Rachel Easterwood

Minimally invasive versus sternotomy approach for mitral valve surgery: a propensity analysis.

BACKGROUND Over the past decade, minimally invasive (MI) mitral valve surgery has grown in popularity. The purpose of this study was to compare both short- and long-term outcomes of mitral valve repair and replacement performed through a MI versus traditional sternotomy (ST) incision using a propensity analysis approach to account for differences in baseline risk. METHODS From January 2000 to December 2008, a total of 1,121 isolated mitral valve operations were performed at our institution (548 ST, 573 MI). Data were retrospectively collected on all patients, and a logistic regression model was created to predict selection to a MI versus ST approach. Propensity scores were then generated based on the regression model and matched pairs created using 1:1 nearest neighbor matching. There were 382 matched pairs in the analysis for a total sample size of 764, or 68.2% of the original cohort. Major outcomes of interest included cardiopulmonary bypass time, cross-clamp time, hospital length of stay, major in-hospital complications, and both short- and long-term survival. RESULTS Cardiopulmonary bypass time was 117.1 ± 2.0 minutes in the ST group and 139.7 ± 2.6 minutes in the MI group (p < 0.0001), and cross-clamp time was 79.6 ± 1.5 minutes in the ST group and 83.7 ± 1.9 in the MI group (p = 0.106). The average hospital length of stay was 9.81 ± 0.61 days among ST patients and 7.76 ± 0.37 days among MI patients (p = 0.0043). There was no significant difference in the frequency of major in-hospital complications between groups. The mean duration of survival follow-up was 4.2 ± 2.4 years. There was no significant difference in mortality at 30 days (p = 0.622) or 1 year (p = 0.599). In addition, there was no significant difference in long-term survival between groups (p = 0.569). CONCLUSIONS Although minimally invasive mitral valve surgery required a slightly longer cardiopulmonary bypass time, there was no difference in cross-clamp time, morbidity, or mortality, and hospital length of stay was significantly shorter when compared with matched sternotomy control patients.

The golden age of minimally invasive cardiothoracic surgery: current and future perspectives

Over the past decade, minimally invasive cardiothoracic surgery (MICS) has grown in popularity. This growth has been driven, in part, by a desire to translate many of the observed benefits of minimal access surgery, such as decreased pain and reduced surgical trauma, to the cardiac surgical arena. Initial enthusiasm for MICS was tempered by concerns over reduced surgical exposure in highly complex operations and the potential for prolonged operative times and patient safety. With innovations in perfusion techniques, refinement of transthoracic echocardiography and the development of specialized surgical instruments and robotic technology, cardiac surgery was provided with the necessary tools to progress to less invasive approaches. However, much of the early literature on MICS focused on technical reports or small case series. The safety and feasibility of MICS have been demonstrated, yet questions remain regarding the relative efficacy of MICS over traditional sternotomy approaches. Recently, there has been a growth in the body of published literature on MICS long-term outcomes, with most reports suggesting that major cardiac operations that have traditionally been performed through a median sternotomy can be performed through a variety of minimally invasive approaches with equivalent safety and durability. In this article, we examine the technological advancements that have made MICS possible and provide an update on the major areas of cardiac surgery where MICS has demonstrated the most growth, with consideration of current and future directions.

Comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive versus traditional sternotomy mitral valve surgery in elderly patients

OBJECTIVES This study assessed comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive versus traditional sternotomy mitral valve surgery in elderly patients. METHODS From January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2008, 1005 patients underwent isolated mitral valve surgery at our institution. Patients ≥ 75-years-old were included in analysis (sternotomy, n = 105; minimally invasive, n = 70). Clinical outcomes included bypass and crossclamp time, length of hospitalization, morbidity, and mortality. To assess resource use, total hospital costs and discharge location were analyzed. Three standardized inpatient functional status outcomes were also assessed. RESULTS The minimally invasive approach was associated with a 9.2-minute longer crossclamp time (P = .037) and a 25.2-minute longer bypass time (P < .001). Minimally invasive surgery was associated with a 3.1-day shorter hospitalization (P = .033). There were no significant differences in rate of major postoperative complications (P = .085) or long-term survival (P = .60). Minimally invasive approach was associated with a

Post-heart transplant survival is inferior at low-volume centers across all risk strata.

6721 lower median cost of hospitalization (P = .007) and more common discharge to home, routinely or with a health aide, rather than to rehabilitation (P = .021). Minimally invasive patients achieved faster rates of independent ambulation (P = .039) and independent sit-to-stand activity (P = .003), although there were no differences in time to independent stair climbing (P = .31). CONCLUSIONS Among elderly patients, minimally invasive mitral valve surgery is associated with slightly longer crossclamp and bypass times but with equivalent morbidity and mortality and shorter hospitalization, decreased resource use, and improved postoperative functional status.

Quantifying the incremental cost of complications associated with mitral valve surgery in the United States.

