Concomitant Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation in Isolated Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting

BACKGROUND

Societal guidelines support concomitant management of atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. To assess real-world adoption and outcomes, this study evaluated Medicare beneficiaries with AF who underwent isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) with surgical ablation (SA) or left atrial appendage obliteration (LAAO) or both procedures in combination (SA + LAAO).

METHODS

The US Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services inpatient claims database identified all patients with AF who underwent isolated CABG from 2018 to 2020. Diagnosis-related group and International Classification of Diseases-10th revision procedure codes defined covariates for doubly robust risk adjustment.

RESULTS

A total of 19,524 patients with preoperative AF who underwent isolated CABG were stratified by SA + LAAO (3475 patients; 17.8%), LAAO only (4541 patients; 23.3%), or no AF treatment (11,508 patients; 58.9%). After doubly robust risk adjustment, longitudinal analysis highlighted that concomitant AF treatment with SA + LAAO (hazard ratio [HR], 0.74; P = .049) or LAAO alone (HR, 0.75; P = . 031) was associated with a significant reduction in readmission for stroke at 3 years compared with no AF treatment. Furthermore, SA + LAAO (HR, 0.86; P = .016) but not LAAO alone (HR, 0.97; P = .573) was associated with improved survival compared with no AF treatment. Finally, SA + LAAO was associated with a superior composite outcome of freedom from stroke or death at 3 years compared with LAAO alone (HR, 0.86;, P = .033) or no AF treatment (HR, 0.81; P = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

In Medicare beneficiaries with AF who underwent isolated CABG, concomitant AF treatment was associated with reduced 3-year readmission for stroke. SA + LAAO was associated with superior reduction in stroke or death at 3 years compared with LAAO alone or no AF treatment.

Intersection of Race, Rurality, and Income in Defining Access to Minimally Invasive Lung Surgery

BACKGROUND

Race is a potent influencer of healthcare access. Geography and income may exert equal or greater influence on patient outcomes. We sought to define the intersection of race, rurality, and income and their influence on access to minimally invasive lung surgery in Medicare beneficiaries.

METHODS

Medicare and Medicaid Services data were used to evaluate patients with lung cancer who underwent right upper lobectomy, via open, robotic-assisted (RATS), or video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) between 2018 and 2020. International Classification of Diseases 10th edition was used to define diagnoses and procedures. We excluded sub-lobar, segmental, wedge, bronchoplastic, or reoperative patients with non-malignant or metastatic disease or a history of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Risk adjustment was performed using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) propensity scores with generalized linear models and Cox Proportional Hazards models.

RESULTS

The cohort comprised 13,404 patients, 4,291 (32.1%) open, 4,317 (32.2%) RATS, and 4,796 (35.8%) VATS. Black/Urban patients had significantly higher RATS and VATS rates (p<0.001), higher long-term survival (p=0.007), fewer open resections (p<0.001), and lower overall mortality (p=0.007). Low-income Black/Urban patients had higher RATS (p=0.002), VATS (p<0.001), higher long-term survival (p=0.005), fewer open resections (p<0.001), and lower overall mortality compared to rural white patients. (p=0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

Rural white populations living close to the federal poverty line may suffer a burden of disparity traditionally observed among poor Black people. This suggests a need for health policies that extend services to impoverished, rural areas to mitigate social determinants of health.

Atrial Fibrillation Management During Surgical vs Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

BACKGROUND

Societal guidelines support atrial fibrillation (AF) treatment during surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Recently, many patients with AF at low to intermediate risk are managed by transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Therefore, we evaluated longitudinal outcomes in these populations.

METHODS

The United States Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services inpatient claims database was evaluated for all beneficiaries with AF undergoing TAVR or SAVR with/without AF treatment (2018-2020). Treatment of AF included concomitant left atrial appendage obliteration, with/without surgical ablation, or endovascular appendage occlusion and/or catheter ablation at any time. Diagnosis-related group and International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, codes defined procedures with doubly robust risk adjustment across each group.

RESULTS

A total of 24,902 patients were evaluated (17,453 TAVR; 7,449 SAVR). Of patients undergoing SAVR, 3176 (42.6%) underwent AF treatment (SAVR+AF). Only 656 TAVR patients (4.5%) received AF treatment. Comparing well-balanced SAVR+AF vs SAVR vs TAVR, there were no differences in the in-hospital incidence of renal failure, bleeding, or stroke, but increased pacemaker requirement (odds ratio [OR], 3.45; P < .0001) and vascular injury (OR, 9.09; P < .0001) were noted in TAVR and higher hospital mortality (OR, 4.02; P < .0001) in SAVR+AF. SAVR+AF was associated with lower readmission for stroke compared with SAVR alone (hazard ratio [HR], 0.87; P = .029) and TAVR (HR, 0.68; P < .0001) and with improved survival vs TAVR (HR, 0.79; P = .019).

CONCLUSIONS

In Medicare beneficiaries with AF requiring aortic valve replacement, SAVR+AF was associated with improved longitudinal survival and freedom from stroke compared with TAVR. SAVR+AF treatment should be considered first-line therapy for patients with AF requiring aortic valve replacement.

Anesthetic Management for Ventricular Tachycardia Ablation: A National Anesthesia Clinical Outcomes Registry Analysis

OBJECTIVES

The authors analyzed anesthetic management trends during ventricular tachycardia (VT) ablation, hypothesizing that (1) monitored anesthesia care (MAC) is more commonly used than general anesthesia (GA); (2) MAC uses significantly increased after release of the 2019 Expert Consensus Statement on Catheter Ablation of Ventricular Arrhythmias; and (3) anesthetic approach varies based on patient and hospital characteristics.

