A new viewpoint on endoscopic CABG: technique description and clinical experience

BACKGROUND: The aim of this paper is to describe a newly developed endoscopic coronary artery bypass graft (Endo-CABG) technique to treat patients with single- and multi-vessel disease and discuss the short-term clinical results in a large patient cohort. This technique avoids a median sternotomy by combining a thoracoscopic technique via three ∼5 mm thoracic ports and a mini-thoracotomy utility 3-4 cm port through the intercostal space. METHODS: From January 2016 to January 2018, data from consecutive patients undergoing an elective Endo-CABG were prospectively entered into a customized database and retrospectively reviewed. Patients scheduled for a combined hybrid intervention were excluded. Conversion rate to sternotomy, incidence of surgical revision and postoperative graft failure, one-month survival, morbidity, and length of stay (LOS) were investigated. Subgroup analyses were performed. RESULTS: A total of 342 patients undergoing an Endo-CABG with one (n = 53) or multiple (n = 289) bypasses were included. No conversion to sternotomy occurred and incidence of surgical revision, graft failure, and 30-day mortality was 7.3%, 1.5%, and 1.8%, respectively. Adverse neurological outcomes were rare: cerebrovascular accident, transient ischemic attack, epilepsy, and postoperative delirium were observed in 0.6%, 0.3%, 0.3%, and 5.3% of patients, respectively. Median intensive care unit and hospital LOS were 2.75 (IQR 1.8 to 3.8) and 8.0 days (IQR 7.0 to 10.0), respectively. Thirty-day mortality in obese patients, diabetics, and octogenarians was 0%, 3.6%, and 5.6%, respectively. EuroSCORE II > 5% was associated with a high 30-day mortality (25%). CONCLUSIONS: Endo-CABG can be considered a safe and effective procedure to treat single- and multi-vessel coronary artery disease. Individual patient selection seems not necessary to apply this technique.status: publishe

Validation of the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II and IV Score in COVID-19 Patients

Background. Severity scoring systems are inherent to ICU practice for multiple purposes. Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) scoring systems are designed for ICU mortality prediction. This study aims to validate APACHE IV in COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU. Methods. All COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU between March 13, 2020, and October 17, 2020, were retrospectively analyzed. APACHE II and APACHE IV scores as well as SOFA scores were calculated within 24 hours after admission. Discrimination for mortality of all three scoring systems was assessed by receiver operating characteristic curves. Youden index was determined for the scoring system with the best discriminative performance. The Hosmer–Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test was used to assess calibration. All analyses were performed for both the overall population as in a subgroup treated with anti-Xa adjusted dosages of LMWHs. Results. 116 patients were admitted to our ICU during the study period. 13 were excluded for various reasons, leaving 103 patients in the statistical analysis of the overall population. 57 patients were treated with anti-Xa adjusted prophylactic dosages of LMWH and were supplementary analyzed in a subgroup analysis. APACHE IV had the best discriminative power of the three scoring systems, both in the overall population (APACHE IV ROC AUC 0.67 vs. APACHE II ROC AUC 0.63) as in the subgroup (APACHE IV ROC AUC 0.82 vs. APACHE II ROC AUC 0.7). This model exhibits good calibration. Hosmer–Lemeshow p values for APACHE IV were 0.9234 for the overall population and 0.8017 for the subgroup. Calibration p values of the APACHE II score were 0.1394 and 0.6475 for the overall versus subgroup, respectively. Conclusions. APACHE IV provided the best discrimination and calibration of the considered scoring systems in critically ill COVID-19 patients, both in the overall group and in the subgroup with anti-Xa adjusted LMWH doses. Only in the subgroup analysis, discriminative abilities of APACHE IV were very good. This trial is registered with NCT04713852

Safety of a powder-free latex allergy protocol in the operating theatre A prospective, observational cohort study

status: publishe

Selective suprascapular and axillary nerve block versus interscalene plexus block for pain control after arthroscopic shoulder surgery : a noninferiority randomized parallel-controlled clinical trial

Background and Objectives: This randomized trial aimed to assess if a combined suprascapular-axillary nerve block (SSB) is noninferior (margin = 1.3 on a 0- to 10-point scale) to interscalene block (ISB) in treating pain after arthroscopic shoulder surgery. Secondary end points included opioid consumption, dyspnea, discomfort associated with muscle weakness, and patient satisfaction. Methods: One hundred patients undergoing arthroscopic shoulder surgery were randomized to receive ultrasound-guided ISB (n = 50) or SSB (n = 50). Pain intensity at rest, dyspnea, and discomfort were recorded upon arrival in the recovery room, discharge to the ward, and at 4, 8, and 24 hours after surgery. Piritramide consumption was recorded for the first 24 hours. Patient satisfaction was assessed on the second postoperative day. Results: During the first 4 hours after surgery, the difference in mean pain score between SSB and ISB was higher than 2.5 (0.8). The difference gradually decreased to 1.1 (1.0) at 8 hours before resulting in noninferiority during the night and at 24 hours. Piritramide consumption was significantly higher in the SSB group in the first 8 hours. The incidence of dyspnea and discomfort was higher after ISB. Treatment satisfaction was similar in both groups. Conclusions: Suprascapular-axillary nerve block is inferior to ISB in terms of analgesia and opioid requirement in the immediate period after arthroscopic shoulder surgery but is associated with a lower incidence of dyspnea and discomfort. The difference in pain and opioid consumption gradually decreases as the blocks wear off in order to reach similar pain scores during the first postoperative night and at 24 hours. Clinical Trial Registration: This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT02415088

