Search

Graphical AbstractThe risks of perioperative arterial ischemic events in patients with cancer in two US cohorts comprising several million patients.

Acute postoperative myocardial ischemia (PMI) after cardiac surgery is an infrequent event that can evolve rapidly and become a potentially life-threatening complication. Multiple factors are associated with acute PMI after cardiac surgery and may vary by the type of surgical procedure performed. Although the criteria defining nonprocedural myocardial ischemia are well established, there are no universally accepted criteria for the diagnosis of acute PMI. In addition, current evidence on the management of acute PMI after cardiac surgery is sparse and generally of low methodological quality. Once acute PMI is suspected, prompt diagnosis and treatment are imperative, and options range from conservative strategies to percutaneous coronary intervention and redo coronary artery bypass grafting. In this document, a multidisciplinary group including experts in cardiac surgery, cardiology, anesthesiology, and postoperative care summarizes the existing evidence on diagnosis and treatment of acute PMI and provides clinical guidance.

Coronary artery revascularisation can be performed surgically or percutaneously. Surgery is associated with higher procedural risk and longer recovery than percutaneous interventions, but with long-term reduction of recurrent cardiac events. For many patients with obstructive coronary artery disease in need of revascularisation, surgical or percutaneous intervention is indicated on the basis of clinical and anatomical reasons or personal preferences. Medical therapy is a crucial accompaniment to coronary revascularisation, and data suggest that, in some subsets of patients, medical therapy alone might achieve similar results to coronary revascularisation. Most revascularisation data are based on prevalently White, non-elderly, male populations in high-income countries; robust data in women, older adults, and racial and other minorities, and from low-income and middle-income countries, are urgently needed.

IMPORTANCE: It has been reported that women undergoing coronary artery bypass have higher mortality and morbidity compared with men but it is unclear if the difference has decreased over the last decade. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate trends in outcomes of women undergoing coronary artery bypass in the US from 2011 to 2020. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This retrospective cohort study at hospitals contributing to the Adult Cardiac Surgery Database of the Society of Thoracic Surgeons included 1 297 204 patients who underwent primary isolated coronary artery bypass from 2011 to 2020. EXPOSURE: Coronary artery bypass. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was operative mortality. The secondary outcome was the composite of operative mortality and morbidity (including operative mortality, stroke, kidney failure, reoperation, deep sternal wound infection, prolonged mechanical ventilation, and prolonged hospital stay). The attributable risk (the association of female sex with coronary artery bypass grafting outcomes) for the primary and secondary outcomes was calculated. RESULTS: Between 2011 and 2020, 1 297 204 patients underwent primary isolated coronary artery bypass grafting with a mean age of 66.0 years, 317 716 of which were women (24.5%). Women had a higher unadjusted operative mortality (2.8%; 95% CI, 2.8-2.9 vs 1.7%; 95% CI, 1.7-1.7; P < .001) and overall unadjusted incidence of the composite of operative mortality and morbidity compared with men (22.9%; 95% CI, 22.7-23.0 vs 16.7%; 95% CI, 16.6-16.8; P < .001). The attributable risk of female sex for operative mortality varied from 1.28 in 2011 to 1.41 in 2020, with no significant change over the study period (P for trend = 0.38). The attributable risk for the composite of operative mortality and morbidity was 1.08 in both 2011 and 2020 with no significant change over the study period (P for trend = 0.71). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Women remain at significantly higher risk for adverse outcomes following coronary artery bypass grafting and no significant improvement has been seen over the course of the last decade. Further investigation into the determinants of operative outcomes in women is urgently needed.

Repeat coronary artery bypass grafting (RCABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are both used for the treatment of symptomatic patients with coronary artery disease and prior CABG, but the optimal treatment strategy remains unknown. We sought to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare operative and follow-up outcomes following RCABG versus PCI in patients with prior CABG.

Graphical Abstract

Introduction and background: Myocardial revascularization using internal thoracic arteries (ITAs) has been associated with superior clinical outcome. This study addresses the question of whether internal mammary arteries are unsuitable for [...]

