Background: Minimally invasive aortic valve (AV) surgery has become widely accepted alternative to standard sternotomy. Despite possible reduction in morbidity, this approach is not routinely performed for aortic surgery. Current report aimed to demonstrate early and mid-term outcomes in patients undergoing minimally invasive aortic root-and ascending aorta-replacement with or without concomitant AV replacement (AVR). Methods: Between 2011 and 2018, 167 selected low-and intermediate risk patients (mean age: 64.1±11.3; 70% men; EuroSCORE II 2.58±3.26) underwent minimally invasive aortic surgery. The "V" shaped partial upper sternotomy was performed through a 6-cm skin incision. Patients were divided into minimally invasive root reimplantation/replacement/remodelling (root RRR), supracoronary aorta replacements (SCAR) and SCAR+AVR. Kaplan-Meier estimates of survival were used. Results: Mean follow-up was 3.1 year (max 7.7 years). Of 167 patients, 82 (49%) underwent SCAR; 44 (26%) SCAR + AVR. Forty-one patients (25%) underwent minimally invasive root RRR. Average aortic diameter was 6.00±0.46 cm. The cardiopulmonary bypass and aortic cross-clamp time were 152.0±46.8 and 101.8±36.8 minutes. There was one conversion to sternotomy. Median intensive care unit stay was 2.0 (IQR: 1.0-3.0) days. Thirty-day mortality was 1%. Within investigated follow-up, there was one late reoperation due to aortic valve thrombosis; late survival was estimated at 95% without differences between types of surgery: hazard ratio, 0.81; 95% CI: 0.36-1.81; P=0.61. Conclusions: Minimally invasive aortic surgery performed through "V" shaped partial upper sternotomy is feasible and safe in selected patients regardless of the extent of repair, from supracoronary aorta replacements to complex root surgery.

In this paper, we register a random sequence constructed based on Markov processes by switching between them. At unobservable random moment, a change in distribution of observed sequence takes place. Using probability maximizing approach, the optimal stopping rule for detecting the disorder is identified. Some explicit solution for example is also obtained. The result is the generalization of Bojdecki's model, where before and after the change independent processes are observed.

In SARS-CoV-2 patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), Veno-Venous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (V-V ECMO) was shown to provide valuable treatment with reasonable survival in large multi-centre investigations. However, in some patients, conversion to modified ECMO support forms may be needed. In this single-centre retrospective registry, all consecutive patients receiving V-V ECMO between 1 March 2020 to 1 May 2021 were included and analysed. The patient cohort was divided into two groups: those who remained on V-V ECMO and those who required conversion to other modalities. Seventy-eight patients were included, with fourteen cases (18%) requiring conversions to veno-arterial (V-A) or hybrid ECMO. The reasons for the ECMO mode configuration change were inadequate drainage (35.7%), inadequate perfusion (14.3%), myocardial infarction (7.1%), hypovolemic shock (14.3%), cardiogenic shock (14.3%) and septic shock (7.1%). In multivariable analysis, the use of dobutamine (p = 0.007) and a shorter ICU duration (p = 0.047) predicted the conversion. The 30-day mortality was higher in converted patients (log-rank p = 0.029). Overall, only 19 patients (24.4%) survived to discharge or lung transplantation. Adverse events were more common after conversion and included renal, cardiovascular and ECMO-circuit complications. Conversion itself was not associated with mortality in the multivariable analysis. In conclusion, as many as 18% of patients undergoing V-V ECMO for COVID-19 ARDS may require conversion to advanced ECMO support.