Surgical ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) can be performed without additional risk of operative mortality or major morbidity, and is recommended at the time of concomitant mitral operations to ...restore sinus rhythm. (Class I, Level A) Surgical ablation for AF can be performed without additional operative risk of mortality or major morbidity, and is recommended at the time of concomitant isolated aortic valve replacement, isolated coronary artery bypass graft surgery, and aortic valve replacement plus coronary artery bypass graft operations to restore sinus rhythm. (Class I, Level B nonrandomized) Surgical ablation for symptomatic AF in the absence of structural heart disease that is refractory to class I/III antiarrhythmic drugs or catheter-based therapy or both is reasonable as a primary stand-alone procedure, to restore sinus rhythm. (Class IIA, Level B randomized) Surgical ablation for symptomatic persistent or longstanding persistent AF in the absence of structural heart disease is reasonable, as a stand-alone procedure using the Cox-Maze III/IV lesion set compared with pulmonary vein isolation alone. (Class IIA, Level B nonrandomized) Surgical ablation for symptomatic AF in the setting of left atrial enlargement (≥4.5 cm) or more than moderate mitral regurgitation by pulmonary vein isolation alone is not recommended. (Class III no benefit, Level C expert opinion) It is reasonable to perform left atrial appendage excision or exclusion in conjunction with surgical ablation for AF for longitudinal thromboembolic morbidity prevention. (Class IIA, Level C limited data) At the time of concomitant cardiac operations in patients with AF, it is reasonable to surgically manage the left atrial appendage for longitudinal thromboembolic morbidity prevention. (Class IIA, Level C expert opinion) In the treatment of AF, multidisciplinary heart team assessment, treatment planning, and long-term follow-up can be useful and beneficial to optimize patient outcomes. (Class I, Level C expert opinion).
Internal thoracic arteries (ITAs) should be used to bypass the left anterior descending (LAD) artery when bypass of the LAD is indicated (class of recommendation COR I, level of evidence LOE B). As ...an adjunct to left internal thoracic artery (LITA), a second arterial graft (right ITA or radial artery RA) should be considered in appropriate patients (COR IIa, LOE B). Use of bilateral ITAs (BITAs) should be considered in patients who do not have an excessive risk of sternal complications (COR IIa, LOE B). To reduce the risk of sternal infection with BITA, skeletonized grafts should be considered (COR IIa, LOE B), smoking cessation is recommended (COR I, LOE C), glycemic control should be considered (COR IIa, LOE B), and enhanced sternal stabilization may be considered (COR IIb, LOE C). As an adjunct to LITA to LAD (or in patients with inadequate LITA grafts), use of a RA graft is reasonable when grafting coronary targets with severe stenoses (COR IIa, LOE: B). When RA grafts are used, it is reasonable to use pharmacologic agents to reduce acute intraoperative and perioperative spasm (COR IIa, LOE C). The right gastroepiploic artery may be considered in patients with poor conduit options or as an adjunct to more complete arterial revascularization (COR IIb, LOE B). Use of arterial grafts (specific targets, number, and type) should be a part of the discussion of the heart team in determining the optimal approach for each patient (COR I, LOE C).
Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) is becoming increasingly popular for lung resection in some centers. However, the issue of whether VATS or open thoracotomy is better remains ...controversial. We compared outcomes of open and VATS lobectomy in a national database.
Using the 2004 and 2006 Nationwide Inpatient Sample database, we identified 13,619 discharge records of patients who underwent pulmonary lobectomy by means of thoracotomy (n = 12,860) or VATS (n = 759). Student's t and chi(2) tests were used to compare the two groups. Multivariable analysis was used to identify independent predictors of outcome measures.
The two groups of patients had similar demographics and preoperative comorbidities. They also had similar in-hospital mortality rates (3.1% versus 3.4%; p = 0.67); lengths of stay (9.3 +/- 0.1 versus 9.2 +/- 0.4 days; p = 0.84); hospitalization costs ($23,862 +/- $206 versus $25,125 +/- $1,093; p = 0.16); and rates of wound infection (0.8% versus 1.3%; p = 0.15), pulmonary complications (32.2% versus 31.2%; p = 0.55), and cardiovascular complications (3.4% versus 3.9%; p = 0.43). However, multivariable analysis showed that the VATS group had a significantly higher incidence of intraoperative complications than the thoracotomy group (odds ratio, 1.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.0 to 2.4; p = 0.04). A higher percentage of patients with annual income greater than $59,000 underwent VATS lobectomy than patients with income less than $59,000 (35.7% versus 25.4%; p < 0.0001).
Patients who underwent VATS lobectomy were 1.6 times more likely to have intraoperative complications than patients who underwent open lobectomy. However, short-term mortality, lengths of stay, and hospitalization costs were similar between the two groups of patients. There seems to be a socioeconomic disparity between VATS and open thoracotomy patients.
