Delirium as a predictor of sepsis in post-coronary artery bypass grafting patients: a retrospective cohort study

Article deposited according to agreement with BMC, December 6, 2010.YesFunding provided by the Open Access Authors Fund

The effect of total arterial grafting on medium-term outcomes following coronary artery bypass grafting

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>While it is believed that total arterial grafting (TAG) for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) confers improved long-term outcomes when compared to conventional grafting with left internal mammary artery and saphenous vein grafts (LIMA+SVG), to date, this has not become the standard of care. In this study, we assessed the impact of TAG on medium-term outcomes after CABG.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Peri-operative data was prospectively collected on consecutive first-time, isolated CABG patients between 1995 and 2005. Patients were divided into two groups based on grafting strategy: TAG (all arterial grafts no saphenous veins) or LIMA+SVG. Patients who had an emergent status or underwent fewer than two distal bypasses were excluded. Medium term univariate and risk-adjusted comparisons between TAG and LIMA+SVG cases were performed.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A total of 4696 CABG patients were included with 1019 patients undergoing TAG (22%). Unadjusted in-hospital mortality was 1.5% for TAG patients compared to 2.0% for LIMA+SVG (p = 0.31). The mean follow-up was 4.8 ± 2.0 years for TAG patients compared to 6.1 ± 3.0 years for LIMA+SVG patients (p < 0.0001). At follow-up total mortality (8% vs 19%; p < 0.0001), and the incidence of readmission to hospital for cardiac reasons (29% vs 38%; p < 0.0001) were significantly lower in TAG compared to LIMA+SVG patients. However, after adjusting for clinical covariates, TAG did not emerge as a significant independent predictor of long-term mortality (HR 0.92; CI 0.71–1.18), readmission to hospital (HR 1.02; CI 0.89–1.18) or the composite outcome of mortality and readmission (HR 1.00; CI 0.88–1.15). Risk adjusted survival was better than 88% in both TAG and LIMA-SVG patients at 5 years follow-up.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Patients undergoing TAG appear to experience lower rates of medium-term all-cause mortality and readmission to hospital for any cardiac cause when compared to patients undergoing LIMA+SVG. However, after adjusting for clinical variables, this difference no longer persists suggesting that at median follow-up there are no mortality or morbidity benefit based on the choice of conduit.</p

The European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation (EuroSCORE) is not appropriate for withholding surgery in high-risk patients with aortic stenosis: a retrospective cohort study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation (EuroSCORE) is a widely used risk assessment tool in patients with severe aortic stenosis to determine operability and to select patients for alternative therapies such as transcatheter aortic valve implantation. The objective of this study was to determine the accuracy of the EuroSCORE in predicting mortality following aortic valve replacement (AVR).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The logistic EuroSCORE was determined for all consecutive patients that underwent conventional AVR between 1995 and 2005 at our institution. Provincial Vital Statistics were used to determine all-cause mortality. The accuracy of the prognostic risk prediction provided by logistic EuroSCORE was assessed by comparing observed and expected operative mortality.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>During the study period, a total of 1,421 patients underwent AVR including 237 patients (16.7%) that had a logistic EuroSCORE > 20. Among these patients, the mean predicted operative mortality was 38.7% (SD = 18.1). The actual mortality of these patients was significantly lower than that predicted by EuroSCORE (11.4% vs. 38.7%, observed/expected ratio 0.29, 95% CI 0.15–0.52, P < 0.05). The EuroSCORE overestimated mortality within all strata of predicted risk. Although medium-term mortality is significantly higher among patients with EuroSCORE > 20 (log rank P = 0.0001), approximately 60% are alive at five years.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Actual operative mortality in patients undergoing AVR is significantly lower than that predicted by the logistic EuroSCORE. Additionally, medium-term survival following AVR is acceptable in high-risk patients with EuroSCORE > 20. More accurate risk prediction models are needed for risk-stratifying patients with severe aortic stenosis.</p

Assessing the risk of waiting for coronary artery bypass graft surgery among patients with stenosis of the left main coronary artery

BACKGROUND: Significant controversy remains over how urgently coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) should be scheduled, particularly for patients with stenosis of the left main coronary artery. Our main objective was to evaluate the safety of waiting for CABG among patients with left main coronary artery disease using a standardized triage system. METHODS: We identified 561 consecutive patients with stenosis of the left main coronary artery who were scheduled to undergo CABG between Apr. 1, 1999, and Mar. 31, 2003. Using standardized triage criteria, patients were assigned to 1 of 4 waiting queues: “emergent,” “in-hospital urgent,” “out-of-hospital semi-urgent A” and “out-of-hospital semi-urgent B.” Postoperative outcome measures were in-hospital death from any cause and a composite outcome measure of in-hospital death from any cause, a prolonged requirement for postoperative mechanical ventilation (> 24 h) and a prolonged postoperative hospital stay (> 9 d). Waiting-time variables included the specific queue, whether patients waited longer than the standard time established for each queue and whether patients were upgraded to a more urgent queue. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify independent predictors of the composite outcome; propensity scores (probability of being assigned to a specific queue) were entered into the model to adjust for patient variability among queues. RESULTS: Of the 561 patients, 65 (11.6%) were assigned to the emergent group, 343 (61.1%) to the in-hospital urgent group, 91 (16.2%) to the semi-urgent A queue and 62 (11.1%) to the semi-urgent B queue. Four patients (0.7%) died while waiting for surgery. The median waiting times were as follows: emergent group, 0 days; in-hospital urgent group, 2 days; 30 days in the semi-urgent A group and 49 days in the semi-urgent B group. A total of 52 patients (9.3%) were upgraded to a more urgent queue, and 147 patients (26.2%) waited longer than the standard times for their respective queue. The overall in-hospital mortality was 5.5% (n = 31), and the composite outcome was 32.6% (n = 183). Independent predictors of the composite outcome were myocardial infarction within 7 days before surgery, preoperative renal failure, ejection fraction of less than 40%, age greater than 70 years and stenosis of left main coronary artery greater than 70%. Waiting-time variables were associated with neither a significantly higher mortality nor morbidity outcome. INTERPRETATION: For selected patients with stenosis of the left main coronary artery, waiting for CABG did not appear to be associated with increased mortality or morbidity