FIBTEM-guided post-cardiopulmonary bypass administration of fibrinogen concentrate resulted in improved intraoperative management of coagulopathic bleeding in thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm operations and reduced transfusion and 24-hour drainage volume.

Background: Fibrinogen is suggested to play an important role in managing major bleeding. However, clinical evidence regarding the effect of fibrinogen concentrate (derived from human plasma) on transfusion is limited. The authors assessed whether fibrinogen concentrate can reduce blood transfusion when given as intraoperative, targeted, first-line hemostatic therapy in bleeding patients undergoing aortic replacement surgery. Methods: In this single-center, prospective, placebocontrolled, double-blind study, patients aged 18 yr or older undergoing elective thoracic or thoracoabdominal aortic replacement surgery involving cardiopulmonary bypass were randomized to fibrinogen concentrate or placebo, administered intraoperatively. Study medication was given if patients had clinically relevant coagulopathic bleeding immediately after removal from cardiopulmonary bypass and completion of surgical hemostasis. Dosing was individualized using the fibrin-based thromboelastometry test. If bleeding continued, a standardized transfusion protocol was followed. Results: Twenty-nine patients in the fibrinogen concentrate group and 32 patients in the placebo group were eligible for the efficacy analysis. During the first 24 h after the administration of study medication, patients in the fibrinogen concentrate group received fewer allogeneic blood components than did patients in the placebo group (median, 2 vs. 13 U; P < 0.001; primary endpoint). Total avoidance of transfusion was achieved in 13 (45%) of 29 patients in the fibrinogen concentrate group, whereas 32 (100%) of 32 patients in the placebo group received transfusion (P < 0.001). There was no observed safety concern with using fibrinogen concentrate during aortic surgery.

AimsVentricular arrhythmias (VA) occur frequently after permanent left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation in end stage heart failure. Left ventricular assist device patients require rhythm control in contrast to patients with biventricular support. However, the rationale for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) utilization in LVAD patients remains unclear. This study investigated the safety and efficacy of primary prevention ICD therapy and the rate of appropriate ICD interventions in LVAD patients. Methods and resultsWe prospectively collected data from patients receiving LVADs. Patients without previous ICD received an ICD after LVAD implantation for primary prevention. Sixty-one patients with LVAD and ICD were followed prospectively for 365 + 321 days. Nine patients died from thromboembolism or haemorrhage. Overall, the rate of appropriate ICD interventions was 34%, mostly for treatment of monomorphic VT in 52%, polymorphic VT in 13%, and VF in 35%. Seventy-one percent of VA were terminated by overdrive pacing, 29% by shock. Patients with a history of VA before LVAD implantation had a significantly higher 1-year rate for ICD therapy compared with LVAD patients with a primary prevention ICD indication LVAD patients (50 vs. 24%). Similarly, patients with non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy had a significantly higher risk for ICD therapy than patients with ischaemic heart disease (50 vs. 22%). ConclusionImplantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy is safe and effective in LVAD patients. Ventricular arrhythmias leading to ICD intervention occur frequently in 34% of LVAD patients after 1 year, with large variations depending on the underlying cardiac disease and previous arrhythmia history. Primary prevention ICD indication after LVAD implantation yields high rates of ICD intervention. A history of previous VA strongly predicts future use of ICD treatment after LVAD implantation.--

These results demonstrate an encouraging outcome after cryopreserved allograft implantation for the treatment of vascular infections in the abdominal aorta. The data represent a basis for future comparisons with other treatment modalities for vascular infections, including silver-coated prostheses and autogenous femoral veins.

The graft adds to the 'frozen elephant trunk' concept for treating the arch and proximal descending aorta. Early experience demonstrates an excellent 30-day survival. Combining the frozen elephant with a four-branched arch graft increases the armament of the surgeon in the treatment of complex and diverse aortic arch pathology.