Search

OBJECTIVES: Concomitant left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) during surgical ablation has emerged as a potential treatment strategy to reduce stroke and perioperative mortality in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). The present meta-analysis aims to assess current evidence on the efficacy and safety between LAAO and LAA preservation cohorts for patients undergoing cardiac surgery. METHODS: Electronic searches were performed using six electronic databases from their inception to November 2013, identifying all relevant comparative randomized and observational studies comparing LAAO with non-LAAO in AF patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Data were extracted and analysed according to predefined endpoints including mortality, stroke, postoperative AF and reoperation for bleeding. RESULTS: Seven relevant studies identified for qualitative and quantitative analyses, including 3653 patients undergoing LAAO (n = 1716) versus non-LAAO (n = 1937). Stroke incidence was significantly reduced in the LAAO occlusion group at the 30-day follow-up [0.95 vs 1.9%; odds ratio (OR) 0.46; P = 0.005] and the latest follow-up (1.4 vs 4.1%; OR 0.48; P = 0.01), compared with the non-LAAO group. Incidence of all-cause mortality was significantly decreased with LAAO (1.9 vs 5%; OR 0.38; P = 0.0003), while postoperative AF and reoperation for bleeding was comparable. CONCLUSIONS: While acknowledging the limitations and inadequate statistical power of the available evidence, this study suggests LAAO as a promising strategy for stroke reduction perioperatively and at the short-term follow-up without a significant increase in complications. Larger randomized studies in the future are required, with clearer surgical and anticoagulation protocols and adequate long-term followup, to validate the clinical efficacy of LAAO versus non-LAAO groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Several studies have shown that after DeBakey type 1 acute aortic dissection (DB1-AAD) surgery, 70% of the surviving patients still present with a dissected distal aorta that can eventually dilate, rupture, lead to distal malperfusion or require secondary extensive interventions. In order to minimize these complications, different surgeons have advocated total thoracic aorta remodelling procedures during primary aortic repair to promote false-lumen obliteration and distal thrombosis. Such management, which includes arch replacement and antegrade stenting of the dissected descending thoracic aorta (DTA), remains controversial due to its perceived increased operative mortality. Furthermore, the desired long-term benefits remain to be confirmed. The present article aimed to evaluate results of antegrade stenting of DTA during surgery for DB1-AAD, focusing on in-hospital mortality and morbidity, and long-term survival, occurrence of distal aortic remodelling and freedom from aortic reinterventions. Early results from the identified studies suggested that hybrid repair of DB1-AAD with antegrade DTA stenting was associated with satisfactory in-hospital mortality (10.0%) and stroke (4.8%) rates, while the risk of spinal cord injury appeared to be higher (4.3%) than that reported from historical controls. Furthermore, antegrade stenting of DTA was associated with promising rates of partial/complete thrombosis of the peristent DTA false lumen (88.9%), suggesting that aortic remodelling is highly probable with this approach. Evidence on long-term results after proximal acute dissection repair is still sparse, and mostly jeopardized by limited data beyond 5 years. Further investigations with longer term follow-up and with specifically designed protocols to assess long-term clinical outcomes (late aortic mortality and freedom from distal aortic reinterventions) of total thoracic aortic remodelling procedures vs more conservative management are warranted to reach more definitive conclusions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE A number of factors limit the effectiveness of current aortic arch studies in assessing optimal neuroprotection strategies, including insufficient patient numbers, heterogenous definitions of clinical variables, multiple technical strategies, inadequate reporting of surgical outcomes and a lack of collaborative effort. We have formed an international coalition of centres to provide more robust investigations into this topic. METHODS High-volume aortic arch centres were identified from the literature and contacted for recruitment. A Research Steering Committee of expert arch surgeons was convened to oversee the direction of the research. RESULTS The International Aortic Arch Surgery Study Group has been formed by 41 arch surgeons from 10 countries to better evaluate patient outcomes after aortic arch surgery. Several projects, including the establishment of a multi-institutional retrospective database, randomized controlled trials and a prospectively collected database, are currently underway. CONCLUSIONS Such a collaborative effort will herald a turning point in the surgical management of aortic arch pathologies and will provide better powered analyses to assess the impact of varying surgical techniques on mortality and morbidity, identify predictors for neurological and operative risk, formulate and validate risk predictor models and review long-term survival outcomes and quality-of-life after arch surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

A response from the author of the article regarding data for aortic registries including blood pressure, glucose, and haematocrit in the 2014 issue is presented.

