Mitral Leaflet Shortening as an Ancillary Procedure in Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy.

BACKGROUND: Mitral leaflet elongation is common in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM), contributes to obstructive physiology, and presents a challenge to the dual surgical goals of abolition of outflow gradients and abolition of mitral regurgitation. Anterior leaflet shortening, performed as an ancillary surgical procedure during myectomy, is controversial. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of all patients undergoing myectomy from January 2010 to March 2020, with analysis of survival and echocardiographic results. The study compared outcomes of patients treated with myectomy and concomitant mitral leaflet shortening with patients treated with myectomy alone. Over this time, the technique for mitral shortening evolved from anterior leaflet plication to residual leaflet excision (ReLex). RESULTS: Myectomy was performed in 416 patients aged 57.5 ± 13.6 years, and 204 (49%) patients were female. Average follow-up was 5.4 ± 2.8 years. Survival follow-up was complete in 415 patients. Myectomy without valve replacement was performed in 332 patients, of whom 192 had mitral valve shortening (58%). Mitral leaflet plication was performed in 73 patients, ReLex in 151, and both procedures in 32. Hospital mortality for patients undergoing myectomy was 0.7%. At 8 years, cumulative survival was 95% for both the myectomy combined with leaflet shortening group and the myectomy alone group, with no difference in survival between the 2 groups. There was no difference in survival between the anterior leaflet plication and ReLex groups. Echocardiography 2.5 years after surgery showed a decrease in resting and provoked gradients, mitral regurgitation, and left atrial volume and no difference in key variables between patients who underwent ancillary leaflet shortening and patients who underwent myectomy alone. CONCLUSIONS: These results affirm that mitral shortening may be an appropriate surgical judgment for selected patients.

Routine Extubation in the Operating Room After Isolated Coronary Artery Bypass.

BACKGROUND: The benefits of fast-track extubation in the intensive care unit (ICU) after cardiac surgery are well established. Although extubation in the operating room (OR) is safe in carefully selected patients, widespread use of this strategy in cardiac surgery remains unproven. This study was designed to evaluate perioperative outcomes with OR vs ICU extubation in patients undergoing nonemergency, isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). METHODS: The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) data for all single-center patients who underwent nonemergency isolated CABG over a 6-year interval were analyzed. Perioperative morbidity and mortality with ICU vs OR extubation were compared. RESULTS: Between January 1, 2017 and December 31, 2022, 1397 patients underwent nonemergency, isolated CABG; 891 (63.8%) of these patients were extubated in the ICU, and 506 (36.2%) were extubated in the OR. Propensity matching resulted in 414 pairs. In the propensity-matched cohort, there were no differences between the 2 groups in incidence of reintubation, reoperation for bleeding, total operative time, stroke or transient ischemic attack, renal failure, or 30-day mortality. OR-extubated patients had shorter ICU hours (14 hours vs 20 hours; P < .0001), shorter postoperative hospital length of stay (3 days vs 5 days; P < .0001), a greater likelihood of being discharged directly to home (97.3% vs 89.9%; P < .0001), and a lower 30-day readmission rate (1.7% vs 4.1%; P = .04). CONCLUSIONS: Routine extubation in the OR is a feasible and safe strategy for a broad spectrum of patients after nonemergency CABG, with no increase in perioperative morbidity or mortality. Wider adoption of routine OR extubation for nonemergency CABG is indicated.

Efficacy of proning in acute respiratory distress syndrome on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

Objectives: Proning patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) has been associated with increased survival, although few data exist evaluating the safety and feasibility of proning patients with ARDS on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Methods: A single-institution retrospective review of all patients with ARDS placed on ECMO between March 1 and May 31, 2020, was performed. All proning events were evaluated for complications, as well as change in compliance, sweep, oxygenation, and flow. The primary outcome of this study was the rate major morbidity associated with proning while on ECMO. Results: In total, 30 patients were placed on ECMO for ARDS, with 12 patients (40%) proned while on ECMO. A total of 83 proning episodes occurred, with a median of 7 per patient (interquartile range, 3-9). No ECMO cannula-associated bleeding, cannula displacement, or endotracheal tune dislodgements occurred (0%). Oropharyngeal bleeding occurred twice (50%). Four patients were proned with chest tubes in place, and none had complications (0%). Lung compliance improved after proning in 70 events (84%), from a mean of 15.4 mL/mm Hg preproning to 20.6 mL/mm Hg postproning (P < .0001). Sweep requirement decreased in 36 events (43%). Oxygenation improved in 63 events (76%), from a mean partial pressure of oxygen of 86 preproning to 103 postproning (P < .0001). Mean ECMO flow was unchanged. Conclusions: Proning in patients with ARDS on ECMO is safe with an associated improvement in lung mechanics. With careful planning and coordination, these data support the practice of appropriately proning patients with severe ARDS, even if they are on ECMO.

Thoracic surgery outcomes for patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019.

OBJECTIVE: As the Coronavirus Disease 2019 pandemic continues, appropriate management of thoracic complications from Coronavirus Disease 2019 needs to be determined. Our objective is to evaluate which complications occurring in patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 require thoracic surgery and to report the early outcomes. METHODS: This study is a single-institution retrospective case series at New York University Langone Health Manhattan campus evaluating patients with confirmed Coronavirus Disease 2019 infection who were hospitalized and required thoracic surgery from March 13 to July 18, 2020. RESULTS: From March 13 to August 8, 2020, 1954 patients were admitted to New York University Langone Health for Coronavirus Disease 2019. Of these patients, 13 (0.7%) required thoracic surgery. Two patients (15%) required surgery for complicated pneumothoraces, 5 patients (38%) underwent pneumatocele resection, 1 patient (8%) had an empyema requiring decortication, and 5 patients (38%) developed a hemothorax that required surgery. Three patients (23%) died after surgery, 9 patients (69%) were discharged, and 1 patient (8%) remains in the hospital. No healthcare providers were positive for Coronavirus Disease 2019 after the surgeries. CONCLUSIONS: Given the 77% survival, with a majority of patients already discharged from the hospital, thoracic surgery is feasible for the small percent of patients hospitalized with Coronavirus Disease 2019 who underwent surgery for complex pneumothorax, pneumatocele, empyema, or hemothorax. Our experience also supports the safety of surgical intervention for healthcare providers who operate on patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019.

Long-term outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement with minimal contrast in chronic kidney disease.

BACKGROUND: Patients with renal insufficiency have poor short-term outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). METHODS: Retrospective chart review identified 575 consecutive patients not on hemodialysis who underwent TAVR between September 2014 and January 2017. Outcomes were defined by VARC-2 criteria. Primary outcome of all-cause mortality was evaluated at a median follow-up of 811 days (interquartile range 125-1,151). RESULTS: Preprocedural glomerular filtration rate (GFR) was ≥60 ml/min in 51.7%, 30-60 ml/min in 42.1%, and < 30 ml/min in 6.3%. Use of transfemoral access (98.8%) and achieved device success (91.0%) did not differ among groups, but less contrast was used with lower GFR (23 ml [15-33], 24 ml [14-33], 13 ml [8-20]; p < .001). Peri-procedural stroke (0.7%, 2.1%, 11.1%; p < .001) was higher with lower GFR. Core lab analysis of preprocedural computed tomography scans of patients who developed a peri-procedural stroke identified potential anatomic substrate for stroke in three out of four patients with GFR 30-60 ml/min and all three with GFR <30 ml/min (severe atheroma was the most common subtype of anatomical substrate present). Compared to GFR ≥60 ml/min, all-cause mortality was higher with GFR 30-60 ml/min (HR 1.61 [1.00-2.59]; aHR 1.61 [0.91-2.83]) and GFR <30 ml/min (HR 2.41 [1.06-5.48]; aHR 2.34 [0.90-6.09]) but not significant after multivariable adjustment. Follow-up echocardiographic data, available in 63%, demonstrated no difference in structural heart valve deterioration over time among groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with baseline renal insufficiency remain a challenging population with poor long-term outcomes despite procedural optimization with a transfemoral-first and an extremely low-contrast approach.

Comparison of device-specific adverse event profiles between Impella platforms.

BACKGROUND: The Impella (Abiomed) ventricular support system is a family of temporary mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices used to treat patients with cardiogenic shock, acute cardiogenic decompensation, and for high-risk percutaneous or surgical revascularization. These devices include the percutaneously implanted 2.5/cardiac power (CP) and the surgically implanted 5.0/left direct (LD). Despite the beneficial effects and increased usage of these devices, data to assess adverse outcomes and guide clinician decision-making between the Impella CP and 5.0/LD are limited. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of 91 consecutive patients who required at least 24 h of Impella support, from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2019. Groups were stratified based on either initial Impella CP or 5.0/LD placement. Clinical outcomes and in-hospital complications were compared. RESULTS: Impella CP was implanted in 66 patients (mean age: 61 ± 15 years, male 71.2%) and Impella 5.0/LD was implanted in 25 patients (mean age: 62 ± 9 years, male 84.0%). There was greater stability of device position (p = .033), less incidence of hemolysis (p < .001), and less frequent need for additional MCS (p = .001) in patients implanted with the Impella 5.0/LD compared with Impella CP in this study cohort. Patients with Impella 5.0/LD were more likely to survive from Impella and survive to discharge. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that for patients who require temporary MCS for more than 24 h, the Impella 5.0/LD may have a more favorable device-specific adverse profile compared with the Impella CP.

Outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with low versus high gradient severe aortic stenosis in the setting of preserved left ventricular ejection fraction.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for low gradient (LG) severe aortic stenosis (AS) with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) remains an area of clinical uncertainty. METHODS: Retrospective review identified 422 patients who underwent TAVR between September 4, 2014 and July 1, 2016. Procedural indication other than severe AS (n = 22) or LVEF <50% (n = 98) were excluded. Outcomes were defined by valve academic research consortium two criteria when applicable and compared between LG (peak velocity <4.0 m/s and mean gradient <40 mmHg; n = 73) and high gradient (HG) (n = 229) groups. The LG group was further categorized as low stroke volume index (SVI) (n = 41) or normal SVI (n = 32). Median follow-up was 747 days [interquartile range 220-1013]. RESULTS: Baseline thirty-day mortality risk (LG 6.2% [3.8-8.1] vs HG 5.7% [4.1-7.4], P = 0.43) did not differ between groups. Short-term outcomes, including procedural success rate (86.1% vs 88.8%, P = 0.53), peri-procedural complications (intra-procedural heart block: 6.8% vs 7.9%, P = 0.99; permanent pacemaker placement: 11.0% vs 13.6%, P = 0.69; moderate paravalvular regurgitation: 2.7% vs 1.3%, P = 0.60), and all-cause in-hospital mortality (2.7% vs 0.9%, P = 0.25) did not differ between LG and HG groups. On long-term follow-up, all-cause mortality also did not differ between LG and HG groups (6.8% vs 10.0%, plog-rank = 0.33) or between the LG low SVI (9.8%), LG normal SVI (3.1%), and HG (10.0%) groups (plog-rank = 0.39). CONCLUSION: Patients with preserved LVEF undergoing TAVR for severe AS with LG, including LG with low SVI, have no significant difference in adverse outcomes when compared to patients with HG.