Biomarkers in Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery: Ready for Prime Time and Outcome Prediction?

Coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) is still one of the most frequently performed surgical procedures all over the world. The results of this procedure have been constantly improved over the years with low perioperative mortality rates, with relatively low complication rates. To further improve these outstanding results, the clinicians focused their attention at biomarkers as outcome predictors. Although biological testing for disease prediction has already been discussed many times, the role of biomarkers in outcome prediction after CABG is still controversial. In this article, we reviewed the current knowledge regarding the role of genetic and dynamic biomarkers and their possible association with the occurrence of adverse clinical outcomes after CABG. We also took into consideration that the molecular pathway activation and the possible imbalance may affect hard outcomes and graft patency. We analyzed biomarkers classified in two different categories depending on their possibility to change over time: genetic markers and dynamic markers. Moreover, we evaluated these markers by dividing them, into sub-categories, such as inflammation, hemostasis, renin-angiotensin, endothelial function, and other pathways. We showed that biomarkers might be associated with unfavorable outcomes after surgery, and in some cases improved outcome prediction. However, the identification of a specific panel of biomarkers or of some algorithms including biomarkers is still in an early developmental phase. Finally, larger studies are needed to analyze broad panel of biomarkers with the specific aim to evaluate the prediction of hard outcomes and graft patency

Multidisciplinary management of neuroendocrine neoplasia: a real-world experience from a referral center

Purpose: Multidisciplinary approach is widely advised for an effective care of patients with neuroendocrine neoplasia (NEN). Since data on efficacy of multidisciplinary management of NENs patients in referral centers are scanty, this study aimed at analyzing the modality of presentation and clinical outcome of patients with NENs managed by a dedicated multidisciplinary team. Methods. In this prospective observational study, we included all consecutive new patients visiting the Sant'Andrea Hospital in Rome (ENETS-Center of Excellence) between January 2014 and June 2018. Results. A total of 195 patients were evaluated. The most frequent sites were pancreas (38.5%), small bowel (22%), and lung (9.7%). Median Ki67 was 3%. After the first visit at the center, additional radiological and/or nuclear medicine procedures were requested in 163 patients (83.6%), whereas histological data revision was advised in 84 patients (43.1%) (revision of histological slides: 27.7%, new bioptic sampling: 15.4%). After that, disease imaging staging and grading was modified in 30.7% and 17.9% of patients, respectively. Overall, a change in therapeutic management was proposed in 98 patients (50.3%). Conclusions. Multidisciplinary approach in a dedicated team may lead to change of disease imaging staging and grading in a significant proportion of patients. Enhancing referral routes to dedicated-NEN center should be promoted, since it may improve patients' clinical outcome

Survival and Recurrence of Endocarditis following Mechanical vs. Biological Aortic Valve Replacement for Endocarditis in Patients Aged 40 to 65 Years: Data from the INFECT-Registry

Background: Infective endocarditis (IE) is a serious disease, and in many cases, surgery is necessary. Whether the type of prosthesis implanted for aortic valve replacement (AVR) for IE impacts patient survival is a matter of debate. The aim of the present study is to quantify differences in long-term survival and recurrence of endocarditis AVR for IE according to prosthesis type among patients aged 40 to 65 years. Methods: This was an analysis of the INFECT-REGISTRY. Trends in proportion to the use of mechanical prostheses versus biological ones over time were tested by applying the sieve bootstrapped t-test. Confounders were adjusted using the optimal full-matching propensity score. The difference in overall survival was compared using the Cox model, whereas the differences in recurrence of endocarditis were evaluated using the Gray test. Results: Overall, 4365 patients were diagnosed and operated on for IE from 2000 to 2021. Of these, 549, aged between 40 and 65 years, underwent AVR. A total of 268 (48.8%) received mechanical prostheses, and 281 (51.2%) received biological ones. A significant trend in the reduction of implantation of mechanical vs. biological prostheses was observed during the study period (p < 0.0001). Long-term survival was significantly higher among patients receiving a mechanical prosthesis than those receiving a biological prosthesis (hazard ratio [HR] 0.546, 95% CI: 0.322-0.926, p = 0.025). Mechanical prostheses were associated with significantly less recurrent endocarditis after AVR than biological prostheses (HR 0.268, 95%CI: 0.077-0.933, p = 0.039). Conclusions: The present analysis of the INFECT-REGISTRY shows increased survival and reduced recurrence of endocarditis after a mechanical aortic valve prosthesis implant for IE in middle-aged patients