Interaction between VA-ECMO and the right ventricle.

The response of the right ventricle (RV) to the hemodynamic effects of veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) is currently unpredictable. We hypothesized that the presence of uni- or bi-ventricular failure before implantation and the cannulation strategy may influence this interaction. We sought to assess the RV performance during VA-ECMO support and identify RV-related predictors of successful weaning. Changes in RV size and function during VA-ECMO support by echocardiography were retrospectively analyzed in 87 consecutive adult patients between February 2008 and June 2017. Predictors of successful weaning due to myocardial recovery were evaluated by multivariable logistic regression. RV echocardiographic parameters did not vary significantly during VA-ECMO support and neither after stratification by the type of cannulation or the presence of isolated or biventricular failure. Successful weaning was conditioned by the absence of RV dysfunction before implantation (OR, 14.7; 95% CI, 13.3-140.3; p = 0.025) or in the last day of support (OR, 9.5; 95% CI, 1.6-54; p = 0.011) and was favored by a total or partial recovery of RV function during the assistance (OR, 6.2; 95%CI, 1.7-22.4; p = 0.005). RV improvement was more often observed in patients with acute RV failure and longer support, while VA-ECMO configuration, additional mechanical support, or pharmacological therapy had no effect. Preservation or improvement of RV function during VA-ECMO is essential for successful weaning. RV echocardiographic performance does not change significantly during VA-ECMO support and is not influenced by cannulation type or the presence of uni- or bi-ventricular failure before implantation.This work was supported by the Alfonso Martin Escudero Foundation.S

Early detection of anthracycline- and trastuzumab-induced cardiotoxicity: value and optimal timing of serum biomarkers and echocardiographic parameters.

Aims To evaluate echocardiographic and biomarker changes during chemotherapy, assess their ability to early detect and predict cardiotoxicity and to define the best time for their evaluation. Methods and results Seventy-two women with breast cancer (52 ± 9.8 years) treated with anthracyclines (26 also with trastuzumab), were evaluated for 14 months (6 echocardiograms/12 laboratory tests). We analysed: high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T, NT-proBNP, global longitudinal strain (GLS), left ventricle end-systolic volume (LVESV), left ventricle end-diastolic volume (LVEDV), and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Cardiotoxicity was defined as a reduction in LVEF>10% compared with baseline with LVEF<53%. High-sensitivity troponin T levels rose gradually reaching a maximum peak at 96 ± 13 days after starting chemotherapy (P < 0.001) and 62.5% of patients presented increased values during treatment. NT-proBNP augmented after each anthracycline cycle (mean pre-cycle levels of 72 ± 68 pg/mL and post-cycle levels of 260 ± 187 pg/mL; P < 0.0001). Cardiotoxicity was detected in 9.7% of patients (mean onset at 5.2 months). In the group with cardiotoxicity, the LVESV was higher compared with those without cardiotoxicity (40 mL vs. 29.5 mL; P = 0.045) at 1 month post-anthracycline treatment and the decline in GLS was more pronounced ( 17.6% vs. 21.4%; P = 0.03). Trastuzumab did not alter serum biomarkers, but it was associated with an increase in LVESV and LVEDV (P < 0.05). While baseline LVEF was an independent predictor of later cardiotoxicity (P = 0.039), LVESV and GLS resulted to be early detectors of cardiotoxicity [odds ratio = 1.12 (1.02–1.24), odds ratio = 0.66 (0.44–0.92), P < 0.05] at 1 month post-anthracycline treatment. Neither high-sensitivity troponin T nor NT-proBNP was capable of predicting subsequent cardiotoxicity. Conclusions One month after completion of anthracycline treatment is the optimal time to detect cardiotoxicity by means of imaging parameters (LVESV and GSL) and to determine maximal troponin rise. Baseline LVEF was a predictor of later cardiotoxicity. Trastuzumab therapy does not affect troponin values hence imaging techniques are recommended to detect trastuzumab-induced cardiotoxicity.post-print3194 K

Effect of intravenous pulses of methylprednisolone 250 mg versus dexamethasone 6 mg in hospitalised adults with severe COVID ‐19 pneumonia: An open‐label randomised trial

Producción CientíficaBackground: The efficacy and safety of high versus medium doses of glucocorticoids for the treatment of patients with COVID-19 has shown mixed outcomes in controlled trials and observational studies. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of methylprednisolone 250 mg bolus versus dexamethasone 6 mg in patients with severe COVID-19. Methods: A randomised, open-label, controlled trial was conducted between February and August 2021 at four hospitals in Spain. The trial was suspended after the first interim analysis since the investigators considered that continuing the trial would be futile. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive dexamethasone 6 mg once daily for up to 10 days or methylprednisolone 250 mg once daily for 3 days. Results: Of the 128 randomised patients, 125 were analysed (mean age 60 ± 17 years; 82 males [66%]). Mortality at 28 days was 4.8% in the 250 mg methylprednisolone group versus 4.8% in the 6 mg dexamethasone group (absolute risk difference, 0.1% [95% CI, −8.8 to 9.1%]; p = 0.98). None of the secondary outcomes (admission to the intensive care unit, non-invasive respiratory or high-flow oxygen support, additional immunosuppressive drugs, or length of stay), or prespecified sensitivity analyses were statistically significant. Hyperglycaemia was more frequent in the methylprednisolone group at 27.0 versus 8.1% (absolute risk difference, −18.9% [95% CI, −31.8 to - 5.6%]; p = 0.007). Conclusions: Among severe but not critical patients with COVID-19, 250 mg/d for 3 days of methylprednisolone compared with 6 mg/d for 10 days of dexamethasone did not result in a decrease in mortality or intubation