Abstract Objective We attempted to identify predictors of adverse outcomes after traditional open and hybrid zone 0 total aortic arch replacement. Methods We performed multivariable analysis using 16 ...variables to identify predictors of adverse outcomes (mortality, permanent neurologic events, and permanent renal failure necessitating hemodialysis) in 319 consecutive patients who underwent total aortic arch replacement in the past 8.5 years and a subgroup analysis in 25 propensity-matched pairs. A total of 274 patients (85.9%) had traditional open repair, and 45 patients (14.1%) had hybrid zone 0 total arch exclusion. Results Operative mortality was 10.3% (n = 33): 11.1% (n = 5) in the hybrid group and 10.2% (n = 28) in the traditional group ( P = .79). A total of 19 patients (5.9%) had permanent stroke (15 traditional 5.5% vs 4 hybrid 8.9%; P = .32), and 2 patients (both traditional) had permanent paraplegia ( P = 1.00). The hybrid group had more total neurologic events ( P = .051) but not more permanent strokes ( P = .32). Prior cardiac disease unrelated to the aorta ( P = .0033) and congestive heart failure ( P = .0053) independently predicted permanent adverse outcome (operative mortality, permanent neurologic event, or permanent renal failure). Concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting independently predicted permanent stroke ( P = .032), as did previous cerebrovascular disease ( P = .032). In multivariable analysis, procedure type (hybrid or traditional) was not an independent predictor of stroke ( P = .09). During a median follow-up of 4.5 years (95% confidence interval, 3.9-4.9), survival was 78.7%, with no intergroup difference ( P = .14). Conclusions Among contemporary cases, both traditional and hybrid total aortic arch replacement had acceptable results. Comparing these 2 different surgical treatment options is challenging, and an individualized approach offers the best results. Permanent adverse outcome was not significantly different between the 2 groups. Procedure type is not an independent predictor of permanent stroke. Prior cardiac disease, past or current smoking, and congestive heart failure predict adverse outcomes for total aortic arch replacement.
Objectives Recent national trends in off-pump versus on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting have not been reported. Methods We analyzed data from the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac ...Surgery Database regarding isolated primary coronary artery bypass grafting operations (N = 2,137,841; 1997-2012). The off-pump percentages were calculated in aggregate, by center, and by surgeon. On the basis of the 2007/2008 yearly off-pump volume, the analysis subgroups were “high” (center n > 200, surgeon n > 100), “intermediate” (center n = 50-200, surgeon n = 20-100), and “low” (center n = 1-49, surgeon n = 1-19). Results The use of off-pump procedures peaked in 2002 (23%) and again in 2008 (21%), followed by a progressive decline in off-pump frequency to 17% by 2012. After 2008, off-pump rates declined among both high-volume and intermediate-volume centers and surgeons; little change was observed for low-volume centers or surgeons (off-pump rates = 10% since 2008). By the end of the study period, 84% of centers performed fewer than 50 off-pump cases per year, 34% of surgeons performed no off-pump operations, and 86% of surgeons performed fewer than 20 off-pump cases per year. Except for a higher (7.8%) conversion rate in 2003, the rate for conversions fluctuated approximately 6%. Conclusions Enthusiasm for off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting has been tempered. The percentage of coronary artery bypass grafting operations performed off-pump has steadily declined over the last 5 years, and currently this technique is used in fewer than 1 in 5 patients who undergo surgical coronary revascularization. A minority of surgeons and centers continue to perform off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting in most of their patients.
Objectives Thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR) was introduced in 2005 to treat descending thoracic aortic aneurysms. Little is known about TEVAR's nationwide effect on patient outcomes. We ...evaluated nationwide data regarding the short-term outcomes of TEVAR and open aortic repair (OAR) procedures performed in the United States during a 2-year period. Methods From the Nationwide Inpatient Sample data, we identified patients who had undergone surgery for an isolated descending thoracic aortic aneurysm from 2006 to 2007. Patients with aneurysm rupture, aortic dissection, vasculitis, connective tissue disorders, or concomitant aneurysms in other aortic segments were excluded. Of the remaining 11,669 patients, 9106 had undergone conventional OAR and 2563 had undergone TEVAR. Hierarchic regression analysis was used to assess the effect of TEVAR versus OAR after adjusting for confounding factors. The primary outcomes were mortality and the hospital length of stay (LOS). The secondary outcomes were the discharge status, morbidity, and hospital charges. Results The patients who had undergone TEVAR were older (69.5 ± 12.7 vs 60.2 ± 14.2 years; P < .001) and had higher Deyo comorbidity scores (4.6 ± 1.8 vs 3.3 ± 1.8; P < .001). The unadjusted LOS was shorter for the TEVAR patients (7.7 ± 11 vs 8.8 ± 7.9 days), but the unadjusted mortality was similar (TEVAR 2.3% vs OAR 2.3%; P = 1.0). The proportion of nonelective interventions was similar between the 2 groups (TEVAR 15.9% vs OAR 15.8%; P = .9). The TEVAR and OAR techniques produced similar risk-adjusted mortality rates; however, the TEVAR patients had 60% fewer complications overall (odds ratio, 0.39; P < .001) and a shorter LOS (by 1.3 days). The TEVAR patients' hospital charges were greater by $6713 (95% confidence interval $1869 to $11,556; P < .001). However, the TEVAR patients were 4 times more likely to have a routine discharge to home. Conclusions The nationwide data on TEVAR for descending thoracic aortic aneurysms have associated this procedure with better in-hospital outcomes than OAR, even though TEVAR was selectively performed in patients who were almost 1 decade older than the OAR patients. Compared with OAR, TEVAR was associated with a shorter hospital LOS and fewer complications but significantly greater hospital charges.
