate participation strongly indicates that a unified national quality reporting program is required. Consolidation of reporting databases and standardization of morbidity definitions across all databases may improve participation and reduce hospital cost.

Age alone should not preclude surgery: Contemporary outcomes after aortic valve replacement in nonagenarians

Advanced age plays a major role in surgical risk algorithms; however, the outcomes data for the very elderly are lacking. We, therefore, evaluated the outcomes after surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in nonagenarians (age, >90 years) at our institution during an 11-year period. The demographics, procedural details, and in-hospital outcomes were retrospectively analyzed for 119 nonagenarians with symptomatic, severe aortic stenosis who had undergone SAVR or SAVR plus concomitant surgery from 2001 to 2012. The mean follow-up period was 915±832 days. The average age was 91.7±1.9 years (range, 90-98), and the mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 8.9±5.7. The mean aortic valve gradient was 45±16 mm Hg, mean aortic valve area was 0.66±0.2 cm2, and mean ejection fraction was 49.8%±11.8%; 47% underwent isolated SAVR. The average length of stay was longer than expected; however, the rates of prolonged ventilation (16.8%), new atrial fibrillation (43.7%), stroke (0.8%), and renal failure (5.9%) were acceptable. Three patients (2.5%) required reoperation for bleeding. Overall, the 30-day and 1-year mortality was 7.6% and 21.0%, respectively. The multivariate predictors of mortality at 1 year included previous myocardial infarction (hazard ratio, 2.79; 95% confidence interval, 1.21-6.45; P=.016), obstructive lung disease (hazard ratio, 3.90; 95% confidence interval, 1.66-9.15; P=.025), and diabetes (hazard ratio, 2.77; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-7.07; P=.033). The observed in-hospital mortality was lower than expected (observed/expected, 0.85). Excellent procedural and long-term outcomes can be achieved in nonagenarians, and age alone should not be a contraindication to SAVR in selected populations. Our sample cohort has validated the feasibility of a primary operative strategy in elderly patients with aortic stenosis and acceptable risk profiles.

On-Pump Beating Heart Surgery Offers an Alternative for Unstable Patients Undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting

Abstract Background: Cardiac surgery has expanded the available approaches to aortocoronary artery bypass grafting to include approaches from minimally invasive surgery to full sternotomy. The heart can be arrested, left beating, or assisted with a right ventricular assist device or cardiopulmonary bypass pump. We have examined the 4 surgical modes that we use routinely in our large multisurgeon practice to determine our selection biases and the outcomes of the different techniques. Methods: Of the 4733 coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) patients we studied from January 2000 through December 2002, 2332 (49.3%) operations were done on-pump on the arrested heart, 1908 (40.3%) were performed off-pump, 364 (7.7%) were performed on-pump on the beating heart, and 129 (2.7%) were performed with right heart assist. The preoperative risk factors, operative variables, and postoperative outcomes of the groups were analyzed. Results: Patients selected for on-pump beating heart procedures tended to be sicker with the highest predicted risk of death. We also selected patients who were in cardiogenic shock, in resuscitation, in emergent or salvage status, on dialysis, and with preoperative intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) use for on-pump beating heart procedures at higher than expected rates. Patients with renal failure with or without dialysis, and those having a history of cerebrovascular accident tended not to be chosen for on-pump arrested heart procedures. Off-pump beating heart procedures were avoided for patients with cardiogenic shock or resuscitation, in emergent or salvage status, and with preoperative IABP use. The mortality rate in these patients was slightly worse in the on-pump beating heart group (4.4%) than in the on-pump arrested heart (3.5%) and off-pump (2.3%) groups (analysis of variance [ANOVA], P =.04). Atrial fibrillation occurred more frequently in both the on-pump beating heart (20.1%) and on-pump arrested heart (23.8%) groups (ANOVA, P <.001). The on-pump groups had higher rates of blood product use and reoperation for bleeding and a prolonged ventilation rate, compared with the other procedures. On-pump patients had a statistically longer length of stay than either off-pump or right heart-assisted patients ( P <.05) and required longer times on the ventilator and in the intensive care unit. Conclusions: Normothermic cardiopulmonary bypass with a beating heart is safe and efficacious and may be the method of choice for patients in cardiogenic shock, requiring resuscitation, or with previous CABG surgery, recent myocardial infarction, a low ejection fraction, or unstable arrhythmias.