A Novel Circulating MicroRNA for the Detection of Acute Myocarditis.

The diagnosis of acute myocarditis typically requires either endomyocardial biopsy (which is invasive) or cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (which is not universally available). Additional approaches to diagnosis are desirable. We sought to identify a novel microRNA for the diagnosis of acute myocarditis. To identify a microRNA specific for myocarditis, we performed microRNA microarray analyses and quantitative polymerase-chain-reaction (qPCR) assays in sorted CD4+ T cells and type 17 helper T (Th17) cells after inducing experimental autoimmune myocarditis or myocardial infarction in mice. We also performed qPCR in samples from coxsackievirus-induced myocarditis in mice. We then identified the human homologue for this microRNA and compared its expression in plasma obtained from patients with acute myocarditis with the expression in various controls. We confirmed that Th17 cells, which are characterized by the production of interleukin-17, are a characteristic feature of myocardial injury in the acute phase of myocarditis. The microRNA mmu-miR-721 was synthesized by Th17 cells and was present in the plasma of mice with acute autoimmune or viral myocarditis but not in those with acute myocardial infarction. The human homologue, designated hsa-miR-Chr8:96, was identified in four independent cohorts of patients with myocarditis. The area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve for this novel microRNA for distinguishing patients with acute myocarditis from those with myocardial infarction was 0.927 (95% confidence interval, 0.879 to 0.975). The microRNA retained its diagnostic value in models after adjustment for age, sex, ejection fraction, and serum troponin level. After identifying a novel microRNA in mice and humans with myocarditis, we found that the human homologue (hsa-miR-Chr8:96) could be used to distinguish patients with myocarditis from those with myocardial infarction. (Funded by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation and others.).Supported by a grant (PI19/00545, to Dr. Martín) from the Ministry of Science and Innovation through the Carlos III Institute of Health–Fondo de Investigación Sanitaria; by a grant from the Biomedical Research Networking Center on Cardiovascular Diseases (to Drs. Martín, Sánchez-Madrid, and Ibáñez); by grants (S2017/BMD-3671-INFLAMUNE-CM, to Drs. Martín and Sánchez-Madrid; and S2017/BMD-3867-RENIM-CM, to Dr. Ibáñez) from Comunidad de Madrid; by a grant (20152330 31, to Drs. Martín, Sánchez-Madrid, and Alfonso) from Fundació La Marató de TV3; by grants (ERC-2011-AdG 294340-GENTRIS, to Dr. Sánchez-Madrid; and ERC-2018-CoG 819775-MATRIX, to Dr. Ibáñez) from the European Research Council; by grants (SAF2017-82886R, to Dr. Sánchez-Madrid; RETOS2019-107332RB-I00, to Dr. Ibáñez; and SAF2017-90604-REDT-NurCaMeIn and RTI2018-095928-BI00, to Dr. Ricote) from the Ministry of Science and Innovation; by Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional (FEDER); and by a 2016 Leonardo Grant for Researchers and Cultural Creators from the BBVA Foundation to Dr. Martín. The National Center for Cardiovascular Research (CNIC) is supported by the Carlos III Institute of Health, the Ministry of Science and Innovation, the Pro CNIC Foundation, and by a Severo Ochoa Center of Excellence grant (SEV-2015-0505). Mr. Blanco-Domínguez is supported by a grant (FPU16/02780) from the Formación de Profesorado Universitario program of the Spanish Ministry of Education, Culture, and Sports. Ms. Linillos-Pradillo is supported by a fellowship (PEJD-2016/BMD-2789) from Fondo de Garantía de Empleo Juvenil de Comunidad de Madrid. Dr. Relaño is supported by a grant (BES-2015-072625) from Contratos Predoctorales Severo Ochoa para la Formación de Doctores of the Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness. Dr. Alonso-Herranz is supported by a fellowship from La Caixa–CNIC. Dr. Caforio is supported by Budget Integrato per la Ricerca dei Dipartimenti BIRD-2019 from Università di Padova. Dr. Das is supported by grants (UG3 TR002878 and R35 HL150807) from the National Institutes of Health and the American Heart Association through its Strategically Focused Research Networks.S

Role of age and comorbidities in mortality of patients with infective endocarditis