DESIGN

Retrospective study.

SETTING

National Anesthesia Clinical Outcomes Registry data.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients 18 years or older who underwent elective VT ablation between 2013 and 2021.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Covariates were selected a priori within multivariate models, and interrupted time-series analysis was performed. Of the 15,505 patients who underwent VT ablation between 2013 and 2021, 9,790 (63.1%) received GA. After the 2019 Expert Consensus Statement on Catheter Ablation of Ventricular Arrhythmias supported avoidance of GA in idiopathic VT, no statistically significant increase in MAC was evident (immediate change in intercept post-consensus statement release adjusted odds ratio 1.41, p = 0.1629; change in slope post-consensus statement release adjusted odds ratio 1.06 per quarter, p = 0.1591). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status, age, and geographic location were statistically significantly associated with the anesthetic approach.

CONCLUSIONS

GA has remained the primary anesthetic type for VT ablation despite the 2019 Expert Consensus Statement on Catheter Ablation of Ventricular Arrhythmias suggested its avoidance in idiopathic VT. Achieving widespread clinical practice change is an ongoing challenge in medicine, emphasizing the importance of developing effective implementation strategies to facilitate awareness of guideline release and subsequent adherence to and adoption of recommendations.

Volume Alone Does Not Predict Quality Outcomes in Hospitals Performing Pediatric Cardiac Surgery

BACKGROUND

Lower institutional volume has been associated with inferior pediatric cardiac surgery outcomes. This study explored the variation in mortality rates among low-, mid-, and high-volume hospitals performing pediatric cardiac surgery in the United States.

METHODS

The Kids' Inpatient Database was explored for the years 2016 and 2019. Hospitals performing only off-bypass coarctation and ventricular septal defect repair were omitted. The hospitals were divided into 3 groups by their annual case volume. Multivariable logistic regression models were fit to obtain risk-adjusted in-hospital mortality rates.

RESULTS

A total of 25,749 operations performed by 235 hospitals were included in the study. The risk-adjusted mortality rate for the entire sample was 1.9%. There were 140 hospitals in the low-volume group, 64 hospitals in the mid-volume group, and 31 in the high-volume group. All groups had low-mortality (mortality <1.9%) and high-mortality (mortality >1.9%) hospitals. Among low-volume hospitals, 53% were low-mortality (n = 74) and 47% were high-mortality (n = 66) hospitals. Among mid-volume hospitals, 58% were low-mortality (n = 37) and 42% were high-mortality (n = 27) hospitals. Among high-volume hospitals, 68% were low-mortality (n = 21) and 32% were high-mortality (n = 10) hospitals. There was no statistically significant difference in risk-adjusted in-hospital mortality when comparing low-, mid-, and high-volume centers for 7 Society of Thoracic Surgeons benchmark procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

This national, real-world, risk-adjusted volume outcome analysis highlights that volume alone may not be the sole arbiter to predict quality of pediatric cardiac surgery outcomes. Using case volume alone as a surrogate for quality may unfairly asperse high-performing, low-volume programs.

Contemporary Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting vs Multivessel Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

BACKGROUND

Interpretation of recent alterations to the guideline priority of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for multivessel disease contests historical data and practice. To reevaluate contemporary outcomes, a large contemporary analysis was conducted comparing CABG with multivessel PCI among Medicare beneficiaries.

METHODS

The United States Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services database was evaluated all beneficiaries with acute coronary syndrome undergoing isolated CABG or multivessel PCI (2018-2020). Risk adjustment was performed using multilevel regression analysis, Cox proportional hazards time to event models, and inverse probability of treatment weighting propensity scores.

RESULTS

A total of 104,127 beneficiaries were identified undergoing CABG (n = 51,389) or multivessel PCI (n = 52,738). Before risk adjustment, compared with PCI, CABG patients were associated with younger age (72.9 vs 75.2 years, P < .001), higher Elixhauser Comorbidity Index (5.0 vs 4.2, P < .001), more diabetes (48.5% vs 42.2%, P < .001), higher cost ($54,154 vs $33,484, P < .001), and longer length of stay (11.9 vs 5.8 days, P < .001). After inverse probability of treatment weighting propensity score adjustment, compared with PCI, CABG was associated with lower hospital mortality (odds ratio, 0.74; P < .001), fewer hospital readmissions at 3 years (odds ratio, 0.85; P < .001), fewer coronary reinterventions (hazard ratio, 0.37; P < .001), and improved 3-year survival (hazard ratio, 0.51; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Contemporary real-world data from Medicare patients with multivessel disease reveal that CABG outcomes were superior to PCI, providing important longitudinal data to guide patient care and policy development.

Anesthetic Choice for Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Device Placement and Lead Removal: A National Anesthesia Clinical Outcomes Registry Analysis

OBJECTIVE

The authors evaluated the anesthetic approach for cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) placement and transvenous lead removal, hypothesizing that monitored anesthesia care is used more frequently than general anesthesia.

DESIGN

A retrospective study.

SETTING

National Anesthesia Clinical Outcomes Registry data.

PARTICIPANTS

Adult patients who underwent CIED (permanent cardiac pacemaker or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator [ICD]) placