Does the surgeon's experience have an impact on outcome after total arterial revascularization with composite T-grafts? A risk factor analysis

Is It Reasonable to Perform Isolated SAVR by Residents in the TAVI Era?

BACKGROUND

The role of conventional surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) is increasingly questioned since the indication for transcatheter aortic valve implantations (TAVIs) is currently extended. While the number of patients referred to SAVR decreases, it is unclear if SAVR should be performed by junior resident surgeons in the course of a heart surgeons training.

METHODS

Patients with isolated aortic valve replacement (AVR) were analyzed with respect to the surgeon's qualification. AVR performed by resident surgeons was compared with AVR by senior surgeons. The collective was analyzed with respect to clinical short-term outcomes comparing full sternotomy (FS) with minimally invasive surgery and ministernotomy (MS) with right anterior thoracotomy (RAT) after a 1:1 propensity score matching.

RESULTS

The 30-day all-cause mortality was 2.3 and 3.4% for resident versus senior AVR groups, cerebrovascular event rates were 1.1 versus 2.6%, and no cases of significant paravalvular leak were detected. Clinical short-term outcomes between FS and minimally invasive access, as well after MS and RAT were comparable.

CONCLUSION

Our current data show feasibility and safety of conventional SAVR procedure performed by resident surgeons in the era of TAVI. Minimally invasive surgery should be trained and performed in higher volumes early in the educational process as it is a safe treatment option.

Der erfahrene Chirurg als unabhängiger Risikofaktor für die Morbidität nach Cholezystektomie. Eine multivariate Analyse von 710 Patienten

Einleitung Bei komplexeren chirurgischen Eingriffen wie der Kolonresektion, herzchirurgischen Eingriffen, arteriellen Rekonstruktionen oder Leberresektionen ist der Einfluss des Chirurgen auf die postoperative Morbidität nachgewiesen. Bei Routineeingriffen wie der Cholezystektomie liegen bislang keine Erkenntnisse zum Zusammenhang von Operateur und Morbidität vor. Insbesondere Untersuchungen bei erfahrenen Chirurgen fehlen.

Methoden Es wurden 710 konsekutive Patienten, die zwischen Januar 2014 und Dezember 2018 von erfahrenen Chirurgen (über n = 300 Cholezystektomien vor Beginn der Untersuchung, über 5 Jahre nach bestandener Facharztprüfung) cholezystektomiert wurden, untersucht. In einer univariaten Analyse wurde der Einfluss von Patientenmerkmalen, Laborparametern, chirurgischen Parametern und des Operateurs auf die postoperative Morbidität analysiert. Die Variablen mit statistischer Signifikanzen wurden dann einer multivariaten logistischen Regressionsanalyse unterzogen.

Ergebnisse Die Mortalität lag bei 5 von 710 (0,7%), die Morbidität bei 58 von 710 (8,2%). 37 von 710 Patienten erlitten eine chirurgische Komplikation, 21 von 710 Patienten eine nicht chirurgische Komplikation. Hinsichtlich der Gesamtmorbidität waren in multivariater Analyse der Kreatininwert (OR 1,29; KI 1,01–1,648; p = 0,042), GOT (OR 1,0405; KI 1–1,01; p = 0,03), offene und Konversions-Cholezystektomie (OR 4,134; KI 1,587–10,768; p = 0,004) und der individuelle Chirurg (OR bis 40,675; p = 0,001) ein unabhängiger Risikofaktor. Bei Analyse der chirurgischen Komplikationen blieben offene und Konversions-Cholezystektomie (OR 8,104; KI 3,03–21,68; p < 0,001) sowie der individuelle Chirurg (OR bis 79,69; p = 0,005) ein statistisch signifikanter unabhängiger Risikofaktor.

Schlussfolgerung Der individuelle Chirurg ist auch bei einem Routineeingriff wie der Cholezystektomie ein unabhängiger Risikofaktor für die Morbidität. Dies gilt auch für erfahrene Chirurgen mit Facharztstatus und hoher Caseload. Im Hinblick auf die Patientensicherheit und Verbesserungen der Ergebnisqualität muss daher diskutiert werden, ob eine routinemäßige risikoadjustierte Messung der individuellen Ergebnisse eines jeden Chirurgen als Basis eines gezielten Qualifizierungprogramms sinnvoll ist.

Explanatory Factors for Periprosthetic Infection in Total Knee Arthroplasty

There are many studies whose results reveal possible risk factors for developing an infection after a total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The objective of this study is to analyse the risk factors that depend on the hospital and, especially, if the patellar replacement influences the appearance of periprosthetic infection. A retrospective study was performed, where data from the electronic registry of patients of people over 18 and who had undergone TKA, between the years 2015 and 2018, were reviewed. Dependent variables on the patients and the health care system were collected. The possible associations between the factors and the appearance of infection after TKA were studied using univariate and multivariate regression analyses. A total of 907 primary knee arthroplasties were included in the study. Those patients who had their patella replaced had a significantly higher risk of developing an infection (OR 2.07; 95% confidence interval 1.01–6.31). Likewise, patients who underwent surgery by surgeons with more than 10 years of experience were more than twice as likely to become infected than those operated on by younger surgeons (OR 2.64; 95%CI 1.01–6.97). Male patients were also found to be three times more likely to be infected than women (OR 2.99; 95%CI 1.32–5.74). Those interventions that were longer had a higher risk of infection. The same happened with patients who stayed in the hospital for a longer period of time. The rest of the variables did not show statistically significant results. In this study, it was found that the replacement of the patella may be a factor of infection, but it should be corroborated with randomized clinical trials. Furthermore, patients who underwent longer surgeries or those with prolonged hospital stays should be closely monitored to detect infection as soon as possible and establish the most appropriate treatment.