Current status of surgical treatment for pectus excavatum deformity

Pectus excavatum is the commonest anterior chest wall deformity which is the result of overgrowth and elon­gation of costal cartilages that push the normal sternum in. The deformity has serious pshychologic impact and limits the exercise tolerance of the patient, because of displacement of the heart within the left hemithorax. Repair of pectus excavatum is performed by the classical Ravich technique or the minimally invasive Nuss repair. The Ravich operation consists of resection of the deformed cartilages, bending the sternum in its normal position and maintenance of the sternum in the correct position by using a metal bar or a strong synthetic mesh. The Nuss procedure involves the thoracoscopic placement of a pre-formed curved metal bar behind the sternum which rises the sternum to the desired position. The selection of the technique depends on the age of the patient and the degree and symmetry of the deformity. The Nuss technique is suitable for children between 5 and 15 years old who have flexible chest wall and symmetric deformities, while the Ravich procedure is indicated in young adults and asymmetric forms. Indeed, the Nuss technique still undergoes modifications to become safer and simpler and further it needs expertise and special equipment

Hybrid approach of ventricular assist device and autologous bone marrow stem cells implantation in end-stage ischemic heart failure enhances myocardial reperfusion

We challenge the hypothesis of enhanced myocardial reperfusion after implanting a left ventricular assist device together with bone marrow mononuclear stem cells in patients with end-stage ischemic cardiomyopathy. Irreversible myocardial loss observed in ischemic cardiomyopathy leads to progressive cardiac remodelling and dysfunction through a complex neurohormonal cascade. New generation assist devices promote myocardial recovery only in patients with dilated or peripartum cardiomyopathy. In the setting of diffuse myocardial ischemia not amenable to revascularization, native myocardial recovery has not been observed after implantation of an assist device as destination therapy. The hybrid approach of implanting autologous bone marrow stem cells during assist device implantation may eventually improve native cardiac function, which may be associated with a better prognosis eventually ameliorating the need for subsequent heart transplantation. The aforementioned hypothesis has to be tested with well-designed prospective multicentre studies

The European Registry for Patients with Mechanical Circulatory Support of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery:third report

OBJECTIVES: In the third report of the European Registry for Patients with Mechanical Circulatory Support of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, outcomes of patients receiving mechanical circulatory support are reviewed in relation to implant era. METHODS: Procedures in adult patients (January 2011-June 2020) were included. Patients from centres with 3 months). Risk factors for death were explored using univariable Cox regression with a stepwise time-varying hazard ratio (3 months). RESULTS: In total, 4834 procedures in 4486 individual patients (72 hospitals) were included, with a median follow-up of 1.1 (interquartile range: 0.3-2.6) years. The annual number of implants (range: 346-600) did not significantly change (P = 0.41). Both Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support class (classes 4-7: 23, 25 and 33%; P 3 months: 0.45). Bilirubin and creatinine levels were significant risk factors in the early phase but not in the late phase after the implant. CONCLUSIONS: In its 10 years of existence, EUROMACS has become a point of reference enabling benchmarking and outcome monitoring. Patient characteristics and outcomes changed between implant eras. In addition, both occurrence of outcomes and risk factor weights are time dependent

Definitions of Minimizing the Extracorporeal Circuit and Potential Benefits

<div>Kyriakos Anastasiadis of the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki in Greece discusses the advances of minimally invasive extracorporeal circulation that distinguish it from conventional cardiopulmonary bypass, focusing on the definition and benefits of minimally invasive systems.</div><div>This presentation was originally given during the SCTS Ionescu University program at the 2017 Annual Meeting of the Society for Cardiothoracic Surgery in Great Britain and Ireland. This content is published with the permission of <a href="https://scts.org/">SCTS</a>. Please <a href="https://sctsed.org/">click here</a> for more information on SCTS educational programs.<br></div><div><br></div