Objectives: Concomitant left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) during surgical ablation has emerged as a potential treatment strategy to reduce stroke and perioperative mortality in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). The present meta-analysis aims to assess current evidence on the efficacy and safety between LAAO and LAA preservation cohorts for patients undergoing cardiac surgery., Methods: Electronic searches were performed using six electronic databases from their inception to November 2013, identifying all relevant comparative randomized and observational studies comparing LAAO with non-LAAO in AF patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Data were extracted and analysed according to predefined endpoints including mortality, stroke, postoperative AF and reoperation for bleeding., Results: Seven relevant studies identified for qualitative and quantitative analyses, including 3653 patients undergoing LAAO (n = 1716) versus non-LAAO (n = 1937). Stroke incidence was significantly reduced in the LAAO occlusion group at the 30-day follow-up [0.95 vs 1.9%; odds ratio (OR) 0.46; P = 0.005] and the latest follow-up (1.4 vs 4.1%; OR 0.48; P = 0.01), compared with the non-LAAO group. Incidence of all-cause mortality was significantly decreased with LAAO (1.9 vs 5%; OR 0.38; P = 0.0003), while postoperative AF and reoperation for bleeding was comparable., Conclusions: While acknowledging the limitations and inadequate statistical power of the available evidence, this study suggests LAAO as a promising strategy for stroke reduction perioperatively and at the short-term follow-up without a significant increase in complications. Larger randomized studies in the future are required, with clearer surgical and anticoagulation protocols and adequate long-term follow-up, to validate the clinical efficacy of LAAO versus non-LAAO groups., (© The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. All rights reserved.)

With the rapidly growing literature across the surgical disciplines, there is a corresponding need to critically appraise and summarize the currently available evidence so they can be applied appropriately to patient care. The interpretation of systematic reviews is particularly challenging in cases where few robust clinical trials have been performed to address a particular question. However, risk of bias can be minimized and potentially useful conclusions can be drawn if strict review methodology is adhered to, including an exhaustive literature search, quality appraisal of primary studies, appropriate statistical methodology, assessment of confidence in estimates and risk of bias. Therefore, the following article aims to: (I) summarize to the important features of a thorough and rigorous systematic review or meta-analysis for the surgical literature; (II) highlight several underused statistical approaches which may yield further interesting insights compared to conventional pair-wise data synthesis techniques; and (III) propose a guide for thorough analysis and presentation of results.

Background: The treatment of chronic type B aortic dissection (CBAD) remains complicated. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has supplanted open surgical repair (OSR) as the preferred surgical treatment for CBAD. Despite TEVAR's superior short-term results, much less is understood about its long-term outcomes. As much of the understanding of OSR originates from historical report, contemporary series, with modern surgical techniques and technologies, may present an alternative to TEVAR. The present systematic review will assess the short- and long-term outcomes of historic and contemporary series of OSR for CBAD., Methods: Electronic searches were performed using six databases from their inception to March 2014. Relevant studies with OSRs for chronic type B dissection were identified. Data were extracted by two independent reviewers and analyzed according to predefined clinical endpoints. Studies were sub-classified into the pre-endovascular (historic series) and endovascular era (contemporary series) depending on whether the majority of cases were performed after 1999., Results: Nineteen studies were identified for inclusion for quantitative analysis. Pooled short-term mortality was 11.1% overall, and 7.5% in the nine contemporary studies. Stroke, spinal cord ischemia, renal dysfunction, and reoperation for bleeding were 5.9%, 4.9%, 8.1%, and 8.1%, respectively, for the contemporary series. Absolute late reintervention was identified in 13.3% of patients overall, and in 11.3% of patients in the contemporary series. Aggregated survival at 1-, 3-, 5-, and 10-years of all patients were 82.1%, 74.1%, 66.3%, and 50.8%, respectively., Conclusions: OSR for chronic type B dissection in the contemporary era offers acceptable results. Management approaches should be considered carefully, taking into account both short-term and long-term complications. More research is required to clarify specific indications for OSR and TEVAR in chronic type B dissections.