To link to full-text access for this article, visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtcvs.2005.02.023 Byline: Mario Gaudino (a), Michele Serricchio (b), Paolo Tondi (b), Laura Gerardino (b), Angela Di Giorgio (b), Paolo Pola (b), Gianfederico Possati (a) Abstract: Only scant information is available on the chronic consequences of radial artery removal for coronary artery bypass surgery on forearm circulation. Author Affiliation: (a) Departments of Cardiac Surgery and Angiology, Rome, Italy (b) Catholic University, Rome, Italy. Article History: Received 18 October 2004; Revised 18 January 2005; Accepted 10 February 2005

The use of pulmonary artery catheters (PACs) in intensive care, non-cardiac major surgery and acute coronary syndrome patients has been well-studied, and enthusiasm for its use has waned due to equivocal benefit, or evidence suggesting PAC use was associated with worse outcomes.

Patients who have undergone coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery are susceptible to bypass graft failure and progression of native coronary artery disease. Although the saphenous vein graft (SVG) was traditionally the most-used conduit, arterial grafts (including the left and right internal thoracic arteries and the radial artery) have improved patency rates. However, the need for secondary revascularization remains common, and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has become the most common modality of secondary revascularization after CABG surgery. Procedural characteristics and clinical outcomes differ considerably from those associated with PCI in patients without previous CABG surgery, owing to altered coronary anatomy and differences in conduit pathophysiology. In particular, SVG PCI carries an increased risk of complications, and operators are shifting their focus towards embolic protection strategies and complex native-vessel interventions, increasingly using SVGs as conduits to facilitate native-vessel PCI rather than pursuing SVG PCI. In this Review, we discuss the differences in conduit pathophysiology, changes in CABG surgery techniques, and the latest evidence in terms of PCI in patients with previous CABG surgery, with a particular emphasis on safety and long-term efficacy. We explore the subject of contemporary CABG surgery and subsequent percutaneous revascularization in this complex patient population.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Atrial fibrillation is the most common complication after cardiac surgery and is associated with extended in-hospital stay and increased adverse outcomes, including death and stroke. Pericardial effusion is common after cardiac surgery and can trigger atrial fibrillation. We tested the hypothesis that posterior left pericardiotomy, a surgical manoeuvre that drains the pericardial space into the left pleural cavity, might reduce the incidence of atrial fibrillation after cardiac surgery.

IMPORTANCE: Recent evidence has suggested that skeletonization of the internal thoracic artery (ITA) is associated with worse clinical outcomes in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG). OBJECTIVE: To compare the long-term clinical outcomes of skeletonized and pedicled ITA for CABG. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The Arterial Revascularization Trial (ART) was a 2-group, multicenter trial comparing the use of a bilateral ITA vs a single ITA for CABG at 10 years. Patients in the ART trial were stratified by ITA harvesting technique: skeletonized vs pedicled. Data were collected from June 2004 to December 2017, and data were analyzed from June to July 2021. INTERVENTIONS: In this analysis, the 10-year clinical outcomes were compared between patients who received skeletonized vs pedicled ITAs. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. The secondary outcomes were a composite of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) including all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and repeated revascularization and a composite including MACE and sternal wound complication (SWC). Cox regression and propensity score matching were used. RESULTS: Of 2161 included patients, 295 (13.7%) were female, and the median (interquartile range) age was 65.0 (58.0-70.0) years. At 10 years, the risk of all-cause mortality was not significantly different between the pedicled and skeletonized groups (hazard ratio [HR], 1.12; 95% CI, 0.92-1.36; P = .27). However, the long-term risks of the secondary outcomes were significantly higher in the skeletonized group compared with the pedicled group (MACE: HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.06-1.47; P = .01; MACE and SWC: HR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.05-1.43; P = .01). The difference was not seen when considering only patients operated on by surgeons who enrolled 51 patients or more in the trial (MACE: HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.82-1.39; P = .62; MACE and SWC: HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.80-1.34; P = .78). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: While the long-term survival of patients was not different between groups, the rate of adverse cardiovascular events was consistently higher in the skeletonized group and the difference was associated with surgeon-related factors. Further evidence on the outcome of skeletonized ITA is needed.