Background— Previous studies have demonstrated a relationship between increasing center volume and cardiac transplant outcomes. The purpose of this study was to confirm a relationship between post–heart transplant outcomes and center experience and to determine whether this relationship persists among low- and high-risk heart transplant recipient-donor pairs. Methods and Results— The United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) provided deidentified patient-level data. Analysis included 8029 heart transplant recipients aged ≥18 years and transplanted between January 1, 2001 and December 31, 2006 with follow-up available through February 3, 2009. The primary outcome was observed 1-year posttransplant graft survival. Multivariable logistic regression was used to calculate expected 1-year survival for recipients. Threshold analysis identified 3 discrete risk groups of transplant recipients: high-risk, moderate-risk, and low-risk. Three discrete risk strata for center volume: low (<10.5 recipients/yr), intermediate (10.5 to 47 recipients/yr), and high (>47 recipients/yr) were also identified. &khgr;2 test was used to compare 1-year survival at low- and intermediate- with high-volume centers. In multivariable logistic regression analysis, annual center volume was significantly associated with posttransplant graft survival at 1 year (odds ratio [OR]=0.995, 0.992 to 0.999; P=0.010) and primary graft failure (OR=0.985, 0.972 to 0.997; P=0.015), but not stroke (OR=0.996, 0.990 to 1.003; P=0.295), infection (OR=1.001, 0.998 to 1.003; P=0.613), or dialysis (OR=1.001, 0.997 to 1.005; P=0.522). Log-rank test demonstrated significant difference in survival between volume groups with respect to high-risk (P=0.0032) and low-risk (P=0.00415), but not moderate-risk (P=0.128) patients. Conclusions— A direct relationship existed between increasing center volume and improved graft survival. Across all recipient-donor pair risk strata, posttransplant graft survival at 1 year was significantly lower at low-volume centers. The volume-outcomes relationship was strongest in the highest-risk recipient-donor category.

Integrating economic evaluation methods into clinical and translational science award consortium comparative effectiveness educational goals.

OBJECTIVE The goal of this study was to quantify the net increase in resource use associated with complications after isolated mitral valve surgery. METHODS Deidentified patient-level claims data on a random sample of mitral valve operations performed in the United States from January 1, 2006, to December 31, 2007, were obtained from the National Inpatient Sample (n = 16,788). Patients with major concomitant cardiac procedures were excluded from the analysis for a net sample size of 6297 patients. Risk-adjusted median total hospital costs and length of stay were analyzed by major complications, including pneumonia, sepsis, stroke, renal failure requiring hemodialysis, cardiac tamponade, myocardial infarction, gastrointestinal bleed, and venous thromboembolism. RESULTS There were a total of 1323 complication events that occurred in 1089 patients. The most common complication was pneumonia (n = 346, 5.5%), which was associated with a

Pediatric Cardiac Transplantation Using Hearts Previously Refused for Quality: A Single Center Experience

29,692 increase in hospital costs and a 10.2-day increase in median length of stay (P < .001). The most costly complication was cardiac tamponade, which resulted in an increase in hospital cost of

Long-Term Outcomes With a Minimally Invasive Approach for Resection of Cardiac Masses

56,547 and an increase in length of stay of 19.3 days (P < .001). There was a stepwise association between the hospital costs and length of stay and the number of complications per patient (P < .001). There was also a significant association between the discharge location and the occurrence of a complication, with 25% more patients who underwent routine home discharge when there were no complications (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS In patients undergoing isolated mitral valve surgery, postoperative complications were associated with significant increases in mortality, hospital costs, and length of stay, as well as with discharge location. With growing national attention to improving quality and containing costs, it is important to understand the nature and impact of complications on outcomes and costs.

Should heart transplant recipients with early graft failure be considered for retransplantation

With the ongoing debate over health care reform in the United States, public health and policy makers have paid growing attention to the need for comparative effectiveness research (CER). Recent allocation of federal funds for CER represents a significant move toward increased evidence-based practice and better-informed allocation of constrained health care resources; however, there is also heated debate on how, or whether, CER may contribute to controlling national health care expenditures. Economic evaluation, in the form of cost-effectiveness or cost–benefit analysis, is often an aspect of CER studies, yet there are no recommendations or guidelines for providing clinical investigators with the necessary skills to collect, analyze, and interpret economic data from clinical trials or observational studies. With an emphasis on multidisciplinary research, the Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) consortium and institutional CTSA sites serve as an important resource for training researchers to engage in CER. In this article, the authors discuss the potential role of CTSA sites in integrating economic evaluation methods into their comparative effectiveness education goals, using the Columbia University Medical Center CTSA as an example. By allowing current and future generations of clinical investigators to become fully engaged not only in CER but also in the economic evaluations that result from such analyses, CTSA sites can help develop the necessary foundation for advancing research to guide clinical decision making and efficient use of limited resources.

Low-Dose Donor Dopamine Is Associated With a Decreased Risk of Right Heart Failure in Pediatric Heart Transplant Recipients.

Pediatric donor hearts are regularly refused for donor quality with limited evidence as to which donor parameters are predictive of poor outcomes. We compare outcomes of recipients receiving hearts previously refused by other institutions for quality with the outcomes of recipients of primarily offered hearts. Data for recipients aged ≤18 and their donors were obtained. Specific UNOS refusal codes were used to place recipients into refusal and nonrefusal groups; demographics, morbidity and mortality were compared. Kaplan–Meier analysis with log‐rank test was used to determine differences in graft survival. A multivariable Cox proportional hazards model was constructed to determine independent risk factors for postoperative mortality. From July 1, 2000 to April 30, 2011, 182 recipients were transplanted and included for analysis. One hundred thirty received a primarily offered heart; 52 received a refused heart. No difference in postoperative complications or graft survival between the two groups (p = 0.190) was found. Prior refusal was not an independent risk factor for recipient mortality. Analysis of this large pediatric cohort examining outcomes with quality‐refused hearts shows that in‐hospital morbidity and long‐term mortality for recipients of quality‐refused hearts are no different than recipients of primarily offered hearts, suggesting that donor hearts previously refused for quality are not necessarily unsuitable for transplant and often show excellent outcomes.