medigraphic.com
ISSN 2078-7170 (Electronic)

2013, Number 1

<< Back Next >>

CorSalud 2013; 5 (1)

Almanac 2012: Adult cardiac surgery. The National Society Journals present selected research that has driven recent advances in Clinical Cardiology

Bridgewater B

Language: Spanish
References: 98
Page: 17-29
PDF size: 406.34 Kb.


ABSTRACT

This review covers the important publications in adult cardiac surgery in the last few years, including the current evidence base for surgical revascularisation and the use of off-pump surgery, bilateral internal mammary arteries and endoscopic vein harvesting. The changes in conventional aortic valve surgery are described alongside the outcomes of clinical trials and registries for transcatheter aortic valve implantation, and the introduction of less invasive and novel approaches of conventional aortic valve replacement surgery. Surgery for mitral valve disease is also considered, with particular reference to surgery for asymptomatic degenerative mitral regurgitation.


REFERENCES

  1. Bridgewater B, Kinsman R, Walton P, et al. Demonstrating Quality; The Sixth National Annual Cardiac Database Report. Henley-on Thames: Dendrite Clinical Systems Ltd, 2009.

  2. ElBardissi AW, Aranki SF, Sheng S, et al. Trends in isolated coronary artery bypass grafting: an analysis of the Society of Thoracic Surgeons adult cardiac surgery database. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2012; 143:273-81.

  3. Bridgewater B. Cardiac registers: the adult cardiac surgery register. Heart 2010;96:1441-3.

  4. Serruys PW, Morice MC, Kappetein AP, et al. Per-cutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary-artery bypass grafting for severe coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 2009;360:961-72.

  5. Kappetein AP, Feldman TE, Mack MJ, et al. Com-parison of coronary bypass surgery with drug-eluting stenting for the treatment of left main and/ or three-vessel disease: 3-year follow-up of the SYNTAX trial. Eur Heart J 2011;32:2125-34.

  6. Weintraub WS, Grau-Sepulveda MV, Weiss JM, et al. Comparative effectiveness of revascularization strategies. N Engl J Med 2012;366:1467-76.

  7. Lee MS, Yang T, Dhoot J, et al. Meta-analysis of clinical studies comparing coronary artery bypass grafting with percutaneous coronary intervention and drug-eluting stents in patients with unpro-tected left main coronary artery narrowings. Am J Cardiol 2010;105:1070-5.

  8. Naik H, White AJ, Chakravarty T, et al. A meta- analysis of 3,773 patients treated with percuta-neous coronary intervention or surgery for unpro-tected left main coronary artery stenosis. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2009;2:739-47.

  9. Morice MC, Serruys PW, Kappetein AP, et al. Out-comes in patients with de novo left main disease treated with either percutaneous coronary inter-vention using paclitaxel-eluting stents or coronary artery bypass graft treatment in the Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with TAXUS and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) trial. Circula-tion 2010;121:2645-53.

  10. Park SJ, Kim YH, Park DW, et al. Randomized trial of stents versus bypass surgery for left main coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 2011;364:1718-27.

  11. Boudriot E, Thiele H, Walther T, et al. Randomized comparison of percutaneous coronary intervention with sirolimus-eluting stents versus coronary artery bypass grafting in unprotected left main stem stenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011;57:538-45.

  12. Capodanno D, Tamburino C. Unraveling the EXCEL: promises and challenges of the next trial of left main percutaneous coronary intervention. Int J Cardiol 2012;156:1-3.

  13. Capodanno D, Caggegi A, Capranzano P, et al. Validating the EXCEL hypothesis: a propensity score matched 3-year comparison of percutaneous coro-nary intervention versus coronary artery bypass graft in left main patients with SYNTAX score ≤32. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2011;77:936-43.

  14. Wijns W, Kolh P, Danchin N, et al. Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur Heart J 2010;31: 2501-55.

  15. Ribichini F, Taggart D. Implications of new ESC/ EACTS guidelines on myocardial revascularisation for patients with multi-vessel coronary artery disease. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2011;39:619-22.

  16. Taggart DP, Boyle R, de Belder MA, et al. The 2010 ESC/EACTS guidelines on myocardial revascularisa-tion. Heart 2011;97:445-6.