Byline: Gianfederico Possati, Mario Gaudino, Francesco Alessandrini, Marco Zimarino, Franco Glieca, Nicola Luciani Abstract: Objective: We herein analyze the results of the systematic clinical and angiographic control performed in a series of 77 consecutive patients undergoing minimally invasive coronary artery bypass. Methods and Results: From January 1995 to June 1997, 77 patients underwent minimally invasive coronary artery bypass at our institution. There was one inhospital death, one noncardiac late death, and five patients had to be reoperated for graft malfunction. A total of 76 patients underwent postoperative angiographic follow-up. In 66 cases (86.8%) the thoracic artery graft, the target vessel, and the anastomosis were patent and functioning normally. In one case the graft was occluded. In the remaining nine cases the thoracic artery graft was patent but with major anomalies of either the anastomosis, the target vessel, or the course of the thoracic artery. Patients operated using especially designed instruments had angiographic results clearly superior to those of patients operated using conventional instrumentation (perfect patency rate 100% vs 81.8%). At a mean follow-up of 18 months, 98.5% of the surviving patients are asymptomatic with negative myocardial scintigraphy. Conclusions: The perfect patency rate of minimally invasive revascularization performed without the use of dedicated instruments is unacceptably low. The use of specific devices is likely to result in a substantial improvement in the angiographic results. (J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1998;115:785-90) Article History: Received 16 July 1997; Revised 29 August 1997; Revised 27 October 1997; Accepted 30 October 1997 Article Note: (footnote) [star] From the Department of Cardiac Surgery, Catholic University, Rome, Italy,a and the Department of Cardiology, 'Calai' Hospital, Gualdo Tadino, Italy.b , [star][star] Address for reprints: Gianfederico Possati, MD, Divisione di Cardiochirurgia, Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, Largo A. Gemelli 8, 00168 Rome, Italy., a 12/1/87522

Patients undergoing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support frequently develop renal failure requiring renal replacement therapy (RRT). RRT may be performed via a dialysis catheter based approach or via the ECMO circuit. We describe our experience with both techniques. A total of 68 patients undergoing ECMO support at our institution were retrospectively analyzed. Predictors of renal failure requiring RRT were determined. Patients undergoing RRT via a dialysis catheter were compared with those undergoing RRT via the ECMO circuit. 10 of the 68 patients required RRT support prior to ECMO. Of the remaining 58 patients, 25 (43%) required new RRT support on ECMO. Lower albumin levels and postcardiotomy shock were predictive of new renal failure requiring RRT on ECMO. RRT performed via the ECMO circuit demonstrated similar efficacy as via a dialysis catheter. Outcomes were much worse for patients requiring new RRT on ECMO support, with a doubling of the length of ECMO support and less that one-third the survival rate of patients not requiring RRT on ECMO support. New renal failure requiring RRT occurs in nearly one-half of patients on ECMO support, with poor outcomes. RRT may be performed via the ECMO circuit with similar efficacy as via a dialysis catheter.

Latest research has indicated a potential adverse effect on graft patency rates and clinical outcomes with skeletonizing the left internal thoracic artery. We aim to provide a prospective, randomized, multicentre trial to compare skeletonized versus pedicled harvesting technique of left internal thoracic artery concerning graft patency rates and patient survival. A total of 1350 patients will be randomized to either skeletonized or pedicled harvesting technique and undergo surgical revascularization. Follow-up will be performed at 30 days, 1 year, 2 years and 5 years after surgery. The primary outcome will be death or left internal thoracic artery graft occlusion in coronary computed tomography angiography or invasive angiography within 2 years (+/- 3 months) after surgery. The secondary outcome will be major adverse cardiac events (composite outcome of all-cause death, myocardial infarction and repeated revascularization) within 1 year, 2 years and 5 years after surgery. The primary end point will be compared in the modified intention-to-treat population between the two treatment groups using Kaplan–Meier graphs, together with log-rank testing. Hereby, we present the study protocol of the first adequately powered prospective, randomized, multicentre trial which compares skeletonized and pedicled harvesting technique of left internal thoracic artery regarding graft patency rates and patient survival.

Currently, midline sternotomy is a widespread method for direct thorax access [1], and despite advancements in minimally invasive surgery, the majority of complex cardiac procedures are performed through midline sternotomy.

