The latest medical research on Cardiothoracic Intensive Care

Patients with severe coronary artery disease who undergo coronary artery bypass grafting consistently demonstrate that continued smoking after surgery increases late mortality rates. Smoking may exert its harmful effects through the ongoing chronic process of atherosclerotic progression both in the grafts and the native system. However, it is not clear whether cardiac mortality is primary and solely responsible for the inferior late survival of current smokers.

In this retrospective analysis, we included all consecutive patients undergoing primary isolated coronary artery bypass surgery from January 1, 2000, to September 30, 2015, in an Academic Hospital in Northern Portugal. The predictive or independent variable was the patients' smoking history status, a categorical variable with three levels: non-smoker (the comparator), ex-smoker for more than 1 year (exposure 1), and current smoker (exposure 2). The primary end-point was long-term all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes were long-term cause-specific mortality (cardiovascular and noncardiovascular). We fitted overall and Fine and Gray subdistribution hazard models.

We identified 5242 eligible patients. Follow-up was 99.7% complete (with seventeen patients lost to follow-up). The median follow-up time was 12.79 years (IQR, 9.51 to 16.60). Throughout the study, there were 2049 deaths (39.1%): 877 from cardiovascular causes (16.7%), 727 from noncardiovascular causes (13.9%), and 445 from unknown causes (8.5%). Ex-smokers had an identical long-term survival than non-smokers (HR 0.99; 95% CI 0.88, 1.12; p = 0.899). Conversely, current smokers had a 24% increase in late mortality risk (HR 1.24; 95% CI 1.07, 1.44; p = 0.004) as compared to non-smokers. While the current smoker status increased the relative incidence of noncardiac death by 61% (HR 1.61; 95% CI 1.27, 2.05, p < 0.001), it did confer a 25% reduction in the relative incidence of cardiac death (HR 0.75; 95% CI 0.59, 0.97; p = 0.025).

Whereas ex-smokers have an identical long-term survival to non-smokers, current smokers exhibit an increase in late all-cause mortality risk at the expense of an increased relative incidence of noncardiac death. By subtracting the inciting risk factor, smoking cessation reduces the relative incidence of cardiac death.

Robotic thymectomy has been suggested and considered technically feasible for thymic tumors. However, because of small-sample series and the lack of data on long-term results, controversies still exist on surgical and oncological results with this approach. We performed a large national multicenter study sought to evaluate the early and long-term outcomes after robot-assisted thoracoscopic thymectomy in thymic epithelial tumors.

All patients with thymic epithelial tumors operated through a robotic thoracoscopic approach between 2002 and 2022 from 15 Italian centers were enrolled. Demographic characteristics, clinical, intraoperative, postoperative, pathological and follow-up data were retrospectively collected and reviewed.

There were 669 patients (307 men and 362 women), 312 (46.6%) of whom had associated myasthenia gravis. Complete thymectomy was performed in 657 (98%) cases and in 57 (8.5%) patients resection of other structures was necessary, with a R0 resection in all but 9 patients (98.6%). Twenty-three patients (3.4%) needed open conversion, but no perioperative mortality occurred. Fifty-one patients (7.7%) had postoperative complications. Median diameter of tumor resected was 4cm (interquartile range 3-5.5cm), and Masaoka stage was stage I in 39.8% of patients, stage II in 56.1%, stage III in 3.5% and stage IV in 0.6%. Thymoma was observed in 90.2% of patients while thymic carcinoma occurred in 2.8% of cases. At the end of the follow-up, only 2 patients died for tumor-related causes. Five and ten-year recurrence rates were 7.4% and 8.3%, respectively.

Through the largest collection of robotic thymectomy for thymic epithelial tumors we demonstrated that robot-enhanced thoracoscopic thymectomy is a technically sound and safe procedure with a low complication rate and optimal oncological outcomes.

Catheter ablation (CA) can interfere with cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) function. The safety of CA in the 1st year after CIED implantation/lead revision is uncertain.

This single center, retrospective cohort included patients who underwent CA between 2012 and 2017 and had a CIED implant/lead revision within the preceding year. We assessed the frequency of device/lead malfunctions in this population.

We identified 1810 CAs in patients between 2012 and 2017, with 170 CAs in 163 patients within a year of a CIED implant/lead revision. Mean age 68 ± 12 years (68% men). Time between the CIED procedure and CA was 158 ± 99 days. The CA procedures included AF ablation (n = 57, 34%), AV node ablation (n = 40, 24%), SVT ablation (n = 37, 22%), and PVC/VT ablations (n = 36, 21%). The cumulative frequency of lead dislodgement, significant CIED dysfunction, and/or CIED-related infection following CA was (n = 1/170, 0.6%). There was a single atrial lead dislodgement (0.6%). There were no instances of power-on-reset or CIED-related infection. Following CA, there was no significant difference in RA or RV lead sensing (p = 0.52 and 0.84 respectively) or thresholds (p = 0.94 and 0.17 respectively). The RA impedance slightly decreased post-CA from 474 ± 80 Ohms to 460 ± 73 Ohms (p = 0.002), as did the RV impedance (from 515 ± 111 Ohms to 497 ± 98 Ohms, p < 0.0001).

CA can be performed within 1 year following CIED implantation/lead revision with a low risk of CIED/lead malfunction or lead dislodgement. The ideal time to perform CA after a CIED remains uncertain.