Clopidogrel use post coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) has become more popular under the assumption that it improves graft patency. The purpose of this sub-analysis from the Randomized On and ...Off-Pump Bypass (ROOBY) trial is to evaluate the role of clopidogrel use post CABG to improve graft patency when added to standard aspirin therapy.
The ROOBY trial was a multi-center, randomized, controlled clinical trial that compared on-pump versus off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Clopidogrel use post CABG was left at the discretion of the operator. Detailed data regarding the use and timing of clopidogrel post CABG were collected prospectively, along with 1-year angiograms to evaluate graft status.
Of the 2,203 subjects undergoing CABG, 953 patient records had complete clopidogrel use and 1-year angiographic data. Of these, 345 (36.2%) received clopidogrel post CABG prior to discharge. Compared with patients with no post-CABG clopidogrel use, baseline characteristics were similar for the clopidogrel group except for the following: lower preoperative aspirin use (80.2% vs 86.7%, p = 0.009); higher preoperative clopidogrel use (23.5% vs 14.0%, p < 0.001), less on-pump (35.9% vs 55.9%, p < 0.0001); and lower endoscopic vein harvesting (30.8% vs 42.5%, p < 0.001) rates. Overall 1-year graft patency rates were not different between the clopidogrel and no-clopidogrel groups (86.5% vs 85.3%, p = 0.43). Multivariable analyses did not alter these findings.
This study suggests that routine post-CABG clopidogrel use may not translate to improved 1-year graft patency. Future studies appear warranted to better define the role of more aggressive antiplatelet therapy post CABG on graft patency and clinical outcomes.
Antegrade cerebral perfusion (ACP) is standard treatment for complex aortic pathology and includes both unilateral (u-ACP) and bilateral (b-ACP) techniques. Focusing on proximal acute aortic ...dissection, we investigated the clinical effect of u-ACP versus b-ACP.
From January 2005 to May 2013, 157 consecutive patients presented with acute type A aortic dissection. Antegrade cerebral perfusion was used in 153 patients (97.4%). Ninety patients (58.8%) received u-ACP, and 63 (41.2%) received b-ACP. No retrograde cerebral perfusion was used. The target systemic hypothermia temperature during ACP was 22° to 24°C. The mean ACP, cardiopulmonary bypass, and cardiac ischemia times were 34.6 ± 18.0, 125.6 ± 48.0, and 92.6 ± 34.1 minutes, respectively.
The p values from logistic regression models indicated that in both groups combined, the ACP, cardiopulmonary bypass, and cardiac ischemia times predicted hospital mortality (p = 0.035, p = 0.0033, and p = 0.035, respectively) but not stroke. The operative mortality was 13.3% (n = 12) with u-ACP and 12.7% (n = 8) with b-ACP (p = 0.91). Of the survivors, 13 of 88 u-ACP patients (14.8%) and 8 of 62 b-ACP patients (12.9%) had a postoperative stroke (p = 0.75). A circulatory arrest time of >30 minutes was associated with stroke (p = 0.031). Temporary neurologic dysfunction was present in 10 u-ACP (11.4%) and 5 b-ACP (8.2%) patients (p = 0.53). Postoperative renal failure occurred in 10 u-ACP (11.4%) and 10 b-ACP patients (16.1%) (p = 0.40). Antegrade stent delivery in the descending thoracic aorta did not affect the ACP, cardiac ischemia, circulatory arrest, or cardiopulmonary bypass times.
As one of the largest single-center studies of the efficacy of u-ACP and b-ACP in patients with type A aortic dissection, operative mortality, stroke, temporary neurologic dysfunction, and renal failure rates were similar in both. In this intrinsically complex disease, survival is the most important outcome; u-ACP may provide cardiac surgeons with valuable technical simplicity during challenging procedures, and b-ACP may be justified for circulatory arrest times of more than 30 minutes.
PDF
