Search

Background and purpose: The conceptualization of brain death (BD) was pivotal in the shaping of judicial and medical practices. Nonetheless, media reports of alleged recovery from BD reinforced the criticism that this construct is a self‐fulfilling prophecy (by treatment withdrawal or organ donation). We meta‐analyzed the natural history of BD when somatic support (SS) is maintained. Methods: Publications on BD were eligible if the following were reported: aggregated data on its natural history with SS; and patient‐level data that allowed censoring at the time of treatment withdrawal or organ donation. Endpoints were as follows: rate of somatic expiration after BD with SS; BD misdiagnosis, including "functionally brain‐dead" patients (FBD; i.e. after the pronouncement of brain‐death, ≥1 findings were incongruent with guidelines for its diagnosis, albeit the lethal prognosis was not altered); and length and predictors of somatic survival. Results: Forty‐seven articles were selected (1610 patients, years: 1969–2021). In BD patients with SS, median age was 32.9 years (range = newborn–85 years). Somatic expiration followed BD in 99.9% (95% confidence interval = 89.8–100). Mean somatic survival was 8.0 days (range = 1.6 h–19.5 years). Only age at BD diagnosis was an independent predictor of somatic survival length (coefficient = −11.8, SE = 4, p < 0.01). Nine BD misdiagnoses were detected; eight were FBD, and one newborn fully recovered. No patient ever recovered from chronic BD (≥1 week somatic survival). Conclusions: BD diagnosis is reliable. Diagnostic criteria should be fine‐tuned to avoid the small incidence of misdiagnosis, which nonetheless does not alter the prognosis of FBD patients. Age at BD diagnosis is inversely proportional to somatic survival. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To evaluate the neuroprotection exerted by ketosis against acute damage of the mammalian central nervous system (CNS). Search engines were interrogated to identify experimental studies comparing the mitigating effect of ketosis (intervention) versus non-ketosis (control) on acute CNS damage. Primary endpoint was a reduction in mortality. Secondary endpoints were a reduction in neuronal damage and dysfunction, and an 'aggregated advantage' (composite of all primary and secondary endpoints). Hedges' g was the effect measure. Subgroup analyses evaluated the modulatory effect of age, insult type, and injury site. Meta-regression evaluated timing, type, and magnitude of intervention as predictors of neuroprotection. The selected publications were 49 experimental murine studies (period 1979-2020). The intervention reduced mortality (g 2.45, SE 0.48, p < .01), neuronal damage (g 1.96, SE 0.23, p < .01) and dysfunction (g 0.99, SE 0.10, p < .01). Reduction of mortality was particularly pronounced in the adult subgroup (g 2.71, SE 0.57, p < .01). The aggregated advantage of ketosis was stronger in the pediatric (g 3.98, SE 0.71, p < .01), brain (g 1.96, SE 0.18, p < .01), and ischemic insult (g 2.20, SE 0.23, p < .01) subgroups. Only the magnitude of intervention was a predictor of neuroprotection (g 0.07, SE 0.03, p 0.01 per every mmol/L increase in ketone levels). Ketosis exerts a potent neuroprotection against acute damage to the mammalian CNS in terms of reduction of mortality, of neuronal damage and dysfunction. Hematic levels of ketones are directly proportional to the effect size of neuroprotection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Open in new tab Download slide Open in new tab Download slide OBJECTIVES Multi-arterial bypass grafting with bilateral internal thoracic (BITA-MABG) or radial (RA-MABG) arteries improves long-term survival, but its increased complexity raises perioperative safety concerns. We compared perioperative outcomes of RA-MABG and BITA-MABG using the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database (STS-ACSD). METHODS We analysed the 2004–2015 BITA-MABG and RA-MABG experience in STS-ACSD. Primary end points were operative mortality (OM) and deep sternal wound infections (DSWI). Risk-adjusted odds ratios [AOR (95% confidence interval)] were derived via multivariable logistic regression. Sensitivity analyses were done in patient sub-cohorts and based on institutional BITA-utilization rates (<5%, 5–10%, 10–20%, 20–40% and >40%). RESULTS Eighty-five thousand nine hundred five RA-MABG (82.5% men; 61 years) and 61 336 BITA-MABG (85.1% men; 59 years) patients were analysed; 41.6% of BITA-MABG and 27.3% of RA-MABG cases came from institutions with low MABG utilization