Oxigenación con membrana extracorpórea en el paciente COVID-19: resultados del Registro Español ECMO-COVID de la Sociedad Española de Cirugía Cardiovascular y Endovascular (SECCE)

Background and aim: COVID-19 patients with severe heart or respiratory failure are potential candidates for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Indications and management of these patients are unclear. Our aim is to describe the results of a prospective registry of COVID-19 patients treated with ECMO. Methods: An anonymous prospective registry of COVID-19 patients treated with veno-arterial (V-A) or veno-venous (V-V) ECMO was created on march 2020. Clinical, analytical and respiratory preimplantation variables, implantation data and post-implantation course data were recorded. The primary endpoint was all cause in-hospital mortality. Secondary events were functional recovery and the combined endpoint of mortality and functional recovery in patients followed at least 3 months after discharge. Results: Three hundred and sixty-six patients from 25 hospitals were analyzed, 347 V-V ECMO and 18 V-A ECMO patients (mean age 52.7 and 49.5 years respectively). Patients with V-V ECMO were more obese, had less frequently organ damage other than respiratory failure and needed less inotropic support; Thirty three percent of V-A ECMO and 34.9% of V-A ECMO were discharged (P = NS). Hospital mortality was non-significantly different, 56.2% versus 50.9% respectively, mainly during ECMO therapy and mostly due to multiorgan failure. Other 51 patients (14%) remained admitted. Mean follow-up was 196 +/- 101.7 days (95%CI: 170.8-221.6). After logistic regression, body weight (OR 0.967, 95%CI: 0.95-0.99, P = 0.004) and ECMO implantation in the own centre (OR 0.48, 95%CI: 0.27-0.88, P = 0.018) were protective for hospital mortality. Age (OR 1.063, 95%CI: 1.005-1.12, P = 0.032), arterial hypertension (3.593, 95%CI: 1.06-12.19, P = 0.04) and global (2.44, 95%CI: 0.27-0.88, P = 0.019), digestive (OR 4,23, 95%CI: 1.27-14.07, P = 0.019) and neurological (OR 4.66, 95%CI: 1.39-15.62, P = 0.013) complications during ECMO therapy were independent predictors of primary endpoint occurrence. Only the post-discharge day at follow-up was independent predictor of both secondary endpoints occurrence. Conclusions: Hospital survival of severely ill COVID-19 patients treated with ECMO is near 50%. Age, arterial hypertension and ECMO complications are predictors of hospital mortality, and body weight and implantation in the own centre are protective. Functional recovery is only predicted by the follow-up time after discharge. A more homogeneous management of these patients is warranted for clinical results and future research optimization. (C) 2022 Sociedad Espanola de Cirugia Cardiovascular y Endovascular. Published by Elsevier Espana, S.L.U

Registro Español de Reparación Valvular 2013

Introducción y objetivos: El Grupo de Trabajo en Reparación Valvular de la Sociedad Española de Cirugía Torácica y Cardiovascular presenta el tercer Registro anual de actividad en cirugía reparadora de las válvulas mitral, aórtica y tricúspide realizadas en España en el año 2013. Métodos: Los datos se obtuvieron mediante encuesta por vía web. La participación fue voluntaria. Se contabiliza el número de intervenciones valvulares (reparaciones y recambios). Se detallan las reparaciones valvulares mitrales por etiologías. Se reporta la mortalidad. Se realiza una comparación de resultados de la cirugía valvular con años anteriores. Resultados: Se ofrecen datos de 25 centros (48% de la actividad quirúrgica del país). El volumen de reparación valvular global sigue incrementándose. La actuación sobre la válvula mitral degenerativa es mayoritariamente reparadora (61,7%). El 46% de todas las válvulas mitrales fueron reparadas. En la válvula aórtica esta técnica es todavía incipiente (2,7%). La etiología degenerativa sigue siendo la más habitual en caso de reparación valvular mitral; no obstante, en nuestro país la etiología reumática no acaba de desaparecer, siendo causa de gran cantidad de implantes protésicos. La mortalidad en la reparación fue del 1,5% ± 1,9, frente al 5,3% ± 3,5 en caso del recambio, aunque la comorbilidad asociada a los grupos fue también claramente diferente (Euroscore de 6,0 ± 3,0 frente a 8,9 ± 2,4). Conclusiones: El porcentaje de pacientes que se benefician de las técnicas de reparación valvular sigue aumentando, con unos resultados satisfactorios en términos de mortalidad

