Update on Mechanical Circulatory Support

Machine Learning on 50,000 Manuscripts Shows Increased Clinical Research by Academic Cardiac Surgeons

INTRODUCTION

Academic cardiac surgeons are productive researchers and innovators. We sought to perform a comprehensive machine learning (ML)-based characterization of cardiac surgery research over the past 40 y to identify trends in research pursuits.

METHODS

US-based academic websites were queried for surgeon profiles. Publications since 1980 were obtained from Web of Science, and publication classifications (e.g., "human", "animal") were collected through the National Institutes of Health iCite tool. Publications were deemed "basic or translational" if >50% of their classification was under "animal" or "molecular or cell", and "clinical" if otherwise. ML-based clustering was performed on publication titles and Medical Subject Heading terms to identify research topics.

RESULTS

A total of 944 cardiac surgeons accounted for 48,031 unique publications. Average citations per year have decreased since 1980 (P < 0.001). The percentage of basic or translational publications by cardiac surgeons has decreased over time (P < 0.001), comprising of only 8% of publications in 2022. Adult cardiac surgeons, those who received an F32, K08, or R01, and those with a PhD were more likely to publish basic or translational research. Top areas of basic or translational research were myocardial reperfusion, aortic aneurysms or remodeling, and transplant immunology. Major areas of clinical research included aortic disease, aortic valve disease, and mechanical circulatory support. Collaboration analysis revealed that 55% of publications were single-center, and the yearly percentage of these publications has decreased over time (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Cardiac surgeons are performing less basic or translational research relative to clinical research than ever before. The majority of publications over the past 40 y did not involve cross-center collaboration. Continued support for clinical research is needed, while also encouraging collaborative basic or translational science to foster innovation in patient care.

Nutrition support for patients on mechanical circulatory support

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

No specific guidelines on medical nutrition therapy (MNT) in patients on different types of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices yet exist and overall evidence is limited. The purpose of this narrative review is to provide an overview about current existing evidence, which might be of underrecognized importance for the patients' short-term and long-term clinical and functional outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Patients on MCS inherit substantial metabolic, endocrinologic, inflammatory, and immunologic alterations, and together with the specificities of MCS therapy, technical modalities of respective devices, and concomitant medication, the consideration of individualized MNT approaches is indicated in routine clinical practice. Exemplarily, the evaluation of the patients' individual nutrition status, determination of nutrition targets, progressive increase of energy and protein supply throughout the different phases of disease, prevention of micronutrient deficiencies, implementation of nutrition protocols, appropriate monitoring strategies, and continuous quality improvement are essential elements of MNT in patients on MCS.

SUMMARY

The importance of MNT for patients on MCS still often remains underrecognized, which might be of particular relevance in view of the significant metabolic alterations, the long treatment period, and severity of illness in these patients. Further research on more targeted MNT approaches in those patients is urgently needed for the generation of evidence-based guidelines for this specific cohort of critically ill patients.