Contes de Nadal i malsons

Abstract not availabl

The Ross procedure in young adults: over 20 years of experience in our Institution†

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term outcomes following the Ross procedure in young adults in our institution. METHODS: All adult patients who received a Ross operation between 1991 and 2014 were included in the study. Survival analysis and regression analysis were performed. Survival of the Ross cohort was compared with the age-, gender- and calendar year-matched general population. RESULTS: Three hundred-and-six patients (mean age: 41.7 ± 9.7, male: 74.8%, bicuspid aortic valve: 58.5%, valve stenosis: 68%) were included in the analysis. There were 7 perioperative deaths (2.3%). Nine patients were lost to follow-up from hospital and completeness of the follow-up was 94%. The median follow-up of the remaining 290 patients was 10.6 years. There were 21 late deaths of which only 3 were valve-related. The overall survival at 15 years since surgery is 88 ± 3% that is comparable with the matched population. Freedom from valve-related deaths was 96.8 ± 2% at 16 years. Freedom from autograft and pulmonary homograft reoperation was 74.5 ± 4.3% at 16 years. Preoperative aortic regurgitation was the only significant predictor of autograft failure over time. Freedom from the combined end point of bleeding/thromboembolism/endocarditis/reoperation was 69.2 ± 4% at 16 years. Perioperative mortality following reoperation was 2.6% and the autograft could be spared in 72% of reinterventions. CONCLUSIONS: The Ross operation in young adults is associated with an excellent survival in the long term that is comparable with the general population. Although there is a risk of reoperation, incidence of other valve-related events is very low. The use of pulmonary autograft should be considered in any young adult patient requiring aortic valve replacement

A New Simple and Objective Method for Graft Sizing in Valve-Sparing Root Replacement Using the Reimplantation Technique

The methods of graft sizing in valve-sparing surgery are criticized for their complexity and subjectivity in application. We propose a simple method for graft sizing in valve-sparing root replacement using the reimplantation technique. Practically, the height of the commissure between the noncoronary cusp and the left coronary cusp give the size of the graft. This new method of graft sizing was successfully applied in the last 27 consecutive patients with good immediate results. Graft sizing with this objective and reproducible simple method results in restoration of normal aortic valve geometry and function

Aortic valve repair with patch in non-rheumatic disease: indication, techniques and durability†

OBJECTIVES: To analyse the long-term outcomes of aortic valve (AV) repair with biological patch in patient with non-rheumatic valve disease. METHODS: From 1995 to 2011, 554 patients underwent elective (AV) repair; among them, 57 (mean age 45 ± 17 years) had cusp restoration using patch for non-rheumatic valve disease. Seven (12%) patients had unicuspid valve, 30 (53%) patients had bicuspid valve and 20 (35%) had tricuspid valve. Autologous pericardium was used in 26 patients (7 treated, 19 non-treated), bovine pericardium in 26, autologous tricuspid valve leaflet in 4 and aortic homograft cusp in 1. Patching was used to repair perforation (n = 20, 35%), commissural defect (n = 18, 32%), raphe repair (n = 17, 30%) or for cusp extension (n = 2, 3.5%). Echocardiographic and clinical follow-up was 98% complete and mean follow-up was 72 ± 42.5 months. RESULTS: No hospital mortality. At 8 years, overall survival was 90 ± 5% and freedom from valve-related death was 96 ± 3%. Two patients (3.5%) needed early reoperation for aortic regurgitation (AR); they underwent re-repair and the Ross procedure, respectively. Late reoperation was necessary in 9 patients (16%) for AR (n = 4), stenosis (n = 3) or mixed disease (n = 2). They had the Ross procedure (n = 6) or prosthetic valve replacement (n = 3) with no mortality. At 8 years, freedom from reoperation was 75 ± 9%. Freedom from reoperation was slightly higher in tricuspid compared with non-tricuspid valves (92 ± 7 vs 68 ± 11%, P = 0.18) and slightly higher for bovine (95 ± 5%) compared with autologous pericardium (73 ± 11%, P = 0.38), but differences were statistically not significant. In tricuspid valves, freedom from reoperation was higher in perforation repair compared with other techniques (100 vs 50 ± 35%, P = 0.02). In bicuspid valves, freedom from reoperation was similar between different repair techniques (P = 0.38). Late echocardiography showed AR 0-1 in 30 (53%) patients, AR 2 in 12 (21%) and no AR ≥ 3. Three patients presented a mean transvalvular gradient of 30-40 mmHg. Thromboembolic events occurred in 2 patients (0.6%/patient-year), bleeding events in 1 (0.3% /patient-year) and no endocarditis occurred. CONCLUSIONS: AV repair with biological patch is feasible for various aetiologies. The techniques are safe and medium-term durability is acceptable, even excellent for perforation repair in tricuspid valve morphology. Bovine pericardium is a good alternative to autologous pericardium