rates (<10%). Unadjusted OM was equivalent for both techniques (BITA-MABG versus RA-MABG: 1.3% vs 1.2%, P  = 0.79), while DSWI was lower for RA-MABG (1.0% vs 0.6%, P  < 0.001). RA-MABG was associated with lower adjusted OM [AOR = 0.80 (0.69–0.96)] and DSWI [AOR = 0.39 (0.32–0.46)]. Sensitivity analyses confirmed robustness of these findings. Equivalent outcomes were observed at high BITA-use institutions where BITA cases comprised >20% of all cases for OM and ≥40% for DSWI. CONCLUSIONS This analysis of the STS-ACSD showed that RA-MABG is a generally safer form of multi-arterial coronary artery bypass grafting surgery. However, this advantage is mitigated at institutions with substantial BITA experience. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: We sought to investigate the impact of radial artery harvesting techniques on clinical outcomes using a meta-analytic approach limited to randomized controlled trials and propensity-matched studies for clinical outcomes, in which graft patency was analyzed.Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted using PubMed and MEDLINE to identify publications containing comparisons between endoscopic radial artery harvesting (ERAH) and open harvesting (ORAH). Only randomized controlled trials and propensity-matched series were included. Data were extracted and analyzed with RevMan. The primary endpoint was wound complication rate, while secondary endpoints were patency rate, early mortality, and long-term cardiac mortality.Results: Six studies comprising 743 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Of them 324 (43.6%) underwent ERAH and 419 (56.4%) ORAH. ERAH was associated with a lower incidence of wound complications (odds ratio: 0.33, confidence interval 0.14-0.77; p = 0.01). There were no differences in graft patency, and early and long-term cardiac mortality between the two techniques.Conclusion: ERAH reduces wound complications and does not affect graft patency, or short- and long-term mortality compared to ORAH. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVES: Multiple arterial coronary artery grafting (MABG) improves long-term survival compared with single arterial CABG (SABG), yet the best second arterial conduit to be used with the left internal thoracic artery (LITA) remains undefined. Outcomes in patients grafted with radial artery (RA-MABG) versus right internal thoracic artery (RITA-MABG) as the second arterial graft were compared with SABG. METHODS: Multi-institutional, retrospective analysis of non-emergent isolated LITA to left anterior descending coronary artery CABG patients was performed using institutional Society of Thoracic Surgeon National Adult Cardiac Surgery Databases. 4484 (54.5%) SABG [LITA ± saphenous vein grafts (SVG)], 3095 (37.6%) RA-MABG (RA ± SVG) and 641 (7.9%) RITA-MABG (RITA ± SVG) patients were included. The RITA was used as a free (68%) or in situ (32%) graft. RA grafts were principally anastomosed to the ascending aorta. Long-term survival was ascertained from US Social Security Death Index and institutional follow-up. Triplet propensity matching and covariate- adjusted multivariate logistic regression were used to adjust for baseline differences between study cohorts. RESULTS: Compared with the SABG cohort, the RITA-MABG cohort was younger (58.6 ± 10.2 vs 65.9 ± 10.4, P < 0.001), had a higher prevalence of males (87% vs 65%, P < 0.001) and was generally healthier (MI: 36.7% vs 56.7%, P < 0.001, smoking: 56.8% vs 61.1%, IDDM: 3.0% vs 14.4%, CVA: 2.6% vs 10.0%). The RA-MABG cohort was generally characterized by a risk profile intermediate to that of SABG and RITA-MABG. Unadjusted 5-, 10- and 15-year survival rates were best in RITA-MABG (95.2%, 89% and 82%), intermediate in RA-MABG (89%, 74%, 57%) and worst in SABG (82%, 61% and 44%) cohorts (all P < 0.001). Propensity matching yielded 551 RA-MABG, RITA-MABG and SABG triplets, which showed similar 30-day mortality. Late survival (16 years) was equivalent in the RA-MABG and RITA-MABG cohorts [68.2% vs 66.7%, P = 0.127, hazard ratio (HR) = 1.28 (0.96-1.71)] and both significantly better than SABG (61.1%). The corresponding SABG versus RITA-MABG and SABG versus RA-MABG HRs (95% confidence interval) were 1.52 (1.18-1.96) and 1.31 (1.01-1.69) with P < 0.002 and P = 0.038, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: RA-MABG or RITA-MABG equally improve long-term survival compared with SABG and thus should be embraced by the Heart Team as the therapy of choice in LITA-based coronary artery bypass surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]