Search

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had an unprecedented impact on health care and cardiac surgery. We report cardiac surgeons concerns, perceptions, and responses during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A detailed survey was sent to recruit participating adult cardiac surgery centers in North America. Data regarding cardiac surgeons perceptions and changes in practice were analyzed. RESULTS: Our study comprises 67 institutions with diverse geographic distribution across North America. Nurses were most likely to be redeployed (88%), followed by advanced care practitioners (69%), trainees (28%), and surgeons (25%). Examining surgeon concerns in regard to COVID-19, they were most worried with exposing their family to COVID-19 (81%), followed by contracting COVID-19 (68%), running out of personal protective equipment (PPE) (28%), and hospital resources (28%). In terms of PPE conservation strategies among users of N95 respirators, nearly half were recycling via decontamination with ultraviolet light (49%), followed by sterilization with heat (13%) and at home or with other modalities (13%). Reuse of N95 respirators for 1 day (22%), 1 week (21%) or 1 month (6%) was reported. There were differences in adoption of methods to conserve N95 respirators based on institutional pandemic phase and COVID-19 burden, with higher COVID-19 burden institutions more likely to resort to PPE conservation strategies. CONCLUSIONS: The present study demonstrates the impact of COVID-19 on North American cardiac surgeons. Our study should stimulate further discussions to identify optimal solutions to improve workforce preparedness for subsequent surges, as well as facilitate the navigation of future healthcare crises.

Abstract Background Guided by the evidence that delaying coronary revascularization may lead to symptom worsening and poorer clinical outcomes, expansion in cardiac surgery capacity has been recommended in Canada. Provincial governments started providing one-time and recurring increases in budgets for additional open heart surgeries to reduce waiting times. We sought to determine whether the year of decision to proceed with non-emergency coronary bypass surgery had an effect on time to surgery. Methods Using records from a population-based registry, we studied times between decision to operate and the procedure itself. We estimated changes in the length of time that patients had to wait for non-emergency operation over 14 calendar periods that included several years when supplementary funding was available. We studied waiting times separately for patients who access surgery through a wait list and through direct admission. Results During two periods when supplementary funding was available, 1998–1999 and 2004–2005, the weekly rate of undergoing surgery from a wait list was, respectively, 50% and 90% higher than in 1996–1997, the period with the longest waiting times. We also observed a reduction in the difference between 90th and 50th percentiles of the waiting-time distributions. Forty percent of patients in the 1998, 1999, 2004 and 2005 cohorts (years when supplementary funding was provided) underwent surgery within 16 to 20 weeks following the median waiting time, while it took between 27 and 37 weeks for the cohorts registered in the years when supplementary funding was not available. Times between decision and surgery were shorter for direct admissions than for wait-listed patients. Among patients who were directly admitted to hospital, time between decision and surgery was longest in 1992–1993 and then has been steadily decreasing through the late nineties. The rate of surgery among these patients was the highest in 1998–1999, and has not changed afterwards, even for years when supplementary funding was provided. Conclusions Waiting times for non-emergency coronary bypass surgery shortened after supplementary funding was granted to increase volume of cardiac surgical care in a health system with publicly-funded universal coverage for the procedure. The effect of the supplementary funding was not uniform for patients that access the services through wait lists and through direct admission.

Transplantation of the heart and lungs is used to treat advanced lung and heart diseases, such as cystic fibrosis, an inherited disease of the exocrine glands that affects various organ systems including the respiratory system. The bronchi are the major passageways connecting the trachea (windpipe) with the lungs. Transbronchial biopsy (TBB), the sampling of bronchial tissue, is performed on recipients of heart-lung grafts to distinguish between rejection by the body of the transplanted organ (which is perceived as foreign by the immune system) and the development of opportunistic infections. Although TBB has been used extensively in adults, its use in children is less well established. TBB in children may be associated with certain problems such difficulty obtaining adequate amounts of tissue for microscopic examination and growth in the laboratory, and maintenance of a safe level of oxygen and sedation during the procedure. Sixty TBB procedures performed on eight children after heart-lung transplantation were reviewed. Microscopic examination of tissue obtained by TBB had a sensitivity of 91 percent and a specificity of 69 percent in detecting lung transplant rejection, and was effective in distinguishing lung infection from lung rejection. Complications associated with TBB included pneumothorax, the collection of air or gas in the lung cavity, and hemorrhage, or bleeding. One of the two cases of hemorrhage led to cardiorespiratory arrest, the cessation of breathing and circulation, possibly due to inadequate oxygen levels. Hence, the level of oxygen in the arteries is now continuously monitored throughout the TBB procedure. (Consumer Summary produced by Reliance Medical Information, Inc.)

Abstract Background Many health care systems now use priority wait lists for scheduling elective coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery, but there have not yet been any direct estimates of reductions in in-hospital mortality rate afforded by ensuring that the operation is performed within recommended time periods. Methods We used a population-based registry to identify patients with established coronary artery disease who underwent isolated CABG in British Columbia, Canada. We studied whether postoperative survival during hospital admission for CABG differed significantly among patients who waited for surgery longer than the recommended time, 6 weeks for patients needing semi-urgent surgery and 12 weeks for those needing non-urgent surgery. Results Among 7316 patients who underwent CABG, 97 died during the same hospital admission, for a province-wide death rate at discharge of 1.3%. The observed proportion of patients who died during the same admission was 1.0% (27 deaths among 2675 patients) for patients treated within the recommended time and 1.5% (70 among 4641) for whom CABG was delayed. After adjustment for age, sex, anatomy, comorbidity, calendar period, hospital, and mode of admission, patients with early CABG were only 2/3 as likely as those for whom CABG was delayed to experience in-hospital death (odds ratio 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.39 to 0.96). There was a linear trend of 5% increase in the odds of in-hospital death for every additional month of delay before surgery, adjusted OR = 1.05 (95% CI 1.00 to 1.11). Conclusion We found a significant survival benefit from performing surgical revascularization within the time deemed acceptable to consultant surgeons for patients requiring the treatment on a semi-urgent or non-urgent basis.

Abstract Background Currently there are no direct estimates of mortality reduction afforded by coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) that take into account the deaths among patients for whom coronary revascularization was indicated but who did not undergo the treatment. The objective of this analysis was to compare survival after the treatment decision between patients who underwent CABG and those who remained untreated. Methods We used a population-based registry to identify patients with established coronary artery disease who were to undergo first-time isolated CABG. We measured the effect of surgical revascularization on survival after the treatment decision in two cohorts of patients categorized by symptoms, coronary anatomy, and left ventricular function. Results One in 10 patients died during the five years after treatment decision. The hazard of death among patients who underwent CABG was 51 percent of that for the untreated group, the adjusted hazard ratio was 0.51 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.43 to 0.61). The effect was stronger when CABG was performed within the recommended time: adjusted hazard ratios were 0.43 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.35 to 0.53) and 0.58 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.48 to 0.70) for early and late intervention, respectively; chi-square for the difference between hazard ratios was 12.2 (P < 0.001). Conclusion Estimates that account for patients who died before they could undergo a required CABG indicate a significant survival benefit of performing early surgical revascularization even for patients registered to undergo the operation on the non-urgent basis.

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Pathology is the property of Canadian Association of Pathologists and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)