The role of annular dimension and annuloplasty in tricuspid aortic valve repair†

OBJECTIVES: Valve sparing reimplantation can improve the durability of bicuspid aortic valve repair compared with subcommissural annuloplasty, especially in patients with a large basal ring. This study analyses the effect of basal ring size and annuloplasty on valve repair in the setting of a tricuspid aortic valve. METHODS: From 1995 to 2013, 382 patients underwent elective tricuspid aortic valve repair. We included only those undergoing subcommissural annuloplasty, valve sparing reimplantation or no annuloplasty and in whom intraoperative transoesophageal echocardiography images were available for retrospective pre- and post-repair basal ring measurements (n = 323, subcommissural annuloplasty: 146, valve sparing reimplantation: 154, no annuloplasty: 23). In a subgroup of patients with available echocardiographic images, basal ring was retrospectively measured at the latest follow-up or prior to reoperation. subcommissural annuloplasty and valve sparing reimplantation were compared after matching for degree of aortic regurgitation and root size. RESULTS: All three groups differed significantly for most of preoperative characteristics. Hospital mortality was 0.9%. The median follow-up was 4.7 years. At 8 years, overall survival was 80 ± 5%. Freedom from reoperation and freedom from aortic regurgitation >1+ were 92 ± 5% and 71 ± 8%, respectively. In multivariate analysis, predictors of aortic regurgitation >1+ were left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (P = 0.003), cusp repair (P = 0.006), body surface area (P = 0.01) and subcommissural annuloplasty (P = 0.05). In subcommissural annuloplasty, freedom from aortic regurgitation >1+ was lower for patients with basal ring ≥28 mm compared with patients with basal ring 1+ was independent of basal ring size (P = 0.38). In matched comparison between subcommissural annuloplasty and valve sparing reimplantation, freedom from aortic regurgitation >1+ was not significantly different (P = 0.06), but in patients with basal ring ≥28 mm, valve sparing reimplantation was superior to subcommissural annuloplasty (P = 0.04). Despite similar intraoperative reduction in basal ring size in subcommissural annuloplasty and valve sparing reimplantation, patients with subcommissural annuloplasty exhibited greater increase in basal ring size during the follow-up compared with the valve sparing reimplantation group (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: As with a bicuspid aortic valve, a large basal ring predicts recurrence of aortic regurgitation in patients with tricuspid aortic valve undergoing repair with the subcommissural annuloplasty technique. This recurrence is caused by basal ring dilatation over time after subcommissural annuloplasty. With the valve sparing reimplantation technique, large basal ring did not predict aortic regurgitation recurrence, as prosthetic-based circumferential annuloplasty displayed better stability over time. Stable circumferential annuloplasty is recommended in tricuspid aortic valve repair whenever the basal ring size is ≥28 mm

Machine learning algorithms performed no better than regression models for prognostication in traumatic brain injury

Objective: We aimed to explore the added value of common machine learning (ML) algorithms for prediction of outcome for moderate and severe traumatic brain injury. Study Design and Setting: We performed logistic regression (LR), lasso regression, and ridge regression with key baseline predictors in the IMPACT-II database (15 studies, n = 11,022). ML algorithms included support vector machines, random forests, gradient boosting machines, and artificial neural networks and were trained using the same predictors. To assess generalizability of predictions, we performed internal, internal-external, and external validation on the recent CENTER-TBI study (patients with Glasgow Coma Scale <13, n = 1,554). Both calibration (calibration slope/intercept) and discrimination (area under the curve) was quantified. Results: In the IMPACT-II database, 3,332/11,022 (30%) died and 5,233(48%) had unfavorable outcome (Glasgow Outcome Scale less than 4). In the CENTER-TBI study, 348/1,554(29%) died and 651(54%) had unfavorable outcome. Discrimination and calibration varied widely between the studies and less so between the studied algorithms. The mean area under the curve was 0.82 for mortality and 0.77 for unfavorable outcomes in the CENTER-TBI study. Conclusion: ML algorithms may not outperform traditional regression approaches in a low-dimensional setting for outcome prediction after moderate or severe traumatic brain injury. Similar to regression-based prediction models, ML algorithms should be rigorously validated to ensure applicability to new populations

Variation in Structure and Process of Care in Traumatic Brain Injury: Provider Profiles of European Neurotrauma Centers Participating in the CENTER-TBI Study.

INTRODUCTION: The strength of evidence underpinning care and treatment recommendations in traumatic brain injury (TBI) is low. Comparative effectiveness research (CER) has been proposed as a framework to provide evidence for optimal care for TBI patients. The first step in CER is to map the existing variation. The aim of current study is to quantify variation in general structural and process characteristics among centers participating in the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study. METHODS: We designed a set of 11 provider profiling questionnaires with 321 questions about various aspects of TBI care, chosen based on literature and expert opinion. After pilot testing, questionnaires were disseminated to 71 centers from 20 countries participating in the CENTER-TBI study. Reliability of questionnaires was estimated by calculating a concordance rate among 5% duplicate questions. RESULTS: All 71 centers completed the questionnaires. Median concordance rate among duplicate questions was 0.85. The majority of centers were academic hospitals (n = 65, 92%), designated as a level I trauma center (n = 48, 68%) and situated in an urban location (n = 70, 99%). The availability of facilities for neuro-trauma care varied across centers; e.g. 40 (57%) had a dedicated neuro-intensive care unit (ICU), 36 (51%) had an in-hospital rehabilitation unit and the organization of the ICU was closed in 64% (n = 45) of the centers. In addition, we found wide variation in processes of care, such as the ICU admission policy and intracranial pressure monitoring policy among centers. CONCLUSION: Even among high-volume, specialized neurotrauma centers there is substantial variation in structures and processes of TBI care. This variation provides an opportunity to study effectiveness of specific aspects of TBI care and to identify best practices with CER approaches

Primary versus early secondary referral to a specialized neurotrauma center in patients with moderate/severe traumatic brain injury: a CENTER TBI study

Funder: ZNS - Hannelore Kohl Stiftung; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100007731Funder: Integra LifeSciences CorporationFunder: OneMindAbstract: Background: Prehospital care for patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) varies with some emergency medical systems recommending direct transport of patients with moderate to severe TBI to hospitals with specialist neurotrauma care (SNCs). The aim of this study is to assess variation in levels of early secondary referral within European SNCs and to compare the outcomes of directly admitted and secondarily transferred patients. Methods: Patients with moderate and severe TBI (Glasgow Coma Scale < 13) from the prospective European CENTER-TBI study were included in this study. All participating hospitals were specialist neuroscience centers. First, adjusted between-country differences were analysed using random effects logistic regression where early secondary referral was the dependent variable, and a random intercept for country was included. Second, the adjusted effect of early secondary referral on survival to hospital discharge and functional outcome [6 months Glasgow Outcome Scale Extended (GOSE)] was estimated using logistic and ordinal mixed effects models, respectively. Results: A total of 1347 moderate/severe TBI patients from 53 SNCs in 18 European countries were included. Of these 1347 patients, 195 (14.5%) were admitted after early secondary referral. Secondarily referred moderate/severe TBI patients presented more often with a CT abnormality: mass lesion (52% vs. 34%), midline shift (54% vs. 36%) and acute subdural hematoma (77% vs. 65%). After adjusting for case-mix, there was a large European variation in early secondary referral, with a median OR of 1.69 between countries. Early secondary referral was not associated with functional outcome (adjusted OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.78–1.69), nor with survival at discharge (1.05, 0.58–1.90). Conclusions: Across Europe, substantial practice variation exists in the proportion of secondarily referred TBI patients at SNCs that is not explained by case mix. Within SNCs early secondary referral does not seem to impact functional outcome and survival after stabilisation in a non-specialised hospital. Future research should identify which patients with TBI truly benefit from direct transportation

Variation in general supportive and preventive intensive care management of traumatic brain injury: a survey in 66 neurotrauma centers participating in the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study

Abstract Background General supportive and preventive measures in the intensive care management of traumatic brain injury (TBI) aim to prevent or limit secondary brain injury and optimize recovery. The aim of this survey was to assess and quantify variation in perceptions on intensive care unit (ICU) management of patients with TBI in European neurotrauma centers. Methods We performed a survey as part of the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study. We analyzed 23 questions focused on: 1) circulatory and respiratory management; 2) fever control; 3) use of corticosteroids; 4) nutrition and glucose management; and 5) seizure prophylaxis and treatment. Results The survey was completed predominantly by intensivists (n = 33, 50%) and neurosurgeons (n = 23, 35%) from 66 centers (97% response rate). The most common cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP) target was > 60 mmHg (n = 39, 60%) and/or an individualized target (n = 25, 38%). To support CPP, crystalloid fluid loading (n = 60, 91%) was generally preferred over albumin (n = 15, 23%), and vasopressors (n = 63, 96%) over inotropes (n = 29, 44%). The most commonly reported target of partial pressure of carbon dioxide in arterial blood (PaCO2) was 36–40 mmHg (4.8–5.3 kPa) in case of controlled intracranial pressure (ICP) < 20 mmHg (n = 45, 69%) and PaCO2 target of 30–35 mmHg (4–4.7 kPa) in case of raised ICP (n = 40, 62%). Almost all respondents indicated to generally treat fever (n = 65, 98%) with paracetamol (n = 61, 92%) and/or external cooling (n = 49, 74%). Conventional glucose management (n = 43, 66%) was preferred over tight glycemic control (n = 18, 28%). More than half of the respondents indicated to aim for full caloric replacement within 7 days (n = 43, 66%) using enteral nutrition (n = 60, 92%). Indications for and duration of seizure prophylaxis varied, and levetiracetam was mostly reported as the agent of choice for both seizure prophylaxis (n = 32, 49%) and treatment (n = 40, 61%). Conclusions Practice preferences vary substantially regarding general supportive and preventive measures in TBI patients at ICUs of European neurotrauma centers. These results provide an opportunity for future comparative effectiveness research, since a more evidence-based uniformity in good practices in general ICU management could have a major impact on TBI outcome

Variation in neurosurgical management of traumatic brain injury

Background: Neurosurgical management of traumatic brain injury (TBI) is challenging, with only low-quality evidence. We aimed to explore differences in neurosurgical strategies for TBI across Europe. Methods: A survey was sent to 68 centers participating in the Collaborative European Neurotrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study. The questionnaire contained 21 questions, including the decision when to operate (or not) on traumatic acute subdural hematoma (ASDH) and intracerebral hematoma (ICH), and when to perform a decompressive craniectomy (DC) in raised intracranial pressure (ICP). Results: The survey was completed by 68 centers (100%). On average, 10 neurosurgeons work in each trauma center. In all centers, a neurosurgeon was available within 30 min. Forty percent of responders reported a thickness or volume threshold for evacuation of an ASDH. Most responders (78%) decide on a primary DC in evacuating an ASDH during the operation, when swelling is present. For ICH, 3% would perform an evacuation directly to prevent secondary deterioration and 66% only in case of clinical deterioration. Most respondents (91%) reported to consider a DC for refractory high ICP. The reported cut-off ICP for DC in refractory high ICP, however, differed: 60% uses 25 mmHg, 18% 30 mmHg, and 17% 20 mmHg. Treatment strategies varied substantially between regions, specifically for the threshold for ASDH surgery and DC for refractory raised ICP. Also within center variation was present: 31% reported variation within the hospital for inserting an ICP monitor and 43% for evacuating mass lesions. Conclusion: Despite a homogeneous organization, considerable practice variation exists of neurosurgical strategies for TBI in Europe. These results provide an incentive for comparative effectiveness research to determine elements of effective neurosurgical care