Outcome analysis of the surgical team in open repair of intact abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery.

OBJECTIVES: To analyze how the experience of the surgical team went to impact the outcomes after open repair (OR) of intact abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA). METHODS: This is a single-center, observational cohort study with retrospective analysis of all open repair for intact abdominal aortic aneurysm performed between January 1st, 2010 and December 31st, 2022. The primary outcome was survival at 30 days and in follow-up, and a composite outcome of mortality and major complication. The secondary outcome was freedom from aorta-related reintervention. All outcomes were stratified according to the experience of the operating team (surgeons and anesthesiology). RESULTS: We analyzed 103 (7.2%) patients: 97 (94.2%) males and 6 (5.8%) females. The mean age was 76 ± 8 years (range, 55-93). The best possible team composition was present in 52 (50.5%) interventions. The follow-up index was 0.82 ± 0.18 (range, 0.6-1.0). Mean follow-up duration was 59 ± 43 months (range, 0-158). We observed no differences between teams in major complications (best, 17.3% vs mixed, 21.6%; OR: 0.4, P = 0.622), 30 days mortality (best, 0% vs mixed, 5.9%; OR: 7.6, P = 0.118) and composite outcome (best, 11.5% vs mixed, 17.6%; OR: 0.8, P = 0.416). Cox regression analysis identified the best possible team as a protective factor against the need for reintervention (HR: 0.2; 95% CI: 0.06-0.88, P = 0.032). CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, OR of AAA yielded satisfactory results in terms of safety and efficacy independently of the team's experience. A more experienced team may protect against aorta-related reintervention.

In vitro and in vivo evaluation of a new active heat moisture exchanger.

INTRODUCTION: In order to improve the efficiency of heat moisture exchangers (HMEs), new hybrid humidifiers (active HMEs) that add water and heat to HMEs have been developed. In this study we evaluated the efficiency, both in vitro and in vivo, of a new active HME (the Performer; StarMed, Mirandola, Italy) as compared with that of existing HMEs (Hygroster and Hygrobac; Mallinckrodt, Mirandola, Italy). METHODS: We tested the efficiency by measuring the temperature and absolute humidity (AH) in vitro using a test lung ventilated at three levels of minute ventilation (5, 10 and 15 l/min) and at two tidal volumes (0.5 and 1 l), and in vivo in 42 patients with acute lung injury (arterial oxygen tension/fractional inspired oxygen ratio 283 +/- 72 mmHg). We also evaluated the efficiency in vivo after 12 hours. RESULTS: In vitro, passive Performer and Hygrobac had higher airway temperature and AH (29.2 +/- 0.7 degrees C and 29.2 +/- 0.5 degrees C, [P < 0.05]; AH: 28.9 +/- 1.6 mgH2O/l and 28.1 +/- 0.8 mgH2O/l, [P < 0.05]) than did Hygroster (airway temperature: 28.1 +/- 0.3 degrees C [P < 0.05]; AH: 27 +/- 1.2 mgH2O/l [P < 0.05]). Both devices suffered a loss of efficiency at the highest minute ventilation and tidal volume, and at the lowest minute ventilation. Active Performer had higher airway temperature and AH (31.9 +/- 0.3 degrees C and 34.3 +/- 0.6 mgH2O/l; [P < 0.05]) than did Hygrobac and Hygroster, and was not influenced by minute ventilation or tidal volume. In vivo, the efficiency of passive Performer was similar to that of Hygrobac but better than Hygroster, whereas Active Performer was better than both. The active Performer exhibited good efficiency when used for up to 12 hours in vivo. CONCLUSION: This study showed that active Performer may provide adequate conditioning of inspired gases, both as a passive and as an active device.