  17. Falk V, Taggart DP. NICE guidance for off-pump CABG: turn off the pump. Heart 2011;97:1731-3.

  18. Pepper JR. NICE guidance for off-pump CABG: keep the pump primed. Heart 2011;97:1728-30.

  19. Shroyer AL, Grover FL, Hattler B, et al. On-pump versus off-pump coronary-artery bypass surgery. N Engl J Med 2009;361:1827-37.

  20. Puskas JD, Mack MJ, Smith CR. On-pump versus off-pump CABG. N Engl J Med 2010;362:851; author reply 53-4.

  21. Zenati MA, Shroyer AL, Collins JF, et al. Impact of endoscopic versus open saphenous vein harvest technique on late coronary artery bypass grafting patient outcomes in the ROOBY (Randomized On/ Off Bypass) Trial. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2011; 141:338-44.

  22. Moller CH, Perko MJ, Lund JT, et al. Three-year follow-up in a subset of high-risk patients randomly assigned to off-pump versus on-pump coronary artery bypass surgery: the Best Bypass Surgery trial. Heart 2011;97:907-13.

  23. Hueb W, Lopes NH, Pereira AC, et al. Five-year follow-up of a randomized comparison between off-pump and on-pump stable multivessel coronary artery bypass grafting. The MASS III Trial. Circula-tion 2010;122(Suppl 11):S48-52.

  24. Lamy A, Devereaux PJ, Prabhakaran D, et al. Off-pump or on-pump coronary-artery bypass grafting at 30 days. N Engl J Med 2012;366(16):1489-97.

  25. Kuss O, von Salviati B, Borgermann J. Off-pump versus on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting: a systematic review and meta-analysis of propensity score analyses. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2010;140: 829-35, 35 e1-13.

  26. Puskas JD, Thourani VH, Kilgo P, et al. Off-pump coronary artery bypass disproportionately benefits high-risk patients. Ann Thorac Surg 2009;88:1142-7.

  27. Angelini GD, Culliford L, Smith DK, et al. Effects of on-and off-pump coronary artery surgery on graft patency, survival, and health-related quality of life: long-term follow-up of 2 randomized controlled trials. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2009;137:295-303.

  28. Anastasiadis K, Argiriadou H, Kosmidis MH, et al. Neurocognitive outcome after coronary artery bypass surgery using minimal versus conventional extracorporeal circulation: a randomised controlled pilot study. Heart 2011;97:1082-8.

  29. Lopes RD, Hafley GE, Allen KB, et al. Endoscopic versus open vein-graft harvesting in coronary-artery bypass surgery. N Engl J Med 2009;361:235-44.

  30. Grant SW, Grayson AD, Zacharias J, et al. What is the impact of endoscopic vein harvesting on clinical outcomes following coronary artery bypass graft surgery? Heart 2012;98:604.

  31. Ouzounian M, Hassan A, Buth KJ, et al. Impact of endoscopic versus open saphenous vein harvest techniques on outcomes after coronary artery by-pass grafting. Ann Thorac Surg 2010;89:403-8.

  32. Taggart DP, Altman DG, Gray AM, et al. Random-ized trial to compare bilateral vs. single internal mammary coronary artery bypass grafting: 1-year results of the Arterial Revascularisation Trial (ART). Eur Heart J 2010;31:2470-81.

  33. Grau JB, Ferrari G, Mak AW, et al. Propensity matched analysis of bilateral internal mammary artery versus single left internal mammary artery grafting at 17-year follow-up: validation of a con-temporary surgical experience. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2012;41:770-5; discussion 76.

  34. Goldman S, Sethi GK, Holman W, et al. Radial artery grafts vs saphenous vein grafts in coronary artery bypass surgery: a randomized trial. JAMA 2011; 305:167-74.

  35. Levisman JM, Budoff MJ, Karlsberg RP. Long-term coronary artery graft patency as evaluated by 64-slice coronary computed tomographic angiography. Coron Artery Dis 2011;22:521-5.

  36. Achouh P, Boutekadjirt R, Toledano D, et al. Long-term (5-to 20-year) patency of the radial artery for coronary bypass grafting. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2010;140:73-9, 79 e1-2.

  37. Hayward PA, Buxton BF. The Radial Artery Patency and Clinical Outcomes trial: design, intermediate term results and future direction. Heart Lung Circ 2011;20:187-92.

