FREEDOM, SYNTAX, FAME and FUNCTIONALITY: the future of surgical revascularization in stable ischemic heart disease

Assessment of Bowel End Perfusion After Mesenteric Division: Eye Versus SPY

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic complications related to tissue ischemia cause morbidity in gastrointestinal (GI) surgery. Surgeons' standard practice to predict bowel perfusion is inspection of mesenteric perfusion before anastomosing bowel ends. Augmenting this assessment with fluorescent imaging is under study. A standardized system to evaluate this imaging has not yet been developed. This study compared the surgeon's intraoperative assessment to a novel GI-specific imaging analysis method.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty-nine consecutive patients undergoing open or laparoscopic-assisted bowel resections were enrolled. After mesenteric division, the surgeon marked the site for bowel transection. Near-infrared fluorescence imaging was performed on the marked bowel ends. Imaging analysis identified theoretical transection sites based on the quantification of arterial and microvascular inflow (Perfusion) and venous outflow (Timing). The primary outcome was the measured disparity between the site marked by the surgeon using current standard of care parameters and the imaging-determined site. No clinical outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS

Seventy-two bowel end segments from 46 patients were analyzed. Disparity was found in 11 of 72 (15%) bowel end segments. In five (7%), the disparity was due to either Perfusion or Timing (single), and in six (8%), due to both Perfusion and Timing (combined). In the single disparity group, the median disparity distance was 2.0 cm by Perfusion and 4.0 cm by Timing, and in the combined group, 3.8 cm by Perfusion and 3.5 cm by Timing. Disparity (either single or combined) was in 25% of colon and 11.5% of small bowel (P = NS). Combined and single disparity had equivalent lengths of disparity distance (P = NS).

CONCLUSIONS

Imaging coupled with this GI-specific analysis provides objective, real-time, and interpretable data of intramural blood supply. A 15% disparity rate from current clinical practice was observed.

Multiple arterial grafting for coronary revascularization: "A guide for the perplexed"

The surgical literature abounds with articles extolling the benefits of arterial grafting for patients with advanced coronary artery disease in need of surgical revascularization. However, examination of clinical performance demonstrates that extensive use of arterial grafting is highly selective and generally uncommon. Rather than to merely repeat multiple excellent recent literature reviews, the goal herein is to provide the reader with a guide to the evaluation of the current literature as well as to suggest fruitful areas for further research. More circumspect understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of our current knowledge base will not only help to explain the current apparent disparity between theory and practice but will hopefully inform future decision-making and patient care.