A multicentre review comparing long term outcomes of endoscopic vein harvesting versus open vein harvesting for coronary artery bypass surgery [version 1; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations]

Background: Utilisation of the Endoscopic Vein Harvesting (EVH) technique has been increasing for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for the last two decades. Some surgeons remain concerned about the long-term patency of the long saphenous vein harvested endoscopically compared to traditional Open Vein Harvesting (OVH). The aim of this study was to perform a retrospective analysis of the outcomes between EVH and OVH from three UK centres with 10 years follow-up. Methods: 27,024 patients underwent CABG with long saphenous vein harvested by EVH (n=13,794) or OVH (n=13,230) in three UK centres between 2007 and 2019. Propensity modelling was used to calculate the Inverse Probability of Treatment Weights (IPTW). The primary endpoint was mortality from all causes and secondary endpoints were length of hospital stay, postoperative complications, and incidence of repeat coronary re-vascularisation for symptomatic patients. IPTW was used to balance the two intervention groups for baseline and preoperative co-morbidities. Results: Median follow-up time was 4.54 years for EVH and 6.00 years for OVH. Death from any cause occurred in 13.8% of the EVH group versus 20.8% in the OVH group over the follow-up period. The hazard ratio of death (EVH to OVH) was 0.823 (95% CI: 0.767, 0.884). Length of hospital stay was similar between the groups (p=0.86). Post-operative pulmonary complications were more common in EVH vs OVH (14.7% vs. 12.8%, p<0.001), but repeat coronary re-vascularisation was similar between the groups. Conclusion: This large retrospective multicentre analysis indicates that EVH has a lower risk of mortality compared with OVH during the follow-up period of the study. The observed benefits of EVH may outweigh the risks but should be considered on a case-by-case basis. We hope this review gives confidence to other cardiac centres that offering an EVH approach to conduit harvesting does not affect long term patient outcomes

A multicentre review comparing long term outcomes of endoscopic vein harvesting versus open vein harvesting for coronary artery bypass surgery

Background: Utilisation of the Endoscopic Vein Harvesting (EVH) technique has been increasing for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for the last two decades. Some surgeons remain concerned about the long-term patency of the long saphenous vein harvested endoscopically compared to traditional Open Vein Harvesting (OVH). The aim of this study was to perform a retrospective analysis of the outcomes between EVH and OVH from three UK centres with 10 years follow-up.Methods: 27,024 patients underwent CABG with long saphenous vein harvested by EVH (n=13,794) or OVH (n=13,230) in three UK centres between 2007 and 2019. Propensity modelling was used to calculate the Inverse Probability of Treatment Weights (IPTW). The primary endpoint was mortality from all causes and secondary endpoints were length of hospital stay, postoperative complications, and incidence of repeat coronary re-vascularisation for symptomatic patients. IPTW was used to balance the two intervention groups for baseline and preoperative co-morbidities.Results: Median follow-up time was 4.54 years for EVH and 6.00 years for OVH. Death from any cause occurred in 13.8% of the EVH group versus 20.8% in the OVH group over the follow-up period. The hazard ratio of death (EVH to OVH) was 0.823 (95% CI: 0.767, 0.884). Length of hospital stay was similar between the groups (p=0.86). Post-operative pulmonary complications were more common in EVH vs OVH (14.7% vs. 12.8%, p<0.001), but repeat coronary re-vascularisation was similar between the groups.Conclusion: This large retrospective multicentre analysis indicates that EVH has a lower risk of mortality compared with OVH during the follow-up period of the study. The observed benefits of EVH may outweigh the risks but should be considered on a case-by-case basis. We hope this review gives confidence to other cardiac centres that offering an EVH approach to conduit harvesting does not affect long term patient outcomes

The circadian clock protein REVERBα inhibits pulmonary fibrosis development

Pulmonary inflammatory responses lie under circadian control; however, the importance of circadian mechanisms in the underlying fibrotic phenotype is not understood. Here, we identify a striking change to these mechanisms resulting in a gain of amplitude and lack of synchrony within pulmonary fibrotic tissue. These changes result from an infiltration of mesenchymal cells, an important cell type in the pathogenesis of pulmonary fibrosis. Mutation of the core clock protein REVERBα in these cells exacerbated the development of bleomycin-induced fibrosis, whereas mutation of REVERBα in club or myeloid cells had no effect on the bleomycin phenotype. Knockdown of REVERBα revealed regulation of the little-understood transcription factor TBPL1. Both REVERBα and TBPL1 altered integrinβ1 focal-adhesion formation, resulting in increased myofibroblast activation. The translational importance of our findings was established through analysis of 2 human cohorts. In the UK Biobank, circadian strain markers (sleep length, chronotype, and shift work) are associated with pulmonary fibrosis, making them risk factors. In a separate cohort, REVERBα expression was increased in human idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) lung tissue. Pharmacological targeting of REVERBα inhibited myofibroblast activation in IPF fibroblasts and collagen secretion in organotypic cultures from IPF patients, thus suggesting that targeting of REVERBα could be a viable therapeutic approach

Predicting the Need for Mechanical Circulatory Support After High-Risk Cardiac Surgery

Rajamiyer Venkateswaran of the Wythenshawe Hospital in Manchester, UK, asks whether it is possible to predict when a patient undergoing high-risk cardiac surgery will need postoperative mechanical circulatory support. He also discusses his institution's approach to transfering a patient to mechanical circulatory support.<div>This presentation was originally given during the SCTS Ionescu University program at the 2017 Annual Meeting of the Society for Cardiothoracic Surgery in Great Britain and Ireland. This content is published with the permission of <a href="https://scts.org/">SCTS</a>. Please <a href="https://sctsed.org/">click here</a> for more information on SCTS educational programs.<br></div

Postcardiotomy VA-ECMO for refractory cardiogenic shock

Abstract Postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock (PCCS) is a rare but catastrophic syndrome that can occur following separation from cardiopulmonary bypass or at any time during the immediate postoperative course. The management of PCCS varies between clinicians, institutions and countries. The available evidence to guide this practice is limited. In their systematic review and meta-analysis, Khorsandi and colleagues report a synthesis of case-series pertinent to the use of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) for PCCS. Whilst we acknowledge the potential survival benefit for carefully selected patients for what is ordinarily a condition with high mortality, we wish to comment on several aspects of the study in the context of its application to clinical practice