Outcomes of aortic root enlargement during isolated aortic valve replacement.

OBJECTIVES: Aortic root enlargement (ARE) lowers the risk of patient prosthesis mismatch after surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with small annular size. Whether ARE is associated with increased operative mortality is controversial. This study compares the early and intermediate outcomes in patients undergoing SAVR with and without ARE. METHODS: All patients undergoing isolated SAVR with and without ARE from 2015 to 2020 were analyzed. Propensity-matching was used to adjust for possible confounding variables. Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank test were used to estimate and compare overall outcomes and survival in the study cohorts. RESULTS: Among 868 isolated SAVRs, ARE was performed in 54 (6.2%) patients. Before matching, mean age was similar but female sex (67.4% vs. 29.6%; SD: -0.82) and previous AVR (18.9% vs. 3.9%; SD: -0.48) were more common in patients undergoing SAVR + ARE versus SAVR alone. A bovine pericardial patch was used for 81.5% (44 of 54) of ARE, with a Dacron patch in the rest. After propensity matching, the average cardiopulmonary bypass (138.2 ± 34.9 vs. 102.9 ± 33.0 min; p < 0.01) and cross-clamp times (113.8 ± 26.7 vs. 83.0 ± 28.4 min; p < 0.01) were longer in the SAVR + ARE group. There were no significant differences in postoperative stroke, new-onset dialysis, pacemaker placement, reoperation for bleeding, length of hospital stay, or 30-day readmission. Thirty-day mortality (0% vs. 0.6%, p = 1.0) and 5-year survival (96.3% vs. 95.7%, p = 0.86) were also similar. CONCLUSIONS: ARE during surgical AVR can be safely performed without an increase in complications with excellent early and intermediate-term survival.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for respiratory failure in phases of COVID-19 variants.

BACKGROUND: Adaptive mutations of the severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) virus have emerged throughout the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The characterization of outcomes in patients requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for severe respiratory distress from COVID-19 during the peak prevalence of different variants is not well known. METHODS: There were 131 patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection supported by ECMO at two referral centers within a large healthcare system. Three predominant variant phase time windows (Pre-Alpha, Alpha, and Delta) were determined by a change-point analyzer based on random population sampling and viral genome sequencing. Patient demographics and outcomes were compared. RESULTS: The average age of patients was 46.9 ± 10.5 years and 70.2% (92/131) were male. Patients cannulated for ECMO during the Delta variant wave were younger compared to earlier Pre-Alpha (39.3 ± 7.8 vs. 48.0 ± 11.1 years) and Alpha phases (39.3 ± 7.8 vs. 47.2 ± 7.7 years) (p < .01). The predominantly affected race in the Pre-Alpha phase was Hispanic (52.2%; 47/90), while in Alpha (61.5%; 16/26) and Delta (40%; 6/15) variant waves, most patients were White (p < .01). Most patients received a tracheostomy (82.4%; 108/131) with a trend toward early intervention in later phases compared to Pre-Alpha (p < .01). There was no significant difference between the duration of ECMO, mechanical support, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), or hospital LOS over the three variant phases. The in-hospital mortality was overall 41.5% (54/131) and was also similar. Six-month survival of patients who survived to discharge was 92.2% (71/77). CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in survival or time on ECMO support in patients during the peak prevalence of the three variants.