Clinically significant incidental findings during preoperative computed tomography of patients undergoing cardiac surgery

Management of a patient with an unusual trajectory of a temporary trans-venous pacing lead

Perforation of the right ventricle during placement of pacing wires is a well-documented complication and can be potentially fatal. Use of temporary pacemaker, helical screw leads and steroids use prior to implant are recognised as risk factors for development of post-permanent pacemaker effusion. We reported an unusual case of pacing wire perforating interventricular septum into the left ventricle that occurred during the implant procedure performed in another institution. After the preoperative work-up and transfer to our tertiary cardiothoracic centre, the patient underwent successful surgical management. In conclusion, early recognition and timely diagnosis using advanced multimodality imaging can guide surgical intervention and prevent unfavourable consequences of device-related complications.

R-I subtype single right coronary artery with congenital absence of left coronary system: A case report

BACKGROUND

Isolated single coronary artery is a rare congenital anomaly. R-I subtype single coronary artery is even rarer. In this subtype, a very large right coronary artery extends in the coronary sulcus to the anterior base of the heart where it produces the left anterior descending coronary artery. Currently, only a few case reports are available in the literature for this anomaly.

CASE SUMMARY

Here, we report the case of a 62-year-old woman who presented to the cardiology clinic with decreased exercise tolerance and poor blood pressure control. The patient underwent coronary angiography (CAG) and emission computed tomography (ECT). CAG images revealed a single gigantic right coronary artery (R-I type) arising from the right coronary sinus with branches supplying the left coronary territory. The ECT results confirmed myocardial ischemia at the location of the absent left coronary artery. The ECT findings confirmed that ischemia was consistent with the vascular loss location in CAG images. In such anomalies, there is a compensatory widening of the coronary artery lumen. Medical treatment was administered, and the patient was discharged.

CONCLUSION

Isolated single coronary arteries are associated with ischemia and potentially fatal acute coronary events. Hence, controlling risk factors is critical.

Long-Term Survival among Octogenarians Undergoing Aortic Valve Replacement with or without Simultaneous Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: A 22-Year Tertiary Single-Center Experience

BACKGROUND

The impact of concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) on aortic valve replacement (AVR) in octogenarians is still debated. We analyzed the characteristics and long-term survival of octogenarians undergoing isolated AVR and AVR + CABG.

METHODS

All octogenarians who consecutively underwent AVR with or without concomitant CABG at our tertiary cardiac center between 2000 and 2022 were included. Patients with redo, emergent, or any other concomitant procedures were excluded. The primary endpoints were 30-day and long-term survival. The secondary endpoints were early postoperative outcomes and determinants of long-term survival. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to identify independent predictors of 30-day mortality, and Cox regression analysis was performed for predictors of adverse long-term survival.

RESULTS

A total of 1011 patients who underwent AVR (83.0 [81.0-85.0] years, 42.0% males) and 1055 with AVR + CABG (83.0 [81.2-85.4] years, 66.1% males) were included in our study. Survival at 30 days and at 1, 3, and 5 years in the AVR group was 97.9%, 91.5%, 80.5%, and 66.2%, respectively, while in the AVR + CABG group it was 96.2%, 89.6%, 77.7%, and 64.7%, respectively. There was no significant difference in median postoperative survival between the AVR and AVR + CABG groups (7.1 years [IQR: 6.7-7.5] vs. 6.6 years [IQR: 6.3-7.2], respectively, p = 0.21). Significant predictors of adverse long-term survival in the AVR group included age (hazard ratio (HR): 1.09; 95% CI: 1.06-1.12, p < 0.001), previous MI (HR: 2.08; 95% CI: 1.32-3.28, p = 0.002), and chronic kidney disease (HR 2.07; 95% CI: 1.33-3.23, p = 0.001), while in the AVR + CABG group they included age (HR: 1.06; 95% CI: 1.04-1.10, p < 0.001) and diabetes mellitus (HR: 1.48; 95% CI: 1.15-1.89, p = 0.002). Concomitant CABG was not an independent risk factor for adverse long-term survival (HR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.77-1.02, p = 0.09).

CONCLUSIONS

The long-term survival of octogenarians who underwent AVR or AVR + CABG was similar and was not affected by adding concomitant CABG. However, octogenarians who underwent concomitant CABG with AVR had significantly higher in-hospital mortality. Each decision should be discussed within the heart team.

Current knowledge and contemporary management of non-A non-B aortic dissections

Non-A non-B aortic dissection (AAD) is an infrequently documented condition, comprising of only a small proportion of all AADs. The unique anatomy of the aortic arch and the failure of the existing classifications to adequately define individuals with non-A non-B AAD, have led to an ongoing controversy around the topic. It seems that the clinical progression of acute non-A non-B AAD diverges from the typical type A and B dissections, frequently leading to serious complications and thus mandating early intervention. Currently, the available treatment methods in the surgical armamentarium are conventional open, endovascular techniques and combined hybrid methods. The optimum approach is tailored in every individual case and may be determined by the dissection’s location, extent, the aortic diameter, the associated complications and the patient’s status. The management of non-A non-B dissections still remains challenging and a unanimous consensus defining the gold standard treatment has yet to be reached. In an attempt to provide further insight into this perplexing entity, we performed a minireview of the literature, aiming to elucidate the epidemiology, clinical course and the optimal treatment modality.