Objective: The radial artery has been demonstrated to provide superior long-term patency outcomes compared with saphenous veins for selected patients who undergo coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Recently, endoscopic radial artery harvesting has been popularized to improve cosmetic and perioperative outcomes. However, concerns have been raised regarding the effects on long-term survival and graft patency of this relatively novel technique. The present meta-analysis aimed to assess the safety and the efficacy of endoscopic radial artery harvesting versus the conventional open approach., Methods: A systematic review of the current literature was performed on five electronic databases. All comparative studies on endoscopic versus open radial artery harvesting were included for analysis. Primary endpoints included mortality and recurrent myocardial infarction. Secondary endpoints included graft patency, wound infection, hematoma formation, and paresthesia., Results: Twelve studies involving 3314 patients were included for meta-analysis according to predefined selection criteria. There were no statistically significant differences in overall mortality, recurrent myocardial infarction, or graft patency between the two surgical techniques. However, patients who underwent endoscopic harvesting were found to have significantly lower incidences of wound infection, hematoma formation, and paresthesia., Conclusions: Current literature on endoscopic harvesting of the radial artery for coronary artery bypass graft surgery is limited by relatively short follow-up periods as well as differences in patient selection and surgical techniques. In addition, there are currently no randomized controlled trials to provide robust clinical data. However, the available evidence suggests that the endoscopic approach is associated with superior perioperative outcomes without clear evidence demonstrating compromised patency or survival outcomes.

Background: Surgical resection is the preferred treatment modality for eligible candidates with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, the selection of sublobar resection versus lobectomy for early-stage NSCLC remains controversial. Previous meta-analyses comparing these two procedures presented data without considering the significant differences in the patient selection processes in individual studies. The present study aimed to compare the overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) outcomes of patients who underwent sublobar resections who were also eligible for lobectomy procedures with those who underwent lobectomy., Methods: An electronic search was conducted using five online databases from their dates of inception to December 2013. Studies were selected according to predefined inclusion criteria and meta-analyzed using hazard ratio (HR) calculations., Results: Twelve studies met the selection criteria, including 1,078 patients who underwent sublobar resections and 1,667 patients who underwent lobectomies. From the available data, there was no significant differences in OS [HR 0.91; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.64-1.29] or DFS (HR 0.82; 95% CI 0.60-1.12) between the two treatment arms. In addition, no significant OS difference was detected for patients who underwent segmentectomies compared to lobectomies (HR 1.04; 95% CI 0.66-1.63, P=0.86)., Conclusions: Using the available data in the current literature, patients who underwent sublobar resection for small, peripheral NSCLC after intentional selection rather than ineligibility for greater resections achieved similar long-term survival outcomes as those who underwent lobectomies. However, patients included for the present meta-analysis were a highly selected cohort and these results should be interpreted with caution. The importance of the patient selection process in individual studies must be acknowledged to avoid conflicting outcomes in future meta-analyses.