Patients undergoing consideration for venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA ECMO) require an immediate risk profile assessment in the setting of incomplete or no information. A retrospective cohort study of 100 patients undergoing VA ECMO placement at three institutions was carried out. Variables strongly associated with survival to discharge were used to calculate a risk stratification score. Indications for VA ECMO support included postcardiotomy shock (24%), ischemic etiologies (33%), nonischemic cardiomyopathy (32%), and other etiologies (11%). Pre–VA ECMO arrest occurred in 69%, and 30% of patients underwent cannulation during arrest. Survival to discharge was 38%. Three variables demonstrated a strong trend toward predicting survival to discharge: lactate >10 mmol/L (p= .054), albumin <3 g/dL (p= .062), and platelet count <180 K/uL (p= .064), and these variables were included in a scoring system. The extremes of age and duration of pre–VA ECMO ventilation were associated with a dismal prognosis and were also included. These five variables were used to construct a mortality prediction score. A score of 0 was associated with 10% expected mortality, whereas a score of 4+ was associated with 100% expected mortality. Mortality increased in a stepwise fashion with increasing scores. The expected mortality closely paralleled the observed mortality. A simple scoring system composed of easily collected variables may help predict mortality. However, it is not intended to replace an experienced clinician’s judgment, but to enhance it.

IMPORTANCE: Sex-related differences in the outcome of using multiple arterial grafts during coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) remain uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcomes of the use of multiple arterial grafts vs a single arterial graft during CABG for women and men. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This statewide cohort study used data from New York’s Cardiac Surgery Reporting System and New York’s Vital Statistics file on 63 402 patients undergoing CABG from January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2014. Statistical analysis was performed from January 10 to August 20, 2020. EXPOSURES: Multiple arterial grafting or single arterial grafting. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Mortality, acute myocardial infarction (AMI), stroke, repeated revascularization, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event (composite of mortality, AMI, and stroke), and major adverse cardiac event (composite of mortality, AMI, or repeated revascularization) were compared among propensity-matched patients and stratified by the risk of long-term mortality. RESULTS: Of the 63 402 patients (48 155 men [76.0%]; mean [SD] age, 69.9 [10.5] years) in the study, women had worse baseline characteristics than men for most of the explored variables. Propensity matching yielded a total of 9512 male pairs and 1860 female pairs. At 7 years of follow-up, mortality was lower among men who underwent multiple arterial grafting (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.73-0.87) but not women who underwent multiple arterial grafting (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.84-1.15). When stratified by the estimated risk of death, the use of multiple arterial grafts was associated with better survival and a lower rate of a major adverse cardiac event among low-risk, but not high-risk, patients of both sexes, and the risk cutoff was different for men and women. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This study suggests that women have a worse preoperative risk profile than men. Multiple arterial grafting is associated with better outcomes among low-risk, but not high-risk, patients, and the risk cutoffs differ between sexes. These data highlight the need for new studies on the outcome of multiple arterial grafts in women.

ObjectiveMultiple arterial grafting (MAG) in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is associated with higher survival and freedom from major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs) in observational studies of mostly men. It is not known whether MAG is beneficial in women. Our objectives were to compare the long-term clinical outcomes of MAG versus single arterial grafting (SAG) in women undergoing CABG for multivessel disease.MethodsClinical and administrative databases for Ontario, Canada, were linked to obtain all women with angiographic evidence of left main, triple or double vessel disease undergoing isolated non-emergent primary CABG from 2008 to 2019. 1:1 propensity score matching was performed. Late mortality and MACCE (composite of stroke, myocardial infarction, repeat revascularisation and death) were compared between the matched groups with a stratified log-rank test and Cox proportional-hazards model.Results2961 and 7954 women underwent CABG with MAG and SAG, respectively, for multivessel disease. Prior to propensity-score matching, compared with SAG, those who underwent MAG were younger (66.0 vs 68.9 years) and had less comorbidities. After propensity-score matching, in 2446 well-matched pairs, there was no significant difference in 30-day mortality (1.6% vs 1.8%, p=0.43) between MAG and SAG. Over a median and maximum follow-up of 5.0 and 11.0 years, respectively, MAG was associated with greater survival (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.98) and freedom from MACCE (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.95).ConclusionsMAG was associated with greater survival and freedom from MACCE and should be considered for women with good life expectancy requiring CABG.