  38. Hayward PA, Gordon IR, Hare DL, et al. Comparable patencies of the radial artery and right internal thoracic artery or saphenous vein beyond 5 years: results from the Radial Artery Patency and Clinical Outcomes trial. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2010;139: 60-5; discussion 65-7.

  39. Pegg TJ, Maunsell Z, Karamitsos TD, et al. Utility of cardiac biomarkers for the diagnosis of type V myocardial infarction after coronary artery bypass grafting: insights from serial cardiac MRI. Heart 2011;97:810-16.

  40. Westenbrink BD, Kleijn L, de Boer RA, et al. Sus-tained postoperative anaemia is associated with an impaired outcome after coronary artery bypass graft surgery: insights from the IMAGINE trial. Heart 2011;97:1590-6.

  41. Smith KM, McKelvie RS, Thorpe KE, et al. Six-year follow-up of a randomised controlled trial exam-ining hospital versus home-based exercise training after coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Heart 2011;97:1169-74.

  42. Velazquez EJ, Lee KL, Deja MA, et al. Coronary-artery bypass surgery in patients with left ven-tricular dysfunction. N Engl J Med 2011;364:1607-16.

  43. Bonow RO, Maurer G, Lee KL, et al. Myocardial viability and survival in ischemic left ventricular dysfunction. N Engl J Med 2011;364:1617-25.

  44. Mack MJ. Coronary artery disease: how should the STICH trial results affect clinical practice? Nat Rev Cardiol 2011;8:427-8.

  45. Velazquez EJ, Williams JB, Yow E, et al. Long-term survival of patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy treated by coronary artery bypass grafting versus medical therapy. Ann Thorac Surg 2012;93:523-30.

  46. Brown JM, O’Brien SM, Wu C, et al. Isolated aortic valve replacement in North America comprising 108,687 patients in 10 years: changes in risks, valve types, and outcomes in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons National Database. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2009;137:82-90.

  47. Cockburn J, Trivedi U, Hildick-Smith D. Transaortic transcatheter aortic valve implantation within a previous bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2011;78:479-84.

  48. Dunning J, Gao H, Chambers J, et al. Aortic valve surgery: marked increases in volume and significant decreases in mechanical valve usedan analysis of 41,227 patients over 5 years from the Society for Cardiothoracic Surgery in Great Britain and Ireland National database. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2011; 142:776-82 e3.

  49. Grant SW, Devbhandari MP, Grayson AD, et al. What is the impact of providing a transcatheter aortic valve implantation service on conventional aortic valve surgical activity: patient risk factors and outcomes in the first 2 years. Heart 2010;96:1633-7.

  50. Kang DH, Park SJ, Rim JH, et al. Early surgery versus conventional treatment in asymptomatic very severe aortic stenosis. Circulation 2010;121:1502-9.

  51. Brown ML, Pellikka PA, Schaff HV, et al. The benefits of early valve replacement in asympto- matic patients with severe aortic stenosis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2008;135:308-15.

  52. Le Tourneau T, Pellikka PA, Brown ML, et al. Clinical outcome of asymptomatic severe aortic stenosis with medical and surgical management: impor-tance of STS score at diagnosis. Ann Thorac Surg 2010;90:1876-83.

  53. Avakian SD, Grinberg M, Ramires JA, et al. Outcome of adults with asymptomatic severe aortic stenosis. Int J Cardiol 2008;123:322-7.

  54. Leon MB, Smith CR, Mack M, et al. Transcatheter aortic-valve implantation for aortic stenosis in patients who cannot undergo surgery. N Engl J Med 2010;363:1597-607.

  55. Reynolds MR, Magnuson EA, Lei Y, et al. Health-related quality of life after transcatheter aortic valve replacement in inoperable patients with severe aortic stenosis. Circulation 2011;124:1964-72.

  56. Reynolds MR, Magnuson EA, Wang K, et al. Cost-effectiveness of transcatheter aortic valve replace-ment compared with standard care among inoper-able patients with severe aortic stenosis: results from the placement of aortic transcatheter valves (PARTNER) trial (Cohort B). Circulation 2012;125: 1102-9.

  57. Smith CR, Leon MB, Mack MJ, et al. Transcatheter versus surgical aortic-valve replacement in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med 2011;364:2187-98.

