ABSTRACT
Background: Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are widely employed as a therapeutic option for end-stage heart failure. We evaluated the outcomes associated with centrifugal-flow LVAD implantation, comparing 2 device models: the Heartmate 3 (HM3) and the Heartware Ventricular Assist Device (HVAD). Methods: Data were collected from patients who underwent LVAD implantation between June 1, 2015 and December 31, 2022. We analyzed overall survival, first rehospitalization, and early, late, and LVAD-related complications. Results: In total, 74 patients underwent LVAD implantation, with 42 receiving the HM3 and 32 the HVAD. A mild Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support score was more common among HM3 than HVAD recipients (p=0.006), and patients receiving the HM3 exhibited lower rates of preoperative ventilator use (p=0.010) and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (p=0.039). The overall early mortality rate was 5.4% (4 of 74 patients), with no significant difference between groups. Regarding early right ventricular (RV) failure, HM3 implantation was associated with a lower rate (13 of 42 [31.0%]) than HVAD implantation (18 of 32 [56.2%], p=0.051). The median rehospitalization-free period was longer for HM3 recipients (16.9 months) than HVAD recipients (5.3 months, p=0.013). Furthermore, HM3 recipients displayed a lower incidence of late hemorrhagic stroke (p=0.016). In the multivariable analysis, preoperative use of continuous renal replacement therapy (odds ratio, 22.31; p=0.002) was the only significant predictor of postoperative RV failure. Conclusion: The LVAD models (HM3 and HVAD) demonstrated comparable overall survival rates. However, the HM3 was associated with a lower risk of late hemorrhagic stroke.
ABSTRACT
This case report presents 2 patients with gastroesophageal junction cancer who both underwent totally minimally invasive esophagectomy with colon interposition. Patients 1 and 2, who were 43-year-old and 78-year-old men, respectively, had distinct clinical presentations and medical histories. Patient 1 underwent minimally invasive robotic esophagectomy with a laparoscopic total gastrectomy, colonic conduit preparation, and intrathoracic esophago-colono-jejunostomy. Patient 2 underwent completely robotic total gastrectomy, colon conduit preparation, and intrathoracic esophago-colono-jejunostomy. The primary challenge in colon interposition is assessing colon vascularity and ensuring an adequate conduit length, which is critical for successful anastomosis. In both cases, we used indocyanine green fluorescence angiography to evaluate vascularity. Determining the appropriate conduit is challenging; therefore, it is crucial to ensure a slightly longer conduit during reconstruction. Because totally minimally invasive colon interposition can reduce postoperative pain and enhance recovery, this surgical technique is feasible and beneficial.
ABSTRACT
Background: The phenomenon known as the "weekend effect" impacts various medical disciplines. We compared outcomes between regular hours and off hours to investigate the presence of the weekend effect in extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR). Methods: Between January 2018 and December 2020, 159 patients at our center were treated with veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for cardiac arrest. We assessed the time required for ECMO preparation, the rate of successful weaning, and the rate of in-hospital mortality. These factors were compared among regular hours ("daytime": weekdays from 7:00 AM-7:00 PM), off hours on weekdays ("nighttime": weekdays from 7:00 PM-7:00 AM), and off hours on weekends and holidays ("weekend": Fridays at 7:00 PM to Mondays at 7:00 AM). Results: The time from the recognition of cardiac arrest to the arrival of the ECMO team was shortest for the daytime group and longest for those treated over the weekend (daytime, 10.0 minutes; nighttime, 12.5 minutes; weekend, 15.0 minutes; p=0.064). The time from the ECMO team's arrival to ECMO initiation was shortest for the daytime and longest for the nighttime group (daytime, 13.0 minutes; nighttime, 18.5 minutes; weekend, 14.0 minutes; p=0.028). No significant difference was observed in the rate of successful ECMO weaning (daytime, 48.3%; nighttime, 39.5%; weekend, 36.1%; p=0.375). Conclusion: In situations involving CPR, the time to arrival of the ECMO team was longer during off hours. Furthermore, ECMO insertion required more time at night than during the other periods. These findings warrant specific training in decision-making and emergent ECMO insertion.
