Search

Background: Aortic valve stenosis has gained increasingly more importance due to its high prevalence in elderly people. More than two decades ago, transcatheter aortic valve replacement emerged for patients who were denied surgery, and its noninferiority has been demonstrated in numerous studies. Oxidative stress has generated great interest because of its sensitivity to cell damage and the possibility of offering early hints of clinical outcomes. The aim of the present study was to investigate whether there is a significant difference between transcatheter (TAVR) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in terms of the changes in oxidation-reduction potential (ORP) and antioxidant capacity. Therefore, we investigated perioperative oxidative stress levels and their influence on clinical outcomes. Methods: A total of 72 patients (50% TAVR versus 50% SAVR) were included in the present study. Static oxidation-reduction potential (sORP) and antioxidant capacity were measured using the RedoxSys™ Diagnostic System (Luoxis Diagnostics, USA) in serum samples drawn before and after surgery, as well as on the first postoperative day. In addition, clinical data were obtained to evaluate the clinical outcome of each case. Results: TAVR patients had higher preoperative sORP levels compared to the SAVR patients and more severe comorbidities. Unlike the TAVR cohort, patients in the SAVR group showed a significant difference in sORP from the pre- to postoperative levels. Capacity demonstrated higher preoperative levels in the SAVR cohort and also a greater difference postoperatively compared to the TAVR cohort. Regression analysis revealed a significant correlation between pre- and postoperative capacity levels (r = -0.9931, p < 0.0001), providing a method of predicting postoperative capacity levels by knowing the preoperative levels. According to the multivariable analysis, both sORP and antioxidant capacity are dependent on time point, baseline value, and type of surgery, with

Item does not contain fulltext

Background Despite substantial improvements in myocardial preservation strategies, coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is still associated with severe complications. It has been reported that remote ischaemic preconditioning (RIPC) reduces reperfusion injury in people undergoing cardiac surgery and improves clinical outcome. However, there is a lack of synthesised information and a need to review the current evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Objectives To assess the benefits and harms of remote ischaemic preconditioning in people undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting, with or without valve surgery. Search methods In May 2016 we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science. We also conducted a search of ClinicalTrials.gov and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). We also checked reference lists of included studies. We did not apply any language restrictions. Selection criteria We included RCTs in which people scheduled for CABG (with or without valve surgery) were randomly assigned to receive RIPC or sham intervention before surgery. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. We calculated mean differences (MDs), standardised mean differences (SMDs) and risk ratios (RR) using a random-effects model. We assessed quality of the trial evidence for all primary outcomes using the GRADE methodology. We completed a 'Risk of bias' assessment for all studies and performed sensitivity analysis by excluding studies judged at high or unclear risk of bias for sequence generation, allocation concealment and incomplete outcome data. We contacted authors for missing data. Our primary endpoints were 1) composite endpoint (including all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction or any new stroke, or both) assessed at 30 days after surgery, 2) cardiac troponin T (cTnT, ng/L) at 48 hours and 72 hours, and as area under the curve (

Nutrition support is a necessary therapy for critically ill cardiac surgery patients. However, conclusive evidence for this population, consisting of well-conducted clinical trials is lacking. To clarify optimal strategies to improve outcomes, an international multidisciplinary group of 25 experts from different clinical specialties from Germany, Canada, Greece, USA and Russia discussed potential approaches to identify patients who may benefit from nutrition support, when best to initiate nutrition support, and the potential use of pharmaco-nutrition to modulate the inflammatory response to cardiopulmonary bypass. Despite conspicuous knowledge and evidence gaps, a rational nutritional support therapy is presented to benefit patients undergoing cardiac surgery.