  58. Kodali SK, Williams MR, Smith CR, et al. Two-year outcomes after transcatheter or surgical aortic-valve replacement. N Engl J Med 2012;366:1686-95.

  59. Moat NE, Ludman P, de Belder MA, et al. Long-term outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implanta-tion in high-risk patients with severe aortic ste-nosis: the U.K. TAVI (United Kingdom Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation) Registry. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011;58:2130-8.

  60. Zahn R, Gerckens U, Grube E, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation: first results from a multi-centre real-world registry. Eur Heart J 2011;32:198-204.

  61. Lefevre T, Kappetein AP, Wolner E, et al. One year follow-up of the multi-centre European PARTNER transcatheter heart valve study. Eur Heart J 2011; 32:148-57.

  62. Gilard M, Eltchaninoff H, Iung B, et al. Registry of transcatheter aortic-valve implantation in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med 2012;366:1705-15.

  63. Ussia GP, Barbanti M, Colombo A, et al. Impact of coronary artery disease in elderly patients under-going transcatheter aortic valve implantation: insight from the Italian CoreValve Registry. Int J Cardiol. Published Online First: 27 March 2012 PMID: 22459391.

  64. Eltchaninoff H, Durand E, Borz B, et al. Prospective analysis of 30-day safety and performance of transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implanta-tion with Edwards SAPIEN XT versus SAPIEN pros-theses. Arch Cardiovasc Dis 2012;105:132-40.

  65. Bapat V, Khawaja MZ, Attia R, et al. Transaortic Transcatheter Aortic valve implantation using Edwards Sapien valve: a novel approach. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2012;79:733-40.

  66. Litzler PY, Borz B, Smail H, et al. Transapical aortic valve implantation in Rouen: four years’ experience with the Edwards transcatheter prosthesis. Arch Cardiovasc Dis 2012;105:141-5.

  67. Murtuza B, Pepper JR, Stanbridge RD, et al. Minimal access aortic valve replacement: is it worth it? Ann Thorac Surg 2008;85:1121-31.

  68. Brown ML, McKellar SH, Sundt TM, et al. Mini-sternotomy versus conventional sternotomy for aortic valve replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2009;137: 670-9 e5.

  69. Zannis K, Folliguet T, Laborde F. New sutureless aortic valve prosthesis: another tool in less invasive aortic valve replacement. Curr Opin Cardiol 2012; 27:125-9.

  70. Folliguet TA, Laborde F, Zannis K, et al. Sutureless perceval aortic valve replacement: results of two European centers. Ann Thorac Surg 2012;93:1483-8.

  71. Holmes DR Jr, Mack MJ, Kaul S, et al. 2012 ACCF/ AATS/SCAI/STS expert consensus document on transcatheter aortic valve replacement. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012;59:1200-54.

  72. Dewey TM, Herbert MA, Ryan WH, et al. Influence of surgeon volume on outcomes with aortic valve replacement. Ann Thorac Surg 2012;93:1107-12; discussion 12-3.

  73. Gammie JS, Sheng S, Griffith BP, et al. Trends in mitral valve surgery in the United States: results from the Society of thoracic surgeons adult cardiac surgery database. Ann Thorac Surg 2009;87:1431-7; discussion 37-9.

  74. Anyanwu AC, Bridgewater B, Adams DH. The lottery of mitral valve repair surgery. Heart 2010;96:1964-7.

  75. Enriquez-Sarano M, Avierinos JF, Messika-Zeitoun D, et al. Quantitative determinants of the outcome of asymptomatic mitral regurgitation. N Engl J Med 2005;352:875-83.

  76. Kang DH, Kim JH, Rim JH, et al. Comparison of early surgery versus conventional treatment in asymp-tomatic severe mitral regurgitation. Circulation 2009;119:797-804.

  77. Montant P, Chenot F, Robert A, et al. Long-term survival in asymptomatic patients with severe de-generative mitral regurgitation: a propensity score-based comparison between an early surgical strategy and a conservative treatment approach. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2009;138:1339-48.

  78. Rosenhek R, Rader F, Klaar U, et al. Outcome of watchful waiting in asymptomatic severe mitral regurgitation. Circulation 2006;113:2238-44.