[Purpose]: The aim of this study was to analyse the characteristics of patients with IE in three groups of age and to assess the ability of age and the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) to predict mortality. [Methods]: Prospective cohort study of all patients with IE included in the GAMES Spanish database between 2008 and 2015.Patients were stratified into three age groups:<65 years,65 to 80 years,and ≥ 80 years.The area under the receiver-operating characteristic (AUROC) curve was calculated to quantify the diagnostic accuracy of the CCI to predict mortality risk. [Results]: A total of 3120 patients with IE (1327 < 65 years;1291 65-80 years;502 ≥ 80 years) were enrolled.Fever and heart failure were the most common presentations of IE, with no differences among age groups.Patients ≥80 years who underwent surgery were significantly lower compared with other age groups (14.3%,65 years; 20.5%,65-79 years; 31.3%,≥80 years). In-hospital mortality was lower in the <65-year group (20.3%,<65 years;30.1%,65-79 years;34.7%,≥80 years;p < 0.001) as well as 1-year mortality (3.2%, <65 years; 5.5%, 65-80 years;7.6%,≥80 years; p = 0.003).Independent predictors of mortality were age ≥ 80 years (hazard ratio [HR]:2.78;95% confidence interval [CI]:2.32–3.34), CCI ≥ 3 (HR:1.62; 95% CI:1.39–1.88),and non-performed surgery (HR:1.64;95% CI:11.16–1.58).When the three age groups were compared,the AUROC curve for CCI was significantly larger for patients aged <65 years(p < 0.001) for both in-hospital and 1-year mortality. [Conclusion]: There were no differences in the clinical presentation of IE between the groups. Age ≥ 80 years, high comorbidity (measured by CCI),and non-performance of surgery were independent predictors of mortality in patients with IE.CCI could help to identify those patients with IE and surgical indication who present a lower risk of in-hospital and 1-year mortality after surgery, especially in the <65-year group

Evolving trends in the management of acute appendicitis during COVID-19 waves. The ACIE appy II study

Background: In 2020, ACIE Appy study showed that COVID-19 pandemic heavily affected the management of patients with acute appendicitis (AA) worldwide, with an increased rate of non-operative management (NOM) strategies and a trend toward open surgery due to concern of virus transmission by laparoscopy and controversial recommendations on this issue. The aim of this study was to survey again the same group of surgeons to assess if any difference in management attitudes of AA had occurred in the later stages of the outbreak. Methods: From August 15 to September 30, 2021, an online questionnaire was sent to all 709 participants of the ACIE Appy study. The questionnaire included questions on personal protective equipment (PPE), local policies and screening for SARS-CoV-2 infection, NOM, surgical approach and disease presentations in 2021. The results were compared with the results from the previous study. Results: A total of 476 answers were collected (response rate 67.1%). Screening policies were significatively improved with most patients screened regardless of symptoms (89.5% vs. 37.4%) with PCR and antigenic test as the preferred test (74.1% vs. 26.3%). More patients tested positive before surgery and commercial systems were the preferred ones to filter smoke plumes during laparoscopy. Laparoscopic appendicectomy was the first option in the treatment of AA, with a declined use of NOM. Conclusion: Management of AA has improved in the last waves of pandemic. Increased evidence regarding SARS-COV-2 infection along with a timely healthcare systems response has been translated into tailored attitudes and a better care for patients with AA worldwide

Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Abstract Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries

Planning secondary prevention: Room for improvement

The prognosis of patients after acute coronary syndromes is still suboptimal, mainly due to the risk of recurrent adverse coronary events, which is greatest during the first year, but persists over one's lifetime. Meaningful progress in preventing cardiovascular events has been achieved. However, there remains much room for improvement by embracing innovative therapies and investing in multidisciplinary approaches. Pharmacological interventions focused on optimising antithrombotic and lipid-lowering therapies are both pillars of secondary prevention that have seen recent ground-breaking advances. Moreover, new approaches in diabetic patients with cardiovascular disease and new targets for anti-inflammatory treatment may significantly improve prevention strategies in the future. However, pharmacological treatments are expensive and can have significant side effects. Developing better tools in order to identify high-risk patients and promote more personalised strategies for each patient should be an absolute priority. Furthermore, adherence to medication is still low and represents a real challenge; several strategies to improve low adherence to treatment are currently under discussion. Non-pharmacological interventions are also essential. Improving communication with patients and advanced surveillance for those secondary risk factors that may negatively impact prognosis are crucial. Encouraging multidisciplinary teams that work effectively to optimise all aspects of secondary prevention, including a cardiac rehabilitation programme, is the optimal approach. Current secondary prevention strategies and suggestions for areas of improvement are discussed in this manuscript. However, the question remains: will research in secondary prevention continue to focus on stronger and more expensive drugs, or is it time for us to embrace a more patient-centred clinical and research model?The Centro Nacional de Investigaciones Cardiovasculares is supported by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (MINECO) and the Pro-CNIC Foundation, and is a Severo Ochoa Center of Excellence (MINECO award SEV-2015-0505).S