Background and Aim of the Study Whether minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MMVS) leads to better outcomes remains unclear. We conducted a systematic review and meta‐analysis comparing various MMVS approaches with conventional sternotomy. Methods We searched Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials. gov, and the ISRCTN Register for studies comparing minimally invasive approach (thoracotomy, port access, partial sternotomy, or robotic) with median sternotomy for mitral valve surgery. We performed title and abstract, full‐text screening, and data extraction independently and in duplicate. We pooled data using random effect models. Quality assessment was performed using validated tools. Certainty of evidence was established using the GRADE framework. Results One hundred and nineteen studies (n = 38,106) met eligibility criteria: eight randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 111 observational studies. MMVS was associated with fewer days in hospital (RCT: MD: −2.2 days, 95% CI, [−3.7 to −0.8]; observational: MD: −2.4 days, 95% CI, [−2.7 to −2.1]). Observational studies suggested that MMVS reduced transfusion requirements with fewer units transfused per patient (MD: −1.2; 95% CI, [−1.6 to −0.9]) and fewer patients transfused (RR, 0.7; 95% CI, [0.6−0.7]). Observational data also suggested lower mortality with MMVS (RR, 0.6; 95% CI, [0.5−0.7], p < .001, I2 = 0%), but this was not corroborated by RCT data. The risk of postoperative mitral regurgitation (≥2+ or requiring re‐intervention) did not differ between the two groups. Conclusions MMVS may be associated with shorter length of hospital stay with no significant difference in short‐term morbidity and mortality. There is a paucity of high‐quality data on the long‐term outcomes of MMVS when compared with conventional sternotomy.
Background The LAAOS III (Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Study) clinical trial demonstrated that concomitant left atrial appendage (LAA) occlusion leads to a lower risk of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism compared with no occlusion in participants with atrial fibrillation and a CHA 2 DS 2 ‐VASc score of ≥2 undergoing cardiac surgery for another indication. We report the cost implications of concomitant LAA occlusion during cardiac surgery. Methods and Results Using LAAOS III data, we compared the costs (in US dollars) associated with LAA occlusion to no occlusion from the perspective of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. We calculated the average cost per participant during the trial by applying Medicare reimbursement costs to cardiovascular events for all trial participants. We conducted sensitivity analyses, varying the cost of stroke ±25% and occlusion technique use. Cost neutrality was defined as a mean cost difference within ±5% of the cost per participant in the no‐occlusion group. Total study cost per participant was $3878 in the LAA occlusion group and $4490 in the no‐occlusion group, a mean difference of −$612 (95% CI, −$1276 to $45). The main drivers of cost savings were fewer stroke events during the trial (mean difference of −$1021). In sensitivity analyses, LAA occlusion was cost saving for suture and stapler techniques but more expensive with closure device. Conclusions Concomitant LAA occlusion was cost saving for participants in LAAOS III. Our findings support concomitant LAA occlusion as an economically dominant strategy for patients with atrial fibrillation and a CHA 2 DS 2 ‐VASc score of ≥2 undergoing cardiac surgery.
OBJECTIVES Guidelines recommend retrograde autologous priming (RAP) of the cardiopulmonary bypass circuit. However, the efficacy and safety of RAP is not well-established. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the effects of RAP on transfusion requirements, morbidity and mortality. METHODS We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline, ScienceDirect, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and Embase for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing RAP to no-RAP. We performed title and abstract review, full-text screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessment independently and in duplicate. We pooled data using a random effects model. RESULTS Twelve RCTs (n = 1206) and 17 observational studies (n = 3565) were included. Fewer patients required blood transfusions with RAP [RCTs; risk ratio 0.58 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.51, 0.65], P < 0.001, and observational studies; risk ratio 0.65 [95% CI: 0.53, 0.80], P < 0.001]. The number of units transfused per patient was also lower among patients who underwent RAP (RCTs; mean difference −0.38 unit [95% CI: −0.72, −0.04], P = 0.03, and observational studies; mean difference −1.03 unit [95% CI: −1.76, −0.29], P < 0.006). CONCLUSIONS This meta-analysis supports the use of RAP as a blood conservation strategy since its use during cardiopulmonary bypass appears to reduce transfusion requirements.
Purpose of reviewSaphenous vein grafts (SVGs) remain the most-commonly used conduits for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Significant rates of vein graft failure (VGF) remain a limitation of their use as this diminishes the long-term benefits of CABG. The choice of intraoperative SVGs preservation solution is believed to have an impact on graft patency; however, the superiority of one solution over the others remains in question. Recent findingsIn the present review, we describe the pathophysiological mechanisms underlying the different phases of VGF. We also reviewed the most recent literature comparing and evaluating the efficacy of various storage solutions. These include heparinized saline, autologous heparinized blood, buffered solutions, and crystalloid cardioplegia.
Background Guidelines recommend both acetylsalicylic acid and ticagrelor following acute coronary syndrome (ACS), but appropriate prescription practices lag. We analyzed the impact of government medication approval, national guideline updates, and publicly funded drug coverage plans on P2Y12 inhibitor utilization. Methods Accessing provincial databases, we obtained data for elderly ACS patients in Ontario, Canada, between 2008 and 2018. Using interrupted-time series with descriptive statistics and segmented regression analysis, we evaluated types of P2Y12 inhibitors prescribed at discharge and changes to their utilization in patients managed with percutaneous intervention (PCI), coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or medically, following national antiplatelet therapy guidelines (by the Canadian Cardiovascular Society), ticagrelor’s national approval by Health Canada, and ticagrelor’s coverage by a publicly funded medication plan. Results We included 114,142 patients (49.4%-PCI; mean age 75.71±6.94 and 62.3% male and 7.7%-CABG; mean age 74.11±5.63 and 73.5% male). Among PCI patients, clopidogrel utilization declined monthly after 2010 national guidelines were published (p<0.0001) and within the first month after ticagrelor’s national approval by Health Canada (p=0.03). Among PCI patients, ticagrelor utilization increased within the first month (p<0.0001) and continued increasing monthly (p<0.0001) after its coverage by a publicly funded medication plan. Among PCI patients, clopidogrel utilization declined within the first month (p=0.003) and ticagrelor utilization increased monthly (p=0.05) after 2012 CCS guidelines. Among CABG patients, ticagrelor’s coverage was associated with a monthly increase in its utilization (p<0.0001). Conclusion National guideline updates and drug coverage by a publicly funded medication plan significantly improved P2Y12 inhibitor utilization. Barriers to appropriate antiplatelet therapy in the surgical population must be explored.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.