Search

Objective:  Endocarditis as a potentially life-threatening disease with high complication and mortality rates. In recent years, an increase in the incident of endocarditis has been reported throughout Europe. In the aging society, successful treatment is complex and challenging owing to the high rate of multimorbidity., Methods:  We initiated a statewide prospective multicenter endocarditis registry in 2020. Perioperative risk factors, comorbidities, microbiological, laboratory and imaging diagnostics, complications, and mortality including 1-year follow-up were collected. The present midterm analysis includes factors influencing mortality in the first 313 patients., Result:  In-hospital mortality and 1-year mortality were 28.4 and 40.9%, respectively. Preoperative risk factors include age ( p  < 0.001), EuroSCORE II ( p  < 0.001), coronary artery disease ( p  = 0.022), pacemaker probe infection ( p  = 0.033), preoperative left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), pulmonary edema, heart failure, septic emboli, acute renal failure, impaired coagulation, hypalbuminemia ( p  < 0.001), and N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide (NTproBNP) ( p  = 0.001). The presence of peri-annular abscess, perforation, and shunt were associated with increased mortality ( p  = 0.004, 0.001, and 0.004, respectively). In addition, cardiopulmonary bypass time influenced mortality ( p  = 0.002). The main postoperative causes of death were multi-organ failure, renal failure, vasoplegia, and low-output syndrome ( p  < 0.001). Previous endocarditis was 7.7%, while 35.5% were prosthetic valve recipients and 33.6% were redo surgeries., Conclusion:  Our first registry data show the complexity of endocarditis patients and the challenging treatment. Some risk factors can be treated preoperatively. For instance, hypalbuminemia and the duration of the procedure can be controlled with adequate albumin substitution and carefully planned procedures restricted to the essential requirements, that is, hybrid approaches with consecutive interventions., Competing Interests: None declared., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Background:  The increasing presence of female doctors in the field of cardiac surgery has raised questions about their surgical quality compared to their male colleagues. Despite their success, female surgeons are still underrepresented in leadership positions, and biases and concerns regarding their performance persist. This study aims to examine whether female surgeons perform worse, equally well, or better than their male counterparts in commonly performed procedures that have a significant number of female patients., Method:  A retrospective cohort of patients from 2011 to 2020 who underwent isolated coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) and aortic valve surgery was studied. To compare the surgical quality of men and women, a 1:1 propensity score matching (two groups of 680 patients operated by men and women, respectively, factors: age, logarithm of EuroSCORE (ES), elective, urgent or emergent surgery, isolated aortic valve, or isolated CABG) was performed. Procedure time, bypass time, x-clamp time, hospital stay, and early mortality were compared., Results:  After propensity score matching between surgeons of both sexes, patients operated by males (PoM) did not differ from patients operated by females (PoF) in mean age (PoM: 66.72 ± 9.33, PoF: 67.24 ± 9.19 years, p  = 0.346), log. ES (PoM: 5.58 ± 7.35, PoF: 5.53 ± 7.26, p  = 0.507), or urgency of operation (PoM: 43.09% elective, 48.97% urgent, 7.94% emergency, PoF: 40.88% elective, 55.29% urgent, 3.83% emergency, p  = 0.556). This was also the case for male and female patients separately. Female surgeons had higher procedure time (PoM: 224.35 ± 110.54 min; PoF: 265.41 ± 53.60 min), bypass time (PoM: 107.46 ± 45.09 min, PoF: 122.42 ± 36.18 min), and x-clamp time (PoM: 61.45 ± 24.77 min; PoF: 72.76 ± 24.43 min). Hospitalization time (PoM: 15.96 ± 8.12, PoF: 15.98 ± 6.91 days, p  = 0,172) as well as early mortality (PoM: 2.21%, PoF: 3.09%, p  = 0.328) did not differ significantly. This was also the case for male and female patients separately., Conclusion:  Our study reveals that in routine heart surgery, the gender of the surgeon does not impact the success of the operation or the early outcome of patients. Despite taking more time to perform procedures, female surgeons demonstrated comparable surgical outcomes to their male counterparts. It is possible that women's inclination for thoroughness contributes to the longer duration of procedures, while male surgeons may prioritize efficiency. Nevertheless, this difference in duration did not translate into significant differences in primary outcomes following routine cardiac surgery. These findings highlight the importance of recognizing the equal competence of female surgeons and dispelling biases regarding their surgical performance., Competing Interests: None declared., (The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).)