IMPORTANCE: Mortality is a common outcome in trials comparing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Controversy exists regarding whether all-cause mortality or cardiac mortality is preferred as a study end point, because noncardiac mortality should be unrelated to the treatment. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the difference in all-cause and cause-specific mortality in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing PCI with CABG for the treatment of patients with coronary artery disease. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE (1946 to the present), Embase (1974 to the present), and the Cochrane Library (1992 to the present) databases were searched on November 24, 2019. Reference lists of included articles were also searched, and additional studies were included if appropriate. STUDY SELECTION: Articles were considered for inclusion if they were in English, were RCTs comparing PCI with drug-eluting or bare-metal stents and CABG for the treatment of coronary artery disease, and reported mortality and/or cause-specific mortality. Trials of PCI involving angioplasty without stenting were excluded. For each included trial, the publication with the longest follow-up duration for each outcome was selected. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: For data extraction, all studies were reviewed by 2 independent investigators, and disagreements were resolved by a third investigator in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guideline. Data were pooled using fixed- and random-effects models. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcomes were all-cause and cause-specific (cardiac vs noncardiac) mortality. Subgroup analyses were performed for PCI trials using drug-eluting vs bare-metal stents and for trials involving patients with left main disease. RESULTS: Twenty-three unique trials were included involving 13 620 unique patients (6829 undergoing PCI and 6791 undergoing CABG; men, 39.9%-99.0% of study populations; mean age range, 60.0-71.0 years). The weighted mean (SD) follow-up was 5.3 (3.6) years. Compared with CABG, PCI was associated with a higher rate of all-cause (incidence rate ratio, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.05-1.29) and cardiac (incidence rate ratio, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.05-1.45) mortality but also noncardiac mortality (incidence rate ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.00-1.41). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Percutaneous coronary intervention was associated with higher all-cause, cardiac, and noncardiac mortality compared with CABG at 5 years. The significantly higher noncardiac mortality associated with PCI suggests that even noncardiac deaths after PCI may be procedure related and supports the use of all-cause mortality as the end point for myocardial revascularization trials.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Perioperative stroke is one of the most severe and feared complications of cardiac surgery. Based on the timing of onset and detection, perioperative stroke can be classified as intraoperative or postoperative. The pathogenesis of perioperative stroke is multifactorial, which makes prediction and prevention challenging. However, information on its incidence, mechanisms, diagnosis, and treatment can be helpful in minimizing the perioperative neurological risk for individual patients. We herein provide suggestions on preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative strategies aimed at reducing the risk of perioperative stroke and at improving the outcomes of patients who experience a perioperative stroke.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Objective Cable closure has been introduced as a potential alternative to traditional wire cerclage (WC) for closure of median sternotomy. To evaluate whether cable closure improves patient outcomes, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature.Methods Ovid versions of Medline and Embase, and Google Scholar were used for the literature search. This yielded 7 studies (n= 2,758), which compared traditional WC to cable closure systems. Outcomes included deep sternal wound infection, sternal dehiscence, postoperative pain score, and sternal wound infection.Results We found significantly lower incidence of sternal dehiscence for cable closure compared to WC (risk ratio [RR] 0.14, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.03 to 0.59, P< 0.01, I2= 0%) but no difference in DSWI (RR 0.97, 95% CI: 0.39 to 2.42, P= 0.95, I2= 33%). Cable closure was also associated with lower pain when compared with the WC group (mean difference −1.04 points, 95% CI: −1.89 to −0.19, P= 0.02, I2= 87%).Conclusions This study suggests that cable closure results in less incidence of sternal dehiscence and pain compared to WC. Nonetheless, there remains a limited number of studies on this topic and further high-quality studies are required to confirm the results of this meta-analysis.