Background: Surgical ablation has emerged as an acceptable treatment modality for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) undertaking concomitant cardiac surgery. However, the efficacy of surgical ablation in patient populations undergoing mitral valve surgery is not well established. The present meta-analysis aims to establish the current randomized evidence on clinical outcomes of surgical ablation versus no ablative treatment in patients with AF undergoing mitral valve surgery., Methods: Electronic searches were performed using six databases from their inception to September 2013, identifying all relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing surgical ablation versus no ablation in AF patients undergoing mitral valve surgery. Data were extracted and analyzed according to predefined clinical endpoints., Results: Nine relevant RCTs were identified for inclusion in the present analysis. The number of patients in sinus rhythm (SR) was significantly improved in the surgical ablation group compared to the non-ablation group at discharge. This effect on SR remained at all follow-up periods until >1 year. Results indicated that there was no significant difference between surgical ablation and no ablation in terms of 30-day mortality, all-cause mortality, pacemaker implantation, stroke, thromboembolism, cardiac tamponade, reoperation for bleeding and myocardial infarction., Conclusions: Results from the present meta-analysis demonstrate that the addition of surgical ablation for AF leads to a significantly higher rate of sinus rhythm in mitral valve surgical patients, with no increase in the rates of mortality, pacemaker implantation, stroke and thromboembolism. Further research should be directed at correlating different surgical ablation subtypes to cardiac and cerebrovascular events at long-term follow-up.

Background: Mitral regurgitation (MR) is the second most common valvular heart disease after aortic stenosis. Without intervention, prognosis is poor in patients with severe symptomatic MR. While surgical repair is recommended for many patients with severe degenerative MR (DMR), as many as 49% of patients do not qualify as they are at high surgical risk. Furthermore, surgical correction for functional MR (FMR) is controversial with suboptimal outcomes and significant perioperative mortality. The percutaneous MitraClip implantation can be seen as a viable option in high surgical risk patients. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to compare the safety, clinical efficacy, and survival outcomes of MitraClip implantation with surgical correction of severe MR., Methods: Six electronic databases were searched for original published studies from January 2000 to August 2013. Two reviewers independently appraised studies, using a standard form, and extracted data on methodology, quality criteria, and outcome measures. All data were extracted and tabulated from the relevant articles' texts, tables, and figures and checked by another reviewer., Results: Overall 435 publications were identified. After applying selection criteria and removing serial publications with accumulating number of patients or increased length of follow-up, four publications with the most complete dataset were included for quality appraisal and data extraction. There was one randomized controlled trial (RCT) and three prospective observational studies. At baseline, patients in the MitraClip group were significantly older (P=0.01), had significantly lower LVEF (P=0.03) and significantly higher EuroSCORE (P<0.0001). The number of patients with post-procedure residual MR severity >2 was significantly higher in the MitraClip group compared to the surgical group (17.2% vs. 0.4%; P<0.0001). 30-day mortality was not statistically significant (1.7% vs. 3.5%; P=0.54), nor were neurological events (0.85% vs. 1.74%; P=0.43), reoperations for failed MV procedures (2% vs. 1%; P=0.56), NYHA Class III/IV (5.7% vs. 11.3; P=0.42) and mortality at 12 months (7.4% vs. 7.3%; P=0.66)., Conclusions: Despite a higher risk profile in the MitraClip patients compared to surgical intervention, the clinical outcomes were similar although surgery was more effective in reducing MR in the early post procedure period. We conclude the non-inferiority of the MitraClip as a treatment option for severe, symptomatic MR in comparison to conventional valvular surgery.

