No abstract

Different minimally invasive approaches have been proposed for cardiac surgery. Between those, the ministernotomy finds wide consensus for the treatment of the aortic disease, being both the upper reversed T and the upper J the mostly used type of incisions. The authors review the literature on the use of ministernotomy in the treatment of the ascending aorta and arch pathology. The scientific literature was reviewed by searching Medline, the Cochrane Library and the CINAHL database. A total of 1411 papers were found in Medline, 186 in the Cochrane database and 514 in CINAHL database; 50 papers were used to write the article; of which seven represent the most significant papers on the subject. The authors, journal, date and country of publication, patients group studied, relevant outcomes, and the results of these papers are tabulated. The ministernotomy is gaining consensus among surgeons. The indication to surgery, initially restricted only to selected elective patients, is now extended to more complex surgeries, including both the aortic root and aortic arch, redo-operations and, in minor cases, to emergency patients. Furthermore, the use of ministernotomy in redo aortic surgery with patent left internal mammary artery (LIMA) to left anterior descending (LAD) artery is a promising alternative. However, the use of this technique is still limited to few institutions and there are still a limited number of studies comparing this approach to full sternotomy in a prospective, randomized fashion. Even with those limitations, from the review of the literature, it seems that ministernotomy approach for aortic root and ascending aorta surgery is a feasible alternative, showing some advantages compared to full sternotomy. Those advantages include: reduced postoperative bleeding and pain, lower risk of mediastinitis, better aesthetic results, and faster respiratory function recovery. This is true not only for first time surgery, but also, and especially, for redo cases, where the limited exposure will reduce risks correlated to the surgical dissection of redo surgery. The ministernotomy approach for aortic root and ascending aorta surgery could in the future be more extensively used, offering greater benefits to cardiac surgical patients.

No abstract

A best evidence topic in cardiac surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was: 'In patients with sewing needle cardiac injuries is the surgical approach the recommended treatment?' The scientific literature was reviewed by searching Medline, using Ovid interface, from 1950 to August 2009. Six hundred and twenty-six papers were found, of which 24 were deemed relevant to this topic. The authors, journal, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes and results of these papers were tabulated. The cause of injury may delay the timing of presentation the diagnosis and consequently the therapeutic strategy. In nearly all the cases in the reviewed papers the authors surgically removed the needle from the heart. However, out of the 24 papers, four patients had a conservative treatment. Most of the authors recommend early removal of the needle to prevent migration and further anatomical damage. The early surgical removal of foreign bodies in the heart is considered an effective approach to prevent complications. The heart is more vulnerable to serious injuries when the foreign body is extracardiac than when the foreign body is completely intracardiac. The unceasing motion of the heart against the sharp point of the fixed foreign body will result in repetitive wounding with bleeding and consequent cardiac tamponade. Due to the tendency of the needle to migrate, the preoperative use of computer tomography scan, trans-thoracic and trans-oesophageal echocardiography have been advocated to locate the exact position of the needle and its correlation with the surrounding tissues. The intraoperative use of epicardial ultrasound or fluoroscopy is also recommended. However, in cases of late diagnosis, in previously untreated patients, treatment can be individualized. If the symptoms are less severe it is reasonable to adopt a conservative approach as with time most foreign bodies become safely encysted and do no harm. Patients can remain asymptomatic for many years. However, they may present many years later with complications such as pericarditis, tamponade or endocarditis. Strict follow-up is useful in those patients.

Acute aortic dissection an extremely severe condition having a high risk of mortality. The classic symptom may mimic other conditions such as myocardial ischemia, leading to misdiagnosis. Coronary malperfusion associated with aortic dissection is relatively rare, but when it occurs, it may have a fatal result for the patient. The diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome may lead to the inappropriate administration of thrombolytic or anticoagulant treatment resulting in catastrophic consequences. Emergency imaging techniques help to guide the correct diagnosis. Transthoracic echocardiography is useful as a first imaging test, and may be followed by transesophageal echocardiography, or other imaging techniques. Surgery represents the treatment for these patients. However, with the aim to stabilize the patient and to reduce myocardial damage, initial preoperative endovascular coronary intervention has been reported.