IMPORTANCE: Changes in evidence-based practice and guideline recommendations depend on high-quality randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Commercial device and pharmaceutical manufacturers are frequently involved in the funding, design, conduct, and reporting of trials, the implications of which have not been recently analyzed. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the design, outcomes, and reporting of contemporary randomized clinical trials of invasive cardiovascular interventions and their association with the funding source. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cross-sectional study analyzed published RCTs between January 1, 2008, to May 31, 2019. The trials included those involving coronary, vascular and structural interventional cardiology, and vascular and cardiac surgical procedures. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: We assessed (1) trial characteristics, (2) finding of a statistically significant difference in the primary end point favoring the experimental intervention, (3) reporting of implied treatment advantage in trials without significant differences in primary end point, (4) existence of major discrepancies between registered and published primary outcomes, (5) number of patients whose outcomes would need to switch from a nonevent to an event to convert a significant difference in primary end point to nonsignificant, and (6) association with funding source. RESULTS: Of the 216 RCTs analyzed, 115 (53.2%) reported having commercial sponsorship. Most trials had 80% power to detect an estimated treatment effect of 30%, and 128 trials (59.3%) used composite primary end points. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) sample size was 502 (204-1702) patients, and the median (IQR) follow-up duration was 12 (1.0-14.4) months. Overall, 123 trials (57.0%) reported a statistically significant difference in the primary outcome favoring the experimental intervention; reporting strategies that implied an advantage were identified in 55 (65.5%) of 84 trials that reported nonsignificant differences. Commercial sponsorship was associated with a statistically significantly greater likelihood of favorable outcomes reporting (exponent of regression coefficient β, 2.80; 95% CI, 1.09-7.18; P = .03) and with the reporting of findings that are inconsistent with the trial results. Discrepancies between the registered and published primary outcomes were found in 82 trials (38.0%), without differences in trial sponsorship. A median (IQR) number of 5 (2.8-12.5) patients experiencing a different outcome would have change statistically significant results to nonsignificant. Commercial sponsorship was associated with a greater number of patients (exponent of regression coefficient β, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.00-1.66; P = .04). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: These results suggest that contemporary RCTs of invasive cardiovascular interventions are relatively small and fragile, have short follow-up, and have limited power to detect large treatment effects. Commercial support appeared to be associated with differences in trial design, results, and reporting.

IMPORTANCE: The optimal conduits for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) remain controversial in multivessel coronary artery disease. OBJECTIVE: To compare the long-term clinical outcomes of total arterial revascularization (TAR) vs non-TAR (CABG with at least 1 arterial and 1 saphenous vein graft) in a multicenter population-based study. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This multicenter population-based cohort study using propensity score matching took place from October 2008 to March 2017 in Ontario, Canada, with a mean and maximum follow-up of 4.6 and 9.0 years, respectively. Individuals with primary isolated CABG were identified, with at least 1 arterial graft. Exclusion criteria were individuals from out of province and younger than 18 years. Patients undergoing a cardiac reoperation or those in cardiogenic shock were also excluded because these conditions would potentially bias the surgeon toward not performing TAR. Analysis began April 2019. EXPOSURES: Total arterial revascularization. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Primary outcome was time to first event of a composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or repeated revascularization (major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events). Secondary outcomes included the individual components of the primary outcome. RESULTS: Of 49 404 individuals with primary isolated CABG, 2433 (4.9%) received TAR, with the total number of bypasses being 2, 3, and 4 or more vessels in 1521 (62.5%), 865 (35.6%), and 47 individuals (1.9%), respectively. The mean (SD) age was 61.2 (10.4) years and 1983 (81.5%) were men. After propensity score matching, 2132 patient pairs were formed, with equal total number of bypasses (mean [SD], 2.4 [0.5]) but with more arterial grafts in the TAR group (mean [SD], 2.4 [0.5] vs 1.2 [0.4]; P &lt; .01). In-hospital death (15 [0.7%] vs 21 [1.0%]; P = .32) did not differ between TAR vs non-TAR groups after propensity score matching. Throughout 8 years, TAR was associated with improved freedom from major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.68-0.89), death (hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.66-0.97), and myocardial infarction (hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.51-0.92). There was no difference in stroke and repeated revascularization. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Total arterial revascularization was associated with improved long-term freedom from major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, death, and myocardial infarction and may be the procedure of choice for patients with reasonable life expectancy requiring CABG.

This study evaluates the changes of oxygen saturation (Spo2) after intravenous administration of methylene blue in 103 patients undergoing open repair of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms. We found that Spo2decreased by a median (interquartile range [IQR]) of 49% (37%–81%) <1 minute after methylene blue administration and recovered completely after approximately 6 minutes—median (IQR) of 270 seconds (180–510). A shorter time to nadir Spo2was associated with a higher nadir (Spearman r[95% confidence interval {CI}], −0.32 [−0.50 to −0.13]; P= .001). Body surface area (BSA) was positively correlated with nadir Spo2(Spearman r[95% CI], 0.36 [0.15–0.51]; P< .001).

Evaluate sex differences in patients undergoing repair of acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD).

