Experience With the Cardiac Surgery Simulation Curriculum: Results of the Resident and Faculty Survey

BACKGROUND: The Cardiac Surgery Simulation Curriculum was developed at 8 institutions from 2010 to 2013. A total of 27 residents were trained by 18 faculty members. A survey was conducted to gain insight into the initial experience. METHODS: Residents and faculty were sent a 72- and 68-question survey, respectively. In addition to demographic information, participants reported their view of the overall impact of the curriculum. Focused investigation into each of the 6 modules was obtained. Participants evaluated the value of the specific simulators used. Institutional biases regarding implementation of the curriculum were evaluated. RESULTS: Twenty (74%) residents and 14 (78%) faculty responded. The majority (70%) of residents completed this training in their first and second year of traditional-track programs. The modules were well regarded with no respondents having an unfavorable view. Both residents and faculty found low, moderate, and high fidelity simulators to be extremely useful, with particular emphasis on utility of high fidelity components. The vast majority of residents (85%) and faculty (100%) felt more comfortable in the resident skill set and performance in the operating room. Simulation of rare adverse events allowed for development of multidisciplinary teams to address them. At most institutions, the conduct of this curriculum took precedence over clinical obligations (64%). CONCLUSIONS: The Cardiac Surgery Simulation Curriculum was implemented with robust adoption among the investigating centers. Both residents and faculty viewed the modules favorably. Using this curriculum, participants indicated an improvement in resident technical skills and were enthusiastic about training in adverse events and crisis management

Interpreting neurologic outcomes in a changing trial design landscape: An analysis of HeartWare left ventricular assist device using a hybrid intention to treat population

Randomized controlled trials can provide optimal clinical evidence to assess the benefits of new devices, and it is these data that often shape device usage in real-world practice. However, individual clinical trial results sometimes appear discordant for the same device, and alternative devices are sometimes not employed in similar patient populations. To make sound evidence-based decisions, clinicians routinely rely on cross-trial comparisons from different trials of similar but not identical patient populations to assess competing technology when head-to-head randomized comparisons are unavailable

Simulation-Based Training in Cardiac Surgery

BACKGROUND: Operating room surgical training has significant limitations. This study hypothesized that some skills could be learned efficiently and safely by using simulation with component task training, deliberate practice, progressive complexity, and experienced coaching to produce safer cardiac surgeons. METHODS: Training modules included cardiopulmonary bypass, coronary artery bypass grafting, aortic valve replacement, massive air embolism, acute intraoperative aortic dissection, and sudden deterioration in cardiac function. Using deliberate practice, first-year cardiothoracic surgical residents at eight institutions were trained and evaluated on component tasks for each module and later on full cardiac operations. Evaluations were based on five-point Likert-scale tools indexed by module, session, task items, and repetitions. Statistical analyses relied on generalized linear model estimation and corresponding confidence intervals. RESULTS: The 27 residents who participated demonstrated improvement with practice repetitions resulting in excellent final scores per module (mean ± two SEs): cardiopulmonary bypass, 4.80 ± 0.12; coronary artery bypass grafting, 4.41 ± 0.19; aortic valve replacement, 4.51 ± 0.20; massive air embolism, 0.68 ± 0.14; acute intraoperative aortic dissection, 4.52 ± 0.17; and sudden deterioration in cardiac function, 4.76 ± 0.16. The transient detrimental effect of time away from training was also evident. CONCLUSIONS: Overall performance in component tasks and complete cardiac surgical procedures improved during simulation-based training. Simulation-based training imparts skill sets for management of adverse events and can help produce safer surgeons

HVAD to HeartMate 3 left ventricular assist device exchange: Best practices recommendations

The HeartWare HVAD System (Medtronic) is a durable implantable left ventricular assist device that has been implanted in approximately 20,000 patients worldwide for bridge to transplant and destination therapy indications. In December 2020, Medtronic issued an Urgent Medical Device Communication informing clinicians of a critical device malfunction in which the HVAD may experience a delay or failure to restart after elective or accidental discontinuation of pump operation. Moreover, evolving retrospective comparative effectiveness studies of patients supported with the HVAD demonstrated a significantly higher risk of stroke and all-cause mortality when compared with a newer generation of a commercially available durable left ventricular assist device. Considering the totality of this new information on HVAD performance and the availability of an alternate commercially available device, Medtronic halted the sale and distribution of the HVAD System in June 2021. The decision to remove the HVAD from commercial distribution now requires the use of the HeartMate 3 left ventricular assist system (Abbott, Inc) if a patient previously implanted with an HVAD requires a pump exchange. The goal of this document is to review important differences in the design of the HVAD and HeartMate 3 that are relevant to the medical management of patients supported with these devices, and to assess the technical aspects of an HVAD-to-HeartMate 3 exchange. This document provides the best available evidence that supports best practices