Registro Español de Reparación Valvular 2014

Introducción y objetivos: El Grupo de Trabajo en Reparación Valvular de la Sociedad Española de Cirugía Torácica y Cardiovascular presenta el cuarto Registro anual de actividad en cirugía reparadora de las válvulas mitral, aórtica y tricúspide realizada en España durante el año 2014. Material y métodos: La recogida de datos se realizó mediante cuestionario on-line, de forma retrospectiva, voluntaria, anónima y no auditada. Se detalla la actividad reparadora y de recambio valvular por grupos. En el grupo mitral se clasificaron las intervenciones de acuerdo con su etiología y se recogieron como variables mortalidad y riesgo quirúrgico, tanto en el grupo total como en pacientes electivos. Resultados: Veintisiete centros participaron en la elaboración de registro. El 70% aportó datos sobre mortalidad. El número de procedimientos de reparación global fue del 22% (36,6% mitrales, 3,5% aórticas y 92,5% tricúspides). La cirugía mitral reparadora fue posible en el 60% de las valvulopatías degenerativas, isquémicas y funcionales, y solo en el 2,8% de las reumáticas. La mortalidad global fue del 1,95%. El porcentaje de reparaciones aórticas oscila por grupos entre el 0 y el 48%. La cirugía reparadora tricúspide se mantiene en cifras similares a años previos. Las técnicas miniinvasivas fueron empleadas en el 3,4% de las cirugías mitrales y el 11,8% de las aórticas. Conclusiones: La actividad reparadora valvular mitral está actualmente consolidada en España, siendo especialmente infrecuente cuando la etiología de la valvulopatía es reumática. La cirugía reparadora aórtica difiere mucho entre grupos y parece encontrarse estabilizada

A multicenter, propensity-score matched analysis comparing valve-sparing approach to valve replacement in aortic root aneurysm: Insight from AVIATOR database

OBJECTIVES: The study objective is to evaluate outcome of valve-sparing root replacement(VSRR) and its comparison to composite valve-graft conduit aortic root replacement(CVG-ARR), in a cohort of patients with aortic root aneurysm +/- valve insufficiency, without valvular stenosis. Although valve-sparing procedures are preferable in young patients, there is a lack of comparative data in comparable patients. METHODS: The VSRR procedures were performed in 2005 patients and 218 patients underwent a CVG-ARR procedure. Exclusion criteria: aortic dissection, endocarditis and valvular-stenosis. Propensity score matching (3:1 ratio) was applied to compare VSRR (reimplantation 33% and remodelling 67%) and CVG-ARR. RESULTS: We matched 218 CVG-ARR patients to 654 VSRR patients (median age, 56.0; median follow-up was 4 years in both, IQR 1-5 years). Early mortality was 1.1% in VSRR versus 2.3% in CVG-ARR. Survival was 95.4% (95% CI 94-97%) at 5 years in VSRR versus 85.4% (95% CI 82-92%) in CVG-ARR, p = 0.002. Freedom from reintervention at 5 years was 96.8% (95% CI 95-98%) in VSRR and 95.4% (95% CI 91-99%) in CVG-ARR, p = 0.98. Additionally, there were more thromboembolism, endocarditis and bleeding events in CVG-ARR (p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: This multicentre study shows excellent results after valve-sparing root replacement in patients with ascending aortic aneurysm with or without valve insufficiency. Compared to composite valve-graft aortic root replacement, survival is better and valve-related event are fewer. Consequently, valve-sparing procedures should be considered whenever a durable repair is feasible. We advocate a valve-sparing strategy even in more complex cases when performed in experienced centers