ObjectiveTo assess the effect of different antiplatelet strategies on clinical outcomes after coronary artery bypass grafting.DesignFive year follow-up of randomised Different Antiplatelet Therapy Strategy After Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting (DACAB) trial.SettingSix tertiary hospitals in China; enrolment between July 2014 and November 2015; completion of five year follow-up from August 2019 to June 2021.Participants500 patients aged 18-80 years (including 91 (18.2%) women) who had elective coronary artery bypass grafting surgery and completed the DACAB trial.InterventionsPatients were randomised 1:1:1 to ticagrelor 90 mg twice daily plus aspirin 100 mg once daily (dual antiplatelet therapy; n=168), ticagrelor monotherapy 90 mg twice daily (n=166), or aspirin monotherapy 100 mg once daily (n=166) for one year after surgery. After the first year, antiplatelet therapy was prescribed according to standard of care by treating physicians.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (a composite of all cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and coronary revascularisation), analysed using the intention-to-treat principle. Time-to-event analysis was used to compare the risk between treatment groups. Multiple post hoc sensitivity analyses examined the robustness of the findings.ResultsFollow-up at five years for major adverse cardiovascular events was completed for 477 (95.4%) of 500 patients; 148 patients had major adverse cardiovascular events, including 39 in the dual antiplatelet therapy group, 54 in the ticagrelor monotherapy group, and 55 in the aspirin monotherapy group. Risk of major adverse cardiovascular events at five years was significantly lower with dual antiplatelet therapy versus aspirin monotherapy (22.6% v29.9%; hazard ratio 0.65, 95% confidence interval 0.43 to 0.99; P=0.04) and versus ticagrelor monotherapy (22.6% v32.9%; 0.66, 0.44 to 1.00; P=0.05). Results were consistent in all sensitivity analyses.ConclusionsTreatment with ticagrelor dual antiplatelet therapy for one year after surgery reduced the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events at five years after coronary artery bypass grafting compared with aspirin monotherapy or ticagrelor monotherapy.Trial registrationNCT03987373ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03987373.

Subclinical hypothyroidism (SCH) is associated with major adverse cardiovascular events. Despite the recognized negative impact of SCH on cardiovascular health, research on cardiac postoperative outcomes with SCH has yielded conflicting results, and patients are not currently treated for SCH before cardiac surgery procedures.

Postoperative atrial fibrillation (POAF) is a prevalent complication following cardiac surgery that is associated with increased adverse events. Several guidelines and expert consensus documents have been published addressing the prevention and management of POAF. We aimed to develop an order set to facilitate widespread implementation and adoption of evidence-based practices for POAF following cardiac surgery.

Coronary artery disease is a common cause of ischemic left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD), for which the optimal revascularisation strategy remains unclear. We aimed to determine whether percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) results in greater survival advantage in patients with LVSD.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.Observational and randomized evidence shows that arterial grafts have better patency rates than saphenous vein grafts (SVGs) in coronary artery bypass grafting. Observational studies suggest that the use of multiple arterial grafts is associated with longer postoperative survival, but this must be interpreted in the context of treatment allocation bias and hidden confounders intrinsic to the study designs. Recently, a pooled analysis of 6 randomized trials comparing the radial artery with the SVG as the second conduit and the largest randomized trial comparing the use of single and bilateral internal thoracic arteries have provided apparently divergent results about a clinical benefit with the use of >1 arterial conduit. However, both analyses have methodological limitations that may have influenced their results. At present, it is unclear whether the well-documented increased patency rate of arterial grafts translates into clinical benefits in the majority of patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting. A large randomized trial testing the arterial grafts hypothesis (ROMA [Randomized Comparison of the Clinical Outcome of Single Versus Multiple Arterial Grafts]) is underway and will report the results in a few years.

The management of severe left main (LM) disease remains controversial and continues to evolve as new evidence emerges. Patient selection for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) relies on both predicting mortality with CABG from clinical characteristics using the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) risk score and anatomical complexity, using the Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) score. LM stenting techniques continue to evolve; for bifurcation lesions, the use of the double-kiss crush technique may reduce the incidence of late target vessel revascularization. In patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) complicated by cardiogenic shock, PCI is likely the first-line option in those with anatomically amenable disease, whereas all other stable non–ST-elevated ACS should be treated similar to stable ischemic heart disease. Outcomes comparing CABG and PCI have been recently examined in 2 large randomized clinical trials. In general, early outcomes of periprocedural myocardial infarction and stroke favoured PCI or were not different from outcomes with CABG. However, the conclusions of both trials are at present discordant with respect to late major adverse cardiac and cerebral events; additional follow-up of the trial patients is important for informed patient decision making. The appropriate mode of revascularization should be selected according to patient clinical characteristics and the complexity of the coronary lesions according to European and American guidelines. In those with low or intermediate SYNTAX scores, particularly with high surgical risk, PCI may be preferred to CABG in most other scenarios. A multidisciplinary heart team is recommended to help individualize revascularization decisions.

