Patients exposed to a surgical safety checklist experience better postoperative outcomes, but this could simply reflect wider quality of care in hospitals where checklist use is routine.

The application of Prevena significantly reduced revision surgery rates in obese patients treated with unilateral pectoralis major flap for deep sternal wound infections.

OBJECTIVES The aim of the study was to compare the conventional frozen elephant trunk implantation technique with a modified implantation technique with an aortic anastomosis in zone 1 and extra-anatomic revascularization of the left subclavian artery during reperfusion. METHODS Between May 2014 and March 2018, 40 patients (26 male; mean age 60.2 ± 11.2 years) underwent complete aortic arch replacement with the Thoraflex Hybrid prosthesis™ (Vascutek, Inchinnan, Scotland) at our institution. Seventeen patients underwent conventional arch replacement (group 1) and 23 patients the modified procedure (group 2). Indication for arch replacement included all types of acute and chronic diseases. RESULTS Cardiopulmonary bypass time (213.1 ± 53.5 vs 243.8 ± 67.0 min, P = 0.13) and aortic cross-clamp time (114.4 ± 40.7 vs 117.3 ± 56.6 min, P = 0.86) did not differ significantly between group 1 and 2. There was a trend towards a shorter circulatory arrest time (50.72 ± 9.6 vs 44.7 ± 15.5 min; P = 0.20) in group 2. Perioperative mortality was 10% (5.9% vs 13%; P = 0.62). Stroke occurred in 10% (5.9% vs 13%; P = 0.62) of patients. Spinal cord injury occurred in 7.5% of patients (11.8% vs 4.3% P = 0.57). Due to the a proximal aortic anastomosis, there was a significantly shorter coverage of the descending aorta with the prosthesis ending at vertebral level Th7.5 (6.75–8) in group 1 versus Th6.0 (5.0–6.0) in group 2 (P-value = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS Implantation of the frozen elephant trunk prosthesis in zone 1 allows for a more proximal aortic anastomosis that could make the procedure more feasible especially in patients with difficult anatomies or in an acute setting.

No abstract

Objectives: Current national registries are lacking detailed pathology-driven analysis and long-term patients outcomes. The Heart Valve Society (HVS) aortic valve (AV) repair research network started the Aortic Valve Insufficiency and ascending aorta Aneurysm InternATiOnal Registry (AVIATOR) to evaluate long-term patient outcomes of AV repair and replacement. The purpose of the current report is to describe the AVIATOR initiative and report in a descriptive manner the patients included. Methods:The AV repair research network includes surgeons, cardiologists, and scientists and established an online database compliant with the guidelines for reporting valve-related events. Prospective inclusion started from January 2013. Adult patients (18 years or older) who were operated on between 1995 and 2017 with complete procedural specification of the type of repair/replacement were selected for descriptive analysis.Results: Currently 58 centers from 17 countries include 4896 patients with 89% AV repair (n ¼ 4379) versus 11% AV replacement (n ¼ 517). AV repair was either isolated (28%), or associated with tubular/partial root replacement (22%) or valve-sparing root replacement (49%) with an in-hospital mortality of 0.5%, 1.7%, and 1.2%, respectively. AV replacement was either isolated (24%), associated with tubular/partial root replacement (17%) or root replacement (59%) with an in-hospital mortality of 1%, 2.6%, and 2.0%, respectively. Conclusions:The multicenter surgical AVIATOR registry, by applying uniform definitions, should provide a solid evidence base to evaluate the place of repair versus replacement on the basis of long-term patient outcomes. Obtaining data completeness and adequate representation of all surgery types remain challenging. Toward the near future AVIATOR-medical will start to study natural history, as will AVIATOR-kids, with a focus on pediatric disease.