Computed tomography reference dimensions for identification of stented surgical mitral bioprostheses valve size

BackgroundSelection of the transcatheter heart valve size for a mitral valve-in-valve procedure is based on the type and manufacturer’s labelled size. However, accurate information of surgical heart valve (SHV) size may not be available in the patient’s medical record. The purpose of this study is to establish reference data for computed tomography (CT) dimensions of commonly used mitral SHV in order to determine the manufacturer’s labelled size from a cardiac CT data set.MethodsCT datasets of 105 patients with surgical mitral bioprosthesis and available manufacturer labeled datasets were included in the analysis. CT derived valve dimensions were assessed by two observers using multiplanar reformats aligned with the basal sewing ring. A circular region of interest was used in a standardized fashion to minimize influence of image acquisition and reconstruction parameters. Interobserver variability was assessed by Bland-Altman analysis.ResultsThe CT-derived dimensions were stratified by valve size and type, and SHV properties were demonstrated for 5 common valve types. Variability of measurements was small and inter-observer limits of agreement were narrow. Stratified by SHV type, no overlap was noted for CT-derived dimensions among different SHV sizes . A reference table of CT characteristics of surgical mitral bioprosthesis types was created.ConclusionThe study provides reference CT data for determining the manufacturers’ labeled SHV size across a range of commonly used mitral SHVs. The findings will be important to help identify types of surgical mitral bioprosthesis utilizing CT characteristics for patients without SHV size documentation.     

Redefining “low risk”: Outcomes of surgical aortic valve replacement in low-risk patients in the transcatheter aortic valve replacement era

ObjectivesGuidelines suggest aortic valve replacement (AVR) for low-risk asymptomatic patients. Indications for transcatheter AVR now include low-risk patients, making it imperative to understand state-of-the-art surgical AVR (SAVR) in this population. Therefore, we compared SAVR outcomes in low-risk patients with those expected from Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) models and assessed their intermediate-term survival.MethodsFrom January 2005 to January 2017, 3493 isolated SAVRs were performed in 3474 patients with STS predicted risk of mortality <4%. Observed operative mortality and composite major morbidity or mortality were compared with STS-expected outcomes according to calendar year of surgery. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify risk factors for these outcomes. Patients were followed for time-related mortality.ResultsWith 15 observed operative deaths (0.43%) compared with 55 expected (1.6%), the observed:expected ratio was 0.27 for mortality (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.14-0.42), stroke 0.65 (95% CI, 0.41-0.89), and reoperation 0.50 (95% CI, 0.42-0.60). Major morbidity or mortality steadily declined, with probabilities of 8.6%, 6.7%, and 5.2% in 2006, 2011, and 2016, respectively, while STS-expected risk remained at approximately 12%. Mitral valve regurgitation, ventricular hypertrophy, pulmonary, renal, and hepatic failure, coronary artery disease, and earlier surgery date were residual risk factors. Survival was 98%, 91%, and 82% at 1, 5, and 9 years, respectively, superior to that predicted for the US age-race-sex–matched population.ConclusionsSTS risk models overestimate contemporary SAVR risk at a high-volume center, supporting efforts to create a more agile quality assessment program. SAVR in low-risk patients provides durable survival benefit, supporting early surgery and providing a benchmark for transcatheter AVR.     

腹腔镜经脐单一部位幽门环肌切开术治疗小儿先天性肥厚性幽门狭窄的临床效果研究

目的研究腹腔镜经脐单一部位幽门环肌切开术治疗小儿先天性肥厚性幽门狭窄的临床效果。方法100例小儿先天性肥厚性幽门狭窄患儿作为研究对象,按照随机方式分为观察组和对照组,每组50例。对照组采用腹腔镜幽门环肌切开术治疗,观察组采用腹腔镜经脐单一部位幽门环肌切开术治疗。观察记录患儿的手术结果及随访结果,并比较两组患儿手术时间、术后住院时间。结果手术过程顺利,100例患儿均成功完成手术,无一例中转开腹手术,无并发症发生。观察组患儿术后6 h将胃管取下,少量喂入温水后逐渐过渡到喂糖水、喂奶;对照组患儿术后24 h开始逐渐进食。患儿术后进行6个月的延续性随访,观察组患儿切口恢复美观,已经无法观察到切口瘢痕,两组患儿的生长发育均显示正常状态。观察组患儿手术时间(21.23±1.65)min及术后住院时间(5.58±1.98)d均显著短于对照组的(38.44±1.23)min、(9.67±1.22)d,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论先天性肥厚性幽门狭窄患儿采用腹腔镜经脐单一部位幽门环肌切开术治疗,手术效果良好,手术创伤小而且安全。     

