Clinical outcome of the PAS-Port (R) proximal anastomosis system in off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting in 201 patients

Aim. The PAS-Port (R) Proximal Anastomosis System (Cardica, Inc, Redwood City, CA, USA) has been used worldwide since March 2003. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the clinical outcome of the PAS-Port (R) Proximal Anastomosis System.Methods. All the patients who underwent off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting in the Catharina Hospital Eindhoven between August 2006 and April 2010 were included in a non-randomized retrospective case-control study, if they had at least one proximal vein graft anastomosis. Study end-points consisted of overall survival, coronary reintervention and postoperative stroke.Results. The study included 312 patients (201 cases, 111 controls). After 36 months of follow-up there was no difference in survival between cases and controls (92.2% vs. 93.7%, P=0.52). No significant difference could be detected between cases and controls with respect to overall coronary reintervention-free survival (93% vs. 96.4%, P=0.20) and freedom from coronary reintervention due to proximal vein graft failure (98% vs. 100% P=0.14). The use of the PAS-Port system could not be identified as an independent risk factor of coronary reintervention (p=0.21). Postoperative stroke rates of cases and controls (2% vs. 0.9%, P=0.42) were comparable.Conclusion. The clinical outcomes in patients treated with the PAS-Port (R) Proximal Anastomosis System were satisfactory compared with those treated with the conventional hand-sewing technique. The use of the PAS-Port system was not associated with higher adverse outcome in terms of overall survival, stroke, coronary reintervention-free survival and freedom from reintervention due to proximal vein graft failure

The usefulness of preoperative exercise therapy in patients scheduled for lung cancer surgery;: a survey among Dutch pulmonologists and cardiothoracic surgeons

Background Preoperative exercise training (PET) studies show promising results in various patient populations. However, the lack of standardised programmes and uniformity in practice guidelines are barriers for implementation. Aim of this study was to assess the current opinions of pulmonologists and cardiothoracic surgeons on the clinical applicability of PET in patients scheduled for lung cancer surgery. Methods Dutch pulmonologists and cardiothoracic surgeons were asked to complete a 29-question survey regarding PET as an additional option to further optimise the health status of patients scheduled for lung cancer surgery. Results In total, 47 respondents (63% response rate), including 30 pulmonologists and 11 cardiothoracic surgeons and 6 residents in training completed the survey. A vast majority of the respondents had a positive attitude towards PET. Home-based exercise was considered less useful, as well as unsupervised exercise. Patient's motivation, improvements in physical capacity and quality of life, and lifestyle adjustments are important factors for the success of PET. The programme should at least contain inspiratory muscle training (95.7%), lifestyle interventions (95.7%), and supervised exercise training (91.5%). Cardiac and pulmonary risk assessment and medication assessment and optimisation were found less important. Conclusion Among pulmonologists and cardiothoracic surgeons, there is a tendency that PET can be a valuable addition to the perioperative care of lung surgery patients. Points of discussion are the contents of PET programmes, and there seems to be a lack of awareness among chest physicians

The usefulness of preoperative exercise therapy in patients scheduled for lung cancer surgery;:a survey among Dutch pulmonologists and cardiothoracic surgeons

Background Preoperative exercise training (PET) studies show promising results in various patient populations. However, the lack of standardised programmes and uniformity in practice guidelines are barriers for implementation. Aim of this study was to assess the current opinions of pulmonologists and cardiothoracic surgeons on the clinical applicability of PET in patients scheduled for lung cancer surgery. Methods Dutch pulmonologists and cardiothoracic surgeons were asked to complete a 29-question survey regarding PET as an additional option to further optimise the health status of patients scheduled for lung cancer surgery. Results In total, 47 respondents (63% response rate), including 30 pulmonologists and 11 cardiothoracic surgeons and 6 residents in training completed the survey. A vast majority of the respondents had a positive attitude towards PET. Home-based exercise was considered less useful, as well as unsupervised exercise. Patient's motivation, improvements in physical capacity and quality of life, and lifestyle adjustments are important factors for the success of PET. The programme should at least contain inspiratory muscle training (95.7%), lifestyle interventions (95.7%), and supervised exercise training (91.5%). Cardiac and pulmonary risk assessment and medication assessment and optimisation were found less important. Conclusion Among pulmonologists and cardiothoracic surgeons, there is a tendency that PET can be a valuable addition to the perioperative care of lung surgery patients. Points of discussion are the contents of PET programmes, and there seems to be a lack of awareness among chest physicians

Preoperative ejection fraction as a predictor of survival after coronary artery bypass grafting: comparison with a matched general population

Background: Preoperative left ventricular dysfunction is an established risk factor for early and late mortality after revascularization. This retrospective analysis demonstrates the effects of preoperative ejection fraction on the short-term and long-term survival of patients after coronary artery bypass grafting. Methods: Early and late mortality were determined retrospectively in 10 626 consecutive patients who underwent isolated coronary bypass between January 1998 and December 2007. The subjects were divided into 3 groups according to their preoperative ejection fraction. Expected survival was estimated by comparison with a general Dutch population group described in the database of the Dutch Central Bureau for Statistics. For each of our groups with a known preoperative ejection fraction, a general Dutch population group was matched for age, sex, and year of operation. Results and Discussion: One hundred twenty-two patients were lost to follow-up. In 219 patients, the preoperative ejection fraction could not be retrieved. In the remaining patients (n = 10 285), the results of multivariate logistic regression and Cox regression analysis identified the ejection fraction as a predictor of early and late mortality. When we compared long-term survival and expected survival, we found a relatively poorer outcome in all subjects with an ejection fraction of 50%, long-term survival exceeded expected survival. Conclusions: The severity of left ventricular dysfunction was associated with poor survival. Compared with the survival of the matched general population, our coronary bypass patients had a worse outcome only if their preoperative ejection fraction was < 50%

Preoperative ejection fraction as a predictor of survival after coronary artery bypass grafting: comparison with a matched general population

Abstract Background Preoperative left ventricular dysfunction is an established risk factor for early and late mortality after revascularization. This retrospective analysis demonstrates the effects of preoperative ejection fraction on the short-term and long-term survival of patients after coronary artery bypass grafting. Methods Early and late mortality were determined retrospectively in 10 626 consecutive patients who underwent isolated coronary bypass between January 1998 and December 2007. The subjects were divided into 3 groups according to their preoperative ejection fraction. Expected survival was estimated by comparison with a general Dutch population group described in the database of the Dutch Central Bureau for Statistics. For each of our groups with a known preoperative ejection fraction, a general Dutch population group was matched for age, sex, and year of operation. Results and Discussion One hundred twenty-two patients were lost to follow-up. In 219 patients, the preoperative ejection fraction could not be retrieved. In the remaining patients (n = 10 285), the results of multivariate logistic regression and Cox regression analysis identified the ejection fraction as a predictor of early and late mortality. When we compared long-term survival and expected survival, we found a relatively poorer outcome in all subjects with an ejection fraction of 50%, long-term survival exceeded expected survival. Conclusions The severity of left ventricular dysfunction was associated with poor survival. Compared with the survival of the matched general population, our coronary bypass patients had a worse outcome only if their preoperative ejection fraction was < 50%.</p