A multicentre, propensity score matched analysis comparing a valve-sparing approach to valve replacement in aortic root aneurysm: Insight from the AVIATOR database

OBJECTIVES: Our goal was to evaluate the outcome of valve-sparing root replacement (VSRR) and to compare the outcomes to those of patients having composite valve-graft conduit aortic root replacement (CVG-ARR) in a cohort of patients with aortic root aneurysm ± valve insufficiency, without valvular stenosis. Although valve-sparing procedures are preferable in young patients, there is a lack of comparative data in comparable patients. METHODS: The VSRR procedures were performed in 2005 patients, and 218 patients underwent a CVG-ARR procedure. Exclusion criteria included aortic dissection, endocarditis and valvular stenosis. Propensity score matching (3:1 ratio) was applied to compare VSRR (reimplantation 33% and remodelling 67%) and CVG-ARR. RESULTS: We matched 218 patients with CVG-ARR to 654 patients with VSRR (median age, 56.0; median follow-up was 4 years in both groups; interquartile range 1-5 years). Early mortality was 1.1% of those who had VSRR versus 2.3% in those who had CVG-ARR. Survival was 95.4% [95% confidence interval (CI) 94-97%] at 5 years in patients who had VSRR versus 85.4% (95% CI 82-92%) in those who had CVG-ARR; P = 0.002. Freedom from reintervention at 5 years was 96.8% (95% CI 95-98%) with VSRR and 95.4% (95% CI 91-99%) with CVG-ARR (P = 0.98). Additionally, there were more thromboembolic, endocarditis and bleeding events in the patients who had CVG-ARR (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: This multicentre study shows excellent results after valve-sparing root replacement in patients with an ascending aortic aneurysm with or without valve insufficiency. Compared to composite valve-graft aortic root replacement, survival is better and valve-related events are fewer. Consequently, valve-sparing procedures should be considered whenever a durable repair is feasible. We advocate a valve-sparing strategy even in more complex cases when performed in experienced centres

Antimicrobial management of Tropheryma whipplei endocarditis: the Spanish Collaboration on Endocarditis (GAMES) experience

OBJECTIVES: Tropheryma whipplei has been detected in 3.5% of the blood culture-negative cases of endocarditis in Spain. Experience in the management of T. whipplei endocarditis is limited. Here we report the long-term outcome of the treatment of previously reported patients who were diagnosed with infective endocarditis (IE) caused by T. whipplei from the Spanish Collaboration on Endocarditis-Grupo de Apoyo al Manejo de la Endocarditis Infecciosa en Espana (GAMES) and discuss potential options for antimicrobial therapy for IE caused by T. whipplei. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seventeen patients with T. whipplei endocarditis were recruited between 2008 and 2014 in 25 Spanish hospitals. Patients were classified according to the therapeutic regimen: ceftriaxone and trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole, doxycycline + hydroxychloroquine and other treatment options. RESULTS: Follow-up data were obtained from 14 patients. The median follow-up was 46.5 months. All patients completed the antibiotic treatment prescribed, with a median duration of 13 months. Six patients were treated with ceftriaxone and trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (median duration 13 months), four with doxycycline + hydroxychloroquine (median duration 13.8 months) and four with other treatment options (median duration 22.3 months). The follow-up after the end of the treatments was between 5 and 84 months (median 24 months). CONCLUSIONS: All treatment lines were effective and well tolerated. Therapeutic failures were not detected during the treatment. None of the patients died or experienced a relapse during the follow-up. Only six patients received antibiotic treatment in accordance with guidelines. These data suggest that shorter antimicrobial treatments could be effective