飞秒激光辅助超声乳化联合Ahmed青光眼引流阀植入术治疗合并难治性青光眼的白内障

目的：评估飞秒激光辅助超声乳化联合Ahmed青光眼引流阀植入术治疗合并难治性青光眼的白内障的有效性和安全性。

方法：回顾性病例对照研究。2019-10/2021-10入院合并难治性青光眼的白内障患者53例53眼，依据自愿选择分为飞秒激光辅助白内障超声乳化(FLACS)组26例26眼和常规白内障超声乳化(CPCS)组27例27眼。两组分别行FLACS和CPCS联合Ahmed青光眼引流阀植入术。比较两组患者术中超声乳化能量释放量(CDE)、有效超声时间(EPT)的差异和术前与术后抗青光眼药物数量的变化，以及术后观察不同时期(1d，1wk，1、3mo)在提高最佳矫正视力(BCVA)，降低眼压、角膜内皮细胞损伤程度和手术并发症及成功率状况。

结果：FLACS组术中CDE和EPT明显低于CPCS组(t=8.50、5.16； P<0.01、=0.001)。两组术后抗青光眼药物较术前均明显减少(t=9.12、7.76； P=0.011、0.016)，但两组间无差异(t=1.79，P=0.082)。两组术后BCVA均较术前改善，眼压均较术前降低(P<0.05)。FLACS组在术后早期(1d，1wk)BCVA的改善较CPCS组更显著(t=9.74、8.49； P=0.008、0.012)，但在术后1、3mo的BCVA改善程度并无不同(t=0.62、0.44； P=1.415、2.021)。CPCS组在术后随访不同时期的角膜内皮细胞损伤较FLACS组更明显(P<0.05)。术后随访的不同时期FLACS组和CPCS组在控制眼压方面无差异(F_组间=0.64，P_组间=0.421)。FLACS组的手术并发症发生率27%(7/26)较CPCS组89%(24/27)低(χ²=20.95，P<0.01)，其中角膜水肿(8% vs 41%)、前囊撕裂(0 vs 11%)在FLACS组中明显低于CPCS组，后囊破裂(0 vs 7%)、玻璃体脱出(0 vs 4%)及人工晶状体偏位(0 vs 7%)也均发生在CPCS组。但两组的治疗总成功率相近(P=28.718)。

结论：飞秒激光辅助超声乳化联合Ahmed青光眼引流阀植入术可充分发挥联合手术的精准微创可控优势，帮助合并难治性青光眼的白内障患者有效降低眼压及更早获得视力恢复。     

Prosthetic choice in mitral valve replacement for severe chronic ischemic mitral regurgitation: Long-term follow-up

BackgroundProsthetic choice for mitral valve replacement is generally driven by patient age and patient and surgeon preference, and current guidelines do not discriminate between different etiologies of mitral valve disease. Our objective was to assess and compare short- and long-term outcomes after mitral valve replacement among patients with biological or mechanical prostheses in the setting of severe ischemic mitral regurgitation.MethodsBetween 2000 and 2016, 424 patients underwent mitral valve replacement for severe ischemic mitral regurgitation at our institution, using biological prosthesis in 188 (44%) and mechanical prosthesis in 236 (56%). A 1:1 propensity score match (n = 126 per group) and inverse probability of treatment weighting were used to compare groups. Short-term outcomes included in-hospital mortality and other cardiovascular adverse events. Long-term outcomes included survival and hospital readmission for cardiovascular causes, stroke, and major bleeding.ResultsIn-hospital mortality and early postoperative adverse events were similar between groups in the propensity score match and inverse probability of treatment weighting cohorts. Overall long-term survival was similar at 5 and 9 years, but mechanical prosthesis recipients were more frequently readmitted to hospital for cardiovascular causes, including stroke and non-neurological bleeding in propensity score matching and inverse probability of treatment weighting analyses (all P values < .004). Type of prosthesis did not independently influence all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% confidence interval, 0.71-1.43; P = .959), but placement of a mechanical prosthesis was associated with increased risk of readmission for cardiovascular events (hazard ratio, 1.65; 95% confidence interval, 1.17-2.32; P = .004) among matched patients.ConclusionsThe type of prosthesis has no influence on long-term survival among patients with severe ischemic mitral regurgitation undergoing mitral valve replacement. There may be an increased risk of neurologic events and serious bleeding associated with mechanical prostheses.