  79. Rosenhek R. Watchful waiting for severe mitral regurgitation. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2011; 23:203-8.

  80. Bonow RO, Carabello BA, Kanu C, et al. ACC/AHA 2006 guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines (writing committee to revise the 1998 guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease): developed in collaboration with the Society of cardiovascular Anesthesiologists: en-dorsed by the Society for cardiovascular angio-graphy and interventions and the Society of thoracic surgeons. Circulation 2006;114:e84-231.

  81. Bridgewater B, Hooper T, Munsch C, et al. Mitral repair best practice: proposed standards. Heart 2006;92:939-44.

  82. Bolling SF, Li S, O’Brien SM, et al. Predictors of mitral valve repair: clinical and surgeon factors. Ann Thorac Surg 2010;90:1904-11; discussion 12.

  83. Gammie JS, O’Brien SM, Griffith BP, et al. Influence of hospital procedural volume on care process and mortality for patients undergoing elective surgery for mitral regurgitation. Circulation 2007;115:881-7.

  84. Perier P, Hohenberger W, Lakew F, et al. Toward a new paradigm for the reconstruction of posterior leaflet prolapse: midterm results of the “respect rather than resect” approach. Ann Thorac Surg 2008;86:718-25; discussion 18-25.

  85. Gammie JS, Bartlett ST, Griffith BP. Small-incision mitral valve repair: safe, durable, and approaching perfection. Ann Surg 2009;250:409-15.

  86. Gammie JS, Zhao Y, Peterson ED, et al. J. Maxwell Chamberlain Memorial Paper for adult cardiac sur-gery. Less-invasive mitral valve operations: trends and outcomes from the Society of thoracic sur-geons adult cardiac surgery database. Ann Thorac Surg 2010;90:1401-8, 10 e1; discussion 08-10.

  87. Modi P, Hassan A, Chitwood WR Jr. Minimally in-vasive mitral valve surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2008;34: 943-52.

  88. Cheng DC, Martin J, Lal A, et al. Minimally invasive versus conventional open mitral valve surgery: a meta-analysis and systematic review. Innovations (Phila) 2011;6:84-103.

  89. Iribarne A, Russo MJ, Easterwood R, et al. Mi-nimally invasive versus sternotomy approach for mitral valve surgery: a propensity analysis. Ann Thorac Surg 2010;90:1471-7; discussion 77-8.

  90. Whitlow PL, Feldman T, Pedersen WR, et al. Acute and 12-month results with catheter-based mitral valve leaflet repair: the EVEREST II (Endovascular Valve Edgeto-Edge Repair) High Risk Study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012;59:130-9.

  91. Shahian DM, Edwards FH. The Society of Thoracic Surgeons 2008 cardiac surgery risk models: intro-duction. Ann Thorac Surg 2009;88(Suppl 1):S1.

  92. O’Brien SM, Shahian DM, Filardo G, et al. The Society of Thoracic Surgeons 2008 cardiac surgery risk models: part 2--isolated valve surgery. Ann Thorac Surg 2009;88 (1 Suppl):S23-42.

  93. Shahian DM, O’Brien SM, Filardo G, et al. The Society of Thoracic Surgeons 2008 cardiac surgery risk models: part 3--valve plus coronary artery by-pass grafting surgery. Ann Thorac Surg 2009;88(1 Suppl):S43-62.

  94. Shahian DM, O’Brien SM, Filardo G, et al. The Society of Thoracic Surgeons 2008 cardiac surgery risk models: part 1--coronary artery bypass grafting surgery. Ann Thorac Surg 2009;88(1 Suppl):S2-22.

  95. Choong CK, Sergeant P, Nashef SA, et al. The EuroSCORE risk stratification system in the current era: how accurate is it and what should be done if it is inaccurate? Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2009;35:59-61.

  96. Nashef SA, Roques F, Sharples LD, et al. EuroSCORE II. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2012;41:734-44; dis- cussion 44-5.

  97. Miceli A, Bruno VD, Capoun R, et al. Mild renal dysfunction in patients undergoing cardiac surgery as a new risk factor for EuroSCORE. Heart 2011; 97:362-5.

  98. Sergeant P, Meuris B, Pettinari M. EuroSCORE II, illum qui est gravitates magni observe. Eur J Cardio-thorac Surg 2012;41:729-3




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com