Objective The management of concomitant mild-to-moderate aortic stenosis (AS) at the time of coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) is controversial. Here we perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of CABG and aortic valve replacement (AVR) versus CABG alone in patients with mild–moderate AS.Methods We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE databases until July 2018 for studies comparing CABG & AVR versus CABG in patients with mild–moderate AS undergoing coronary bypass. Data were extracted by 2 independent investigators. The main outcomes were operative mortality, long-term survival, and reintervention for AS.Results There were 6 unmatched retrospective observational studies with 1,172 patients (median follow-up 4.7 [interquartile range: 4.3 to 5.3] years). Patients undergoing CABG & AVR had less severe coronary artery disease. There were no differences in operative mortality (relative risk [RR]: 1.07; 95% CI, 0.59 to 1.94; P= 0.8). CABG & AVR was associated with greater incidence of stroke, bleeding, renal failure, and mediastinitis. At median follow-up of 5 years, there was no difference in long-term mortality (incidence rate ratio [IRR]:1.44; 95% CI, 0.83 to 2.51; P= 0.19), but CABG & AVR was associated with 73% lower risk of reoperation for AS (n= 13/485 versus n= 71/702; IRR: 0.27; 95% CI, 0.14 to 0.51; P< 0.001).Conclusions In patients undergoing CABG with mild–moderate AS, combining AVR with CABG was associated with no difference in operative mortality but with increased risk of stroke, bleeding, renal failure, and mediastinitis. Long-term mortality was not different, but a risk of reoperation for AS at 5 years was 73% lower. Given the increasingly wide availability and safety of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), one may consider a conservative approach toward concomitant mild–moderate AS.

Despite the progressive expansion of clinical indications for percutaneous coronary intervention and the increasingly high risk profile of referred patients, coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) remains the mainstay in multivessel disease, providing good long-term outcomes with low complication rates. Multiple arterial grafting, especially if associated with anaortic techniques, might provide the best longer-term outcomes. A surgical approach individualized to the patients’ clinical and anatomic characteristics, and surgeon and team experience, are key to excellent outcomes. Current evidence regarding patient selection, indications, graft selection, and potential strategies to optimize outcomes in patients treated with CABG is summarized.

ObjectiveTo assess the effect of various evaluation and reporting strategies in determining outlier surgeons, defined by having worse-than-expected mortality after cardiac surgery.MethodsOur study included 33 394 isolated coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) procedures performed by 136 surgeons and 12 172 surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) procedures performed by 113 surgeons between 2010 and 2014. Three current methodologies based on the framework of comparing observed and expected (O/E ratio) mortality, with different distributional assumptions, were examined. We further assessed the consistency of outliers detected by these three methods and the impact of using different time windows and aggregating data of CABG and SAVR procedures.ResultsThe three methods were consistent and detected same outliers, with the least conservative method detecting additional outliers (outliers detected for methods 1, 2 and 3: CABG 3 (2.2%), 2 (1.5%) and 8 (5.9%); SAVR 1 (0.9%), 0 (0.0%) and 11 (9.7%)). When numbers of cases recorded were low and events were rare, the two more conservative methods were unlikely to detect outliers unless the O/E ratios were extremely high. However, these two methods were more consistent in detecting the same surgeons as outliers across different time windows for assessment. Of the surgeons who performed both CABG and SAVR, none was an outlier for both procedures when assessed separately. Aggregating data from CABG and SAVR may lead to results to be dominated by the procedure that had a higher caseload.ConclusionsThe choices of outlier assessment method, time window for assessment and data aggregation have an intertwined impact on detecting outlier surgeons, often representing different value assumptions toward patient protection and provider penalty. It is desirable to use different methods as sensitivity analyses, avoid aggregating procedures and avoid rare-event endpoints if possible.