Background: Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS) has become a standard technique to perform mitral valve surgery in many cardiac centers. However, there remains a question regarding when MIMVS should not be performed due to an increased surgical risk. Consequently, expert surgeons were surveyed regarding their opinions on patient factors, mitral valve pathology and surgical skills in MIMVS., Methods: Surgeons experienced in MIMVS were identified through an electronic search of the literature. A link to an online survey platform was sent to all surgeons, as well as two follow-up reminders. Survey responses were then submitted to a central database and analyzed., Results: The survey was completed by 20 surgeons. Overall results were not uniform with regard to contraindications to performing MIMVS. Some respondents do not consider left atrial enlargement (95% of surgeons), complexity of surgery (75%), age (70%), aortic calcification (70%), EuroSCORE (60%), left ventricular ejection fraction (55%), or obesity (50%) to be contraindication to surgery. Ninety percent of respondents believe more than 20 cases are required to gain familiarity with the procedure, while 85% believe at least one MIMVS case needs to be performed per week to maintain proficiency. Eighty percent recommend establishment of multi-institutional databases and standardized surgical mentoring courses, while 75% believe MIMVS should be incorporated into current training programs for trainees., Conclusions: These results suggest that MIMVS has been accepted as a treatment option for patients with mitral valve pathologies according the expert panel. Initial training and continuing practice is recommended to maintain proficiency, as well as further research and formalization of training programs.

Background: The treatment of complex pathologies of the aortic arch and proximal descending aorta represents a significant challenge for cardiac surgeons. Various surgical techniques and prostheses have been implemented over the past several decades, all with varying degrees of success. The introduction of the frozen elephant trunk (FET) technique facilitates one-stage repair of such pathologies. The present systematic review and meta-analysis aims to assess the safety and efficacy of the FET approach in the current literature., Methods: Electronic searches were performed using six databases from their inception to July 2013. Relevant studies utilizing the FET technique were identified. Data were extracted and analyzed according to predefined clinical endpoints., Results: Seventeen studies were identified for inclusion for qualitative and quantitative analyses, all of which were observational reports. Pooled mortality was 8.3%, while stroke and spinal cord injuries were 4.9% and 5.1% respectively. Cardiopulmonary bypass time, myocardial ischemia time, and circulatory arrest time strongly correlated with perioperative mortality in a linear relationship, while moderate correlations between cerebral perfusion time and mortality, and circulatory arrest time and spinal cord injury, were also identified. Five-year survival, reported in five studies, ranged between 63-88%., Conclusions: Overall, results of the present systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that the FET procedure can be performed with acceptable mortality and morbidity risks.

Background: Increasing evidence continues to demonstrate a survival advantage for bilateral internal mammary artery (BIMA) over left internal mammary artery (LIMA) for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). We performed an updated meta-analysis of published studies comparing BIMA versus LIMA in CABG operations and assessed differences in long-term survival., Methods: Electronic searches for studies comparing BIMA versus LIMA were performed using three databases from 1972 to December 2012. Studies with at least four years of follow-up and at least 100 patients in each group were included for review. We used a random-effect model and pooled hazard ratios from across all included studies., Results: No randomized controlled trials and 27 observational studies totaling 79,063 patients (19,277 BIMA, 59,786 LIMA) were included for final analysis. The BIMA group demonstrated significantly better long-term survival than the LIMA group [hazard ratio, 0.78; confidence interval, 0.72-0.84; P<0.00001]., Conclusions: In an updated meta-analysis, we demonstrate an increase in long-term survival in patients receiving BIMA as a primary grafting strategy over those receiving a LIMA. Although no randomized controlled trials were included in this meta-analysis, the survival benefit seen with a BIMA cannot be overlooked when determining which operation to perform in CABG patients. Until the long-term results of the ART trial are published, we offer best available evidence in favor of BIMA over LIMA for CABG surgery.

