A Retrospective Evaluation of Endo-Aortic Balloon Occlusion Compared to External Clamping in Minimally Invasive Mitral Valve Surgery.

We compare outcomes of endo-aortic balloon occlusion (EABO) vs external aortic clamping (EAC) in patients undergoing minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS) in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) Adult Cardiac Surgery Database. Adults undergoing mitral valve surgery (July 2017-December 2018) were identified within the STS database (N = 60,607). Total 7,978 patients underwent a minimally invasive approach (including robotically assisted). About 1,163 EABO patients were 1:1 propensity-matched to EAC patients using exact matching on age, sex, and type of mitral procedure, and propensity score average matching for 16 other risk indicators. Early outcomes were compared. Categorical variables were compared using logistic regression; hospital and intensive care unit length of stay were compared using negative binomial regression. In the matched cohort, mean age was 62 years; 35.9% were female, and 86% underwent mitral valve repair. Cardiopulmonary bypass time was shorter for EABO vs EAC group (125.0 ± 53.0 vs 134.0 ± 67.0 minutes, P = 0.0009). There was one aortic dissection in the EAC group and none in the EABO group (P value > 0.31), and no statistically significant differences in cross-clamp time, major intraoperative bleeding, perioperative mortality, stroke, new onset of atrial fibrillation, postoperative acute kidney injury, success of repair. Median hospital LOS was shorter for EABO vs EAC procedures (4 vs 5 days, P < 0.0001). In this large, retrospective, STS database propensity-matched analysis ofpatients undergoing MIMVS, we observed similar safety outcomes for EABO and EAC, including no aortic dissections in the EABO group. The EABO group showed slightly shorter CPB times and hospital LOS.

Prosthesis-prosthesis anastomosis using barbed sutures compared to conventional sutures under high, long-term pressure; in vitro extracorporeal circulation setup.

BACKGROUND: While barbed sutures have been extensively utilized in other disciplines, they have not been widely adopted in cardiac surgery. The lack of safety and feasibility data has limited its use within the field. To aide in the further understanding of how cardiac surgeons can use barbed sutures, we sought to develop a high-pressure in vitro simulation model. We compared knotless barbed sutures in a highly pressurized anastomosis to conventional sutures. METHODS: Ten specimens in total were utilized in prosthesis anastomosis, using 34 mm Gelweave Plexus (Terumo Aortic, Sunrise, FL 33325, USA) and 34 mm Hemabridge (Intergard Woven Hemabridge, Getinge, Göteborg, Sweden). Five models of size 3-0 barbed suture anastomoses using non-absorbable, barbed, self-retaining, monofilament polypropylene sutures (Filbloc® 3-0, Assut Europe, Rome, Italy) were compared against five conventional anastomoses using size 4-0 polypropylene monofilament (Ethicon, USA). The systems were connected using a novel-designed extracorporeal circulation system. Pressure was rapidly increased in the specimen to a mean pressure of 300-350 mmHg, running then for a minimum of 48 hours to assess anastomosis strength and endurance. RESULTS: No anastomotic dehiscence or rupture was recorded. Complex, angular anastomosis required extra stitch leakage sutures in both conventional and barbed suture specimens. CONCLUSION: Using knotless barbed sutures with an additional self-locking maneuver for prosthesis-prosthesis anastomosis in cardiac surgery is feasible in an in vitro model under long term, high-mean pressure when compared to conventional sutures. In vivo trials should be performed to further validate the in vitro findings.