Item does not contain fulltext

Background Despite substantial improvements in myocardial preservation strategies, coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is still associated with severe complications. It has been reported that remote ischaemic preconditioning (RIPC) reduces reperfusion injury in people undergoing cardiac surgery and improves clinical outcome. However, there is a lack of synthesised information and a need to review the current evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Objectives To assess the benefits and harms of remote ischaemic preconditioning in people undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting, with or without valve surgery. Search methods In May 2016 we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science. We also conducted a search of ClinicalTrials.gov and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). We also checked reference lists of included studies. We did not apply any language restrictions. Selection criteria We included RCTs in which people scheduled for CABG (with or without valve surgery) were randomly assigned to receive RIPC or sham intervention before surgery. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. We calculated mean differences (MDs), standardised mean differences (SMDs) and risk ratios (RR) using a random-effects model. We assessed quality of the trial evidence for all primary outcomes using the GRADE methodology. We completed a 'Risk of bias' assessment for all studies and performed sensitivity analysis by excluding studies judged at high or unclear risk of bias for sequence generation, allocation concealment and incomplete outcome data. We contacted authors for missing data. Our primary endpoints were 1) composite endpoint (including all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction or any new stroke, or both) assessed at 30 days after surgery, 2) cardiac troponin T (cTnT, ng/L) at 48 hours and 72 hours, and as area under the curve (

Nutrition support is a necessary therapy for critically ill cardiac surgery patients. However, conclusive evidence for this population, consisting of well-conducted clinical trials is lacking. To clarify optimal strategies to improve outcomes, an international multidisciplinary group of 25 experts from different clinical specialties from Germany, Canada, Greece, USA and Russia discussed potential approaches to identify patients who may benefit from nutrition support, when best to initiate nutrition support, and the potential use of pharmaco-nutrition to modulate the inflammatory response to cardiopulmonary bypass. Despite conspicuous knowledge and evidence gaps, a rational nutritional support therapy is presented to benefit patients undergoing cardiac surgery.

Nutrition support is a necessary therapy for critically ill cardiac surgery patients. However, conclusive evidence for this population, consisting of well-conducted clinical trials is lacking. To clarify optimal strategies to improve outcomes, an international multidisciplinary group of 25 experts from different clinical specialties from Germany, Canada, Greece, USA and Russia discussed potential approaches to identify patients who may benefit from nutrition support, when best to initiate nutrition support, and the potential use of pharmaco-nutrition to modulate the inflammatory response to cardiopulmonary bypass. Despite conspicuous knowledge and evidence gaps, a rational nutritional support therapy is presented to benefit patients undergoing cardiac surgery.

Background: Invasive off- or on-pump cardiac surgery (elective and emergency procedures, excluding transplants are routinely performed to treat complications of ischaemic heart disease. Randomised controlled trials (RCT) evaluate the effectiveness of treatments in the setting of cardiac surgery. However, the impact of RCTs is weakened by heterogeneity in outcome measuring and reporting, which hinders comparison across trials. Core outcome sets (COS, a set of outcomes that should be measured and reported, as a minimum, in clinical trials for a specific clinical field) help reduce this problem. In light of the above, we developed a COS for cardiac surgery effectiveness trials. Methods: Potential core outcomes were identified a priori by analysing data on 371 RCTs of 58,253 patients. We reached consensus on core outcomes in an international three-round eDelphi exercise. Outcomes for which at least 60% of the participants chose the response option "no" and less than 20% chose the response option "yes" were excluded. Results: Eighty-six participants from 23 different countries involving adult cardiac patients, cardiac surgeons, anaesthesiologists, nursing staff and researchers contributed to this eDelphi. The panel reached consensus on four core outcomes: 1) Measure of mortality, 2) Measure of quality of life, 3) Measure of hospitalisation and 4) Measure of cerebrovascular complication to be included in adult cardiac surgery trials. Conclusion: This study used robust research methodology to develop a minimum core outcome set for clinical trials evaluating the effectiveness of treatments in the setting of cardiac surgery. As a next step, appropriate outcome measurement instruments have to be selected.

Anneke Damberg, Carina Benstoem, Ruediger Autschbach, Andreas GoetzenichDepartment of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery, University Clinic RWTH Aachen, Aachen, GermanyAbstract: The standard treatment for symptomatic severe aortic valve stenosis is surgical aortic valve replacement. Over the last decade, transcatheter aortic valve replacement has emerged as an option for patients judged inoperable. It might also constitute an alternative for high-risk patients, even though which patients might benefit from this approach is still being discussed and remains controversial. Transcatheter heart valve replacement is a rapidly spreading technology. However, a number of problems still need to be addressed, such as paravalvular regurgitation, stroke rate, and postoperative conduction disturbances. Further, the durability of transcatheter heart valves remains unclear. Randomized clinical trials and long-term follow-up will help define the role of transcatheter heart valve replacement in aortic stenosis therapy.Keywords: TAVI, aortic valve replacement, transcatheter surgery