Background: Surgical management of aortic arch pathologies still faces significant challenges, especially if the pathology involves the proximal descending aorta. A novel solution, named the frozen elephant trunk approach, encompasses a hybrid stent-graft that is placed during conventional arch surgery in the descending aorta to exert an expansive radial force. This obviates the need for second-stage surgery, while limiting the residual patency of the false lumen and minimizing wall stress. The objective of this systematic review is to assess the safety and efficacy of the frozen elephant trunk technique in aortic ach pathologies., Selection Criteria: We included all studies that used hybrid-stent grafts, or stented the proximal descending aorta under direct visualization during conventional arch surgery. Six electronic databases were searched (inception to June 2013), limited to studies that have reported 10 patients or more in the English language., Main Results: Sixteen observational studies, with 1,409 patients, were identified. A variety of commercial and custom-made stent-grafts were used, with varying pathology indications. Overall mortality was 8.5% (range, 0-18.2%). One-year survival, reported in six studies, was 85.6% (range, 70-97%), while five-year survival was 71.5% (range, 63-88%). Stroke and spinal cord injury was identified in 5.3% and 5.5% of patients respectively, while renal failure and reoperation for bleeding was 12.0% and 8.9% respectively. No other endpoints were sufficiently reported., Implications for Clinical Practice: The frozen elephant trunk approach represents a reasonably safe procedure to repair the arch and proximal descending aorta. While promising, these results require long-term studies to assess durability and freedom from reoperation. Further regulatory approval is also required to permit widespread employment of specialized commercial hybrid stent-grafts.

Introduction: Recognizing the importance of neuroprotection in aortic arch surgery, deep hypothermic circulatory arrest (DHCA) now underpins operative practice as it minimizes cerebral metabolic activity. When prolonged periods of circulatory arrest are required, selective antegrade cerebral perfusion (SACP) is supplemented as an adjunct. However, concerns exist over the risks of SACP in introducing embolism and hypo- and hyper-perfusing the brain. The present meta-analysis aims to compare postoperative outcomes in arch surgery using DHCA alone or DHCA + SACP as neuroprotection strategies., Methods: Electronic searches were performed using six databases from their inception to January 2013. Two reviewers independently identified all relevant studies comparing DHCA alone with DHCA + SACP. Data were extracted and meta-analyzed according to pre-defined clinical endpoints., Results: Nine comparative studies were identified in the present meta-analysis, with 648 patients employing DHCA alone and 370 utilizing DHCA + SACP. No significant differences in temporary or permanent neurological outcomes were identified. DHCA + SACP was associated with significantly better survival outcomes (P=0.008, I(2)=0%), despite longer cardiopulmonary bypass time. Infrequent and inconsistent reporting of other clinical results precluded analysis of systemic outcomes., Conclusions: The present meta-analysis indicate the superiority of DHCA + SACP in terms of mortality outcomes.

Introduction: A recent concern of deep hypothermic circulatory arrest (DHCA) in aortic arch surgery has been its potential association with increased risk of coagulopathy, elevated inflammatory response and end-organ dysfunction. Recently, moderate hypothermic circulatory arrest (MHCA) with selective antegrade circulatory arrest (SACP) seeks to negate potential hypothermia-related morbidities, while maintaining adequate neuroprotection. The present meta-analysis aims to compare postoperative outcomes in arch surgery using DHCA or MHCA+SACP as neuroprotective strategies., Methods: Electronic searches were performed using six databases from their inception to January 2013. Two reviewers independently identified all relevant studies comparing DHCA with MHCA+SACP, as defined by a recent hypothermia temperature consensus. Data were extracted and meta-analyzed according to pre-defined clinical endpoints., Results: Nine comparative studies were identified for inclusion in the present meta-analysis. Stroke rates were significantly lower in patients undergoing MHCA+SACP (P=0.0007, I(2)=0%), while comparable results were observed with temporary neurological deficit, mortality, renal failure or bleeding. Infrequent and inconsistent reporting of systemic outcomes precluded analysis of other systemic outcomes., Conclusions: The present meta-analysis indicated the superiority of MHCA+SACP in terms of stroke risk.

Considered a standard part of aortic arch surgery, hypothermia can sufficiently reduce cerebral metabolic demand to permit reasonable periods of circulatory arrest. Yet despite its ubiquitous application and critical importance, temperature classification in hypothermic circulatory arrest is still without clear definition. The following Consensus from experts in high-volume aortic institutions defines 'profound', 'deep', 'moderate', and 'mild' hypothermia and recommends standardized monitoring sites, so as to facilitate more consistent reporting and robust analysis.