MICS - MiECC: Can't have one without the other

Minimally invasive extracorporeal circulation versus conventional cardiopulmonary bypass in patients undergoing cardiac surgery (MiECS): Rationale and design of a multicentre randomised trial

INTRODUCTION

The ultimate answer to the question whether minimal invasive extracorporeal circulation (MiECC) represents the optimal perfusion technique in contemporary clinical practice remains elusive. The present study is a real-world study that focuses on specific perfusion-related clinical outcomes after cardiac surgery that could potentially be favourably affected by MiECC and thereby influence the future clinical practice.

METHODS

The MiECS study is an international, multi-centre, two-arm randomized controlled trial. Patients undergoing elective or urgent coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), aortic valve replacement (AVR) or combined procedure (CABG + AVR) using extracorporeal circulation will be randomized to MiECC or contemporary conventional cardiopulmonary bypass (cCPB). Use of optimized conventional circuits as controls is acceptable. The study design includes a range of features to prevent bias and is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05487612).

RESULTS

The primary outcome is a composite of postoperative serious adverse events that could be related to perfusion technique occurring up to 30 days postoperatively. Secondary outcomes include use of blood products, ICU and hospital length of stay (30 days) as well as health-related quality of life (30 and 90 days).

CONCLUSIONS

The MiECS trial has been designed to overcome perceived limitation of previous trials of MiECC. Results of the proposed study could affect current perfusion practice towards advancement of patient care.

From less invasive to minimal invasive extracorporeal circulation

Development of minimally invasive cardiac surgery (MICS) served the purpose of performing surgery while avoiding the surgical stress triggered by a full median sternotomy. Minimizing surgical trauma is associated with improved cosmesis and enhanced recovery leading to reduced morbidity. However, it has to be primarily appreciated that the extracorporeal circulation (ECC) stands for the basis of nearly all MICS procedures. With some fundamental modification and advancement in perfusion techniques, the use of ECC has become the enabling technology for the development of MICS. Less invasive cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) techniques are based on remote cannulation and optimization of perfusion techniques with assisted venous drainage and use of centrifugal pump, so as to facilitate the demanding surgical maneuvers, rather than minimizing the invasiveness of the CPB. This is reflected in the increased duration of CPB required for MICS procedures. Minimal invasive Extracorporeal Circulation (MiECC) represents a major breakthrough in perfusion. It integrates all contemporary technological advancements that facilitate best applying cardiovascular physiology to intraoperative perfusion. Consequently, MiECC use translates to improved end-organ protection and clinical outcome, as evidenced in multiple clinical trials and meta-analyses. MICS performed with MiECC provides the basis for developing a multidisciplinary intraoperative strategy towards a "more physiologic" cardiac surgery by combining small surgical trauma with minimum body's physiology derangement. Integration of MiECC can advance MICS from non-full sternotomy for selected patients to a "more physiologic" surgery, which represents the real face of modern cardiac surgery in the transcatheter era.

Minimally Invasive Aortic Valve Replacement on Minimally Invasive Extracorporeal Circulation: Going beyond Aesthetics

We present our multidisciplinary and multistep strategy in patients undergoing minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (mAVR) on minimally invasive extracorporeal circulation (MiECC) compared with control groups of a single strategy and conventional techniques. This cohort study included high-risk patients (Society of Thoracic Surgeons [STS] risk score >8%) undergoing aortic valve surgery under different strategies during the period from January 2017 until March 2019. Patients were matched for age, gender, body mass index, and STS score: group 1 (MiAVR) based on a minimally invasive technique with J-mini-sternotomy, rapid deployment valve (RDV), and type IV customized MiECC; group 2 (control-mAVR) consisted of minimally invasive technique with only J mini-sternotomy and RDV on a conventional extracorporeal system; group 3 (control-MiECC): full sternotomy and type IV customized MiECC; and group 4 (control): full sternotomy on a conventional extracorporeal system. The MiAVR group had significantly less duration of x-clamp time (35.4 ± 11 minutes), postoperative respiratory support (4.1 ± 1 hour), postoperative hemorrhage (250 ± 50 mL), and intensive care unit stay (1 ± .5 days) than the control-conventional (group 4) group. Seventy-six percent of patients did not receive any blood products in MiAVR (p = .025 vs. group 4). Incidence of atrial fibrillation (8%) and low cardiac output (14%) in MiAVR were significantly better than control. Critics of minimally invasive techniques sustain that potential advantages are offset by a longer cross-clamp and cardiopulmonary bypass duration, which may translate into inferior clinical outcomes. We advocate that our multidisciplinary approach supported by multiple technologies may be associated with faster recovery and superior outcomes than conventional minimally/conventional techniques.

A multidisciplinary perioperative strategy for attaining "more physiologic" cardiac surgery

BACKGROUND

Cardiac surgery is, by definition, a "non-physiologic" intervention associated with systemic adverse effects. Despite advances in surgical technique, cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) technology as well as anaesthesia management and patient care, there is still significant morbidity and subsequent mortality.

AIM

We consider that the contemporary demand for further improving patient outcome mandates the upgrade from optimal perfusion during the procedure as the gold standard to the concept of a "more physiologic" cardiac surgery. Our policy is a multidisciplinary perioperative strategy based on goal-directed perfusion throughout surgery incorporating in-line monitoring. This translates to "prevent rather than correct" malperfusion through real-time adjustment rather than correction of derangement detected late by incremental evaluation.

METHOD

The strategy is based on continuous monitoring of cardiac index, SvO₂, DO₂i, DO₂i/VCO₂i and rSO₂. Data acquisition is followed by action when needed; this includes stepwise: transfusion, increase of cardiac output and initiation of inotropic/vasoactive support. Moreover, implementation of minimally invasive extracorporeal circulation (MiECC) is considered as a fundamental component of physiologic perfusion when on-CPB, providing improved circulatory support and end-organ protection.

CONCLUSION

We consider that, with this strategy which establishes optimal perfusion perioperatively, we attain the goal of a "more physiologic" cardiac surgery.