Every cloud has a silver lining: COVID-19 chest-CT screening prevents unnecessary cardiac surgery

BACKGROUND

Unenhanced chest CT can identify incidental findings (IFs) leading to management strategy change. We report our institutional experience with routine chest-CT as preoperative screening tool during the COVID-19 pandemic, focusing on the impact of IFs.

METHODS

All patients scheduled for cardiac surgery from May 1st to December 31^st 2020, underwent preoperative unenhanced chest-CT according to COVID-19 pandemic institutional protocol. We have analyzed IFs incidence, reported consequent operative changes, and identified IFs clinical determinants.

RESULTS

Out of 447, 278 patients were included. IFs rate was 7.2% (20/278): a solid mass (11/20, 55%), lymphoproliferative disease (1/20, 5%), SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia (2/20, 10%), pulmonary artery chronic thromboembolism (1/20, 5%), anomalous vessel anatomy (2/20, 10%), voluminous hiatal hernia (1/20, 5%), mitral annulus calcification (1/20, 5%), and porcelain aorta (1/20, 5%) were reported. Based on IFs, 4 patients (20%-4/278, 1.4%) were not operated, 8 (40%-8/278, 2.9%) underwent a procedure different from the one originally planned one, and 8 (40%-8/278, 2.9%) needed additional preoperative investigations before undergoing the planned surgery. At univariate regression, coronary artery disease, atrial fibrillation, and history of cancer were significantly more often present in patients presenting with significant IFs. History of malignancy was identified as the only independent determinant of significant IFs at chest-CT (OR=4.27 IQR: [1.14-14.58], P=0.0227).

CONCLUSIONS

Unenhanced chest-CT as a preoperative screening tool in cardiac surgery led to incidental detection of significant clinical findings, which justified even procedures cancellation. Malignancy history is a determinant for CT incidental findings and could support a tailored screening approach for high-risk patients.

Aortic root replacement for aortic root aneurysm with severe aortic regurgitation and incidentally detected left ventricular hyper-trabeculation/noncompaction

A 54-year-old male with severe aortic regurgitation (AR), aortic root aneurysm, left ventricular hyper-trabeculation/noncompaction (LVHT) and systolic dysfunction with a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of 52% underwent successful aortic root replacement. Intraoperative video-endoscopy confirmed LVHT. At 3-year follow-up, he remains in an excellent clinical condition and echocardiography shows an improvement of the systolic function, LVHT and LVEF of 66%. Timely surgical correction of severe AR may also lead to improvement of systolic function in a patient with LVHT.

Incidental findings on routine preoperative noncontrast chest computed tomography and chest radiography prior to cardiac surgery in the multicenter randomized controlled CRICKET study

Objective

To describe the prevalence and consequences of incidental findings when implementing routine noncontrast CT prior to cardiac surgery.

Methods

In the multicenter randomized controlled CRICKET study, 862 adult patients scheduled for cardiac surgery were randomized 1:1 to undergo standard of care (SoC), which included a chest-radiograph, or an additional preoperative noncontrast chest CT-scan (SoC+CT). In this subanalysis, all incidental findings detected on the chest radiograph and CT-scan were analyzed. The influence of smoking status on incidental findings was also evaluated, adjusting for sex, age, and group allocation.

Results

Incidental findings were observed in 11.4% (n = 49) of patients in the SoC+CT group and in 3.7% (n = 16) of patients in the SoC-group (p < 0.001). The largest difference was observed in findings requiring follow-up (SoC+CT 7.7% (n = 33) vs SoC 2.3% (n = 10), p < 0.001). Clinically relevant findings changing the surgical approach or requiring specific treatment were observed in 10 patients (1.2%, SoC+CT: 1.6% SoC: 0.7%), including lung cancer in 0.5% of patients (n = 4) and aortic dilatation requiring replacement in 0.2% of patients (n = 2). Incidental findings were more frequent in patients who stopped smoking (OR 1.91, 1.03–3.63) or who actively smoked (OR 3.91, 1.85–8.23).

Conclusions

Routine CT-screening increases the rate of incidental findings, mainly by identifying more pulmonary findings requiring follow-up. Incidental findings are more prevalent in patients with a history of smoking, and preoperative CT might increase the yield of identifying lung cancer in these patients. Incidental findings, but not specifically the use of routine CT, are associated with delay of surgery.

Key Points

• Clinically relevant incidental findings are identified more often after a routine preoperative CT-scan, when compared to a standard of care workup, with some findings changing patient management.

• Patients with a history of smoking have a higher rate of incidental findings and a lung cancer rate comparable to that of lung cancer screening trials.

• We observed no clear delay in the time to surgery when adding routine CT screening.