Synchronous carotid artery stenting and open heart surgery

BackgroundThe optimal management of the patients requiring cardiac surgery with concomitant severe carotid disease remains a controversy. The traditional approach involves staged or combined carotid endarterectomy and cardiac surgery. This study evaluated the feasibility and safety of angioplasty and stenting for the treatment of carotid stenoses concomitantly to cardiac operations to reduce the risk of perioperative stroke.MethodsAll patients scheduled for cardiac surgery were screened preoperatively by color duplex ultrasonography for carotid disease. Carotid stenoses ≥60% in symptomatic patients and ≥70% in asymptomatic patients were treated using carotid artery stenting (CAS) under local anesthesia immediately before the open heart surgery. Cerebral protection devices were used in all cases. Patients did not receive aspirin or clopidogrel before the procedure. In a prospective, nonrandomized study, we analyzed 90 consecutive patients requiring cardiac surgery with concomitant severe carotid artery disease who underwent one stage CAS and cardiac surgery.ResultsDespite the high baseline risk profile, our results were encouraging. Carotid stenting was successful in all patients. No neurologic complications occurred during the carotid stenting procedures. The 30-day death/stroke rate was 2.2% (one death, one contralateral stroke). No myocardial infarction occurred. The carotid restenosis rate was zero during the intermediate-term follow-up.ConclusionsIn our experience, CAS followed immediately by cardiac surgery is safe and represents a reasonable option for selected patients presenting with severe carotid and coronary disease

Minimal invasive extracorporeal circulation should become the standard practice in coronary revascularization surgery†.

We read with great interest the large-scale network meta-analysis by Kowalewski et al. comparing clinical outcomes of patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) operated on using minimal invasive extracorporeal circulation (MiECC) or off-pump (OPCAB) with those undergoing surgery on conventional cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) [1]. The authors actually integrated into single study two recently published meta-analysis comparing MiECC and OPCAB with conventional CPB, respectively [2, 3] into a single study. According to the results of this study, MiECC and OPCAB are both strongly associated with improved perioperative outcomes following CABG when compared with CABG performed on conventional CPB. The authors conclude that MiECC may represent an attractive compromise between OPCAB and conventional CPB. After carefully reading the whole manuscript, it becomes evident that the role of MiECC is clearly undervalued. Detailed statistical analysis using the surface under the cumulative ranking probabilities indicated that MiECC represented the safer and more effective intervention regarding all-cause mortality and protection from myocardial infarction, cerebral stroke, postoperative atrial fibrillation and renal dysfunction when compared with OPCAB. Even though no significant statistical differences were demonstrated between MiECC and OPCAB, the superiority of MiECC is obvious by the hierarchy of treatments in the probability analysis, which ranked MiECC as the first treatment followed by OPCAB and conventional CPB. Thus, MiECC does not represent a compromise between OPCAB and conventional CPB, but an attractive dominant technique in CABG surgery. These results are consistent with the largest published meta-analysis by Anastasiadis et al. comparing MiECC versus conventional CPB including a total of 2770 patients. A significant decrease in mortality was observed when MiECC was used, which was also associated with reduced risk of postoperative myocardial infarction and neurological events [4]. Similarly, another recent meta-analysis by Benedetto et al. compared MiECC versus OPCAB and resulted in comparable outcomes between these two surgical techniques [5]. As stated in the text, superiority of MiECC observed in the current network meta-analysis, when compared with OPCAB, could be attributed to the fact that MiECC offers the potential for complete revascularization, whereas OPCAB poses a challenge for unexperienced surgeons; especially when distal marginal branches on the lateral and/or posterior wall of the heart need revascularization. This is reflected by a significantly lower number of distal anastomoses performed in OPCAB when compared with conventional CPB. Therefore, taking into consideration the literature published up to date, including the results of the current article, we advocate that MiECC should be integrated in the clinical practice guidelines as a state-of-the-art technique and become a standard practice for perfusion in coronary revascularization surgery