Neurological outcome after minimal invasive coronary artery surgery (NOMICS): protocol for an observational prospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION: Adverse neurocognitive outcomes are still an important cause of morbidity and mortality after cardiac surgery. The most common neurocognitive disorders after conventional cardiac surgery are postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD), stroke and delirium. Minimal invasive cardiac procedures have recently been introduced into practice. Endoscopic coronary artery bypass grafting (Endo-CABG) is a minimal invasive cardiac procedure based on the conventional CABG procedure. Neurocognitive outcome after minimal invasive cardiac surgery, including Endo-CABG, has never been studied. Therefore, the main objective of this study is to examine neurocognitive outcome after Endo-CABG. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will perform a prospective observational cohort study including 150 patients. Patients are categorised into three groups: (1) patients undergoing Endo-CABG, (2) patients undergoing a percutaneous coronary intervention and (3) a healthy volunteer group. All patients in the Endo-CABG group will be treated following a uniform, standardised protocol. To assess neurocognitive outcome after surgery, a battery of six neurocognitive tests will be administered at baseline and at 3-month follow-up. In the Endo-CABG group, a neurological examination will be performed at baseline and postoperatively and delirium will be scored at the intensive care unit. Quality of life (QOL), anxiety and depression will be assessed at baseline and at 3-month follow-up. Satisfaction with Endo-CABG will be assessed at 3-month follow-up. Primary endpoints are the incidence of POCD, stroke and delirium after Endo-CABG. Secondary endpoints are QOL after Endo-CABG, patient satisfaction with Endo-CABG and the incidence of anxiety and depression after Endo-CABG. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The neurological outcome after minimal invasive coronary artery surgery study has received approval of the Jessa Hospital ethics board. It is estimated that the trial will be executed from December 2016 to January 2018, including enrolment and follow-up. Analysis of data, followed by publication of the results, is expected in 2018. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02979782.status: publishe

Impact of implementation of an individualised thromboprophylaxis protocol in critically ill ICU patients with COVID-19: A longitudinal controlled before-after study

INTRODUCTION: An individualised thromboprophylaxis was implemented in critically ill patients suffering from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia to reduce mortality and improve clinical outcome. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of this intervention on clinical outcome. METHODS: In this mono-centric, controlled, before-after study, all consecutive adult patients with confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia admitted to ICU from March 13th to April 20th 2020 were included. A thromboprophylaxis protocol, including augmented LMWH dosing, individually tailored with anti-Xa measurements and twice-weekly ultrasonography screening for DVT, was implemented on March 31th 2020. Primary endpoint is one-month mortality. Secondary outcomes include two-week and three-week mortality, the incidence of VTE, acute kidney injury and continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT). Multiple regression modelling was used to correct for differences between the two groups. RESULTS: 46 patients were included in the before group, 26 patients in the after group. One month mortality decreased from 39.13% to 3.85% (p < 0.001). After correction for confounding variables, one-month mortality was significantly higher in the before group (p = 0.02, OR 8.86 (1.46, 53.75)). The cumulative incidence of VTE and CRRT was respectively 41% and 30.4% in the before group and dropped to 15% (p = 0.03) and 3.8% (p = 0.01), respectively. After correction for confounding variables, risk of VTE (p = 0.03, 6.01 (1.13, 32.12)) and CRRT (p = 0.02, OR 19.21 (1.44, 255.86)) remained significantly higher in the before group. CONCLUSION: Mortality, cumulative risk of VTE and need for CRRT may be significantly reduced in COVID-19 patients by implementation of a more aggressive thromboprophylaxis protocol. Future research should focus on confirmation of these results in a randomized design and on uncovering the mechanisms underlying these observations. REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04394000.status: publishe

Acute kidney injury in critical COVID-19 : a multicenter cohort analysis in seven large hospitals in Belgium

Background Acute kidney injury (AKI) has been reported as a frequent complication of critical COVID-19. We aimed to evaluate the occurrence of AKI and use of kidney replacement therapy (KRT) in critical COVID-19, to assess patient and kidney outcomes and risk factors for AKI and differences in outcome when the diagnosis of AKI is based on urine output (UO) or on serum creatinine (sCr). Methods Multicenter, retrospective cohort analysis of patients with critical COVID-19 in seven large hospitals in Belgium. AKI was defined according to KDIGO within 21 days after ICU admission. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to explore the risk factors for developing AKI and to assess the association between AKI and ICU mortality. Results Of 1286 patients, 85.1% had AKI, and KRT was used in 9.8%. Older age, obesity, a higher APACHE II score and use of mechanical ventilation at day 1 of ICU stay were associated with an increased risk for AKI. After multivariable adjustment, all AKI stages were associated with ICU mortality. AKI was based on sCr in 40.1% and UO in 81.5% of patients. All AKI stages based on sCr and AKI stage 3 based on UO were associated with ICU mortality. Persistent AKI was present in 88.6% and acute kidney disease (AKD) in 87.6%. Rapid reversal of AKI yielded a better prognosis compared to persistent AKI and AKD. Kidney recovery was observed in 47.4% of surviving AKI patients. Conclusions Over 80% of critically ill COVID-19 patients had AKI. This was driven by the high occurrence rate of AKI defined by UO criteria. All AKI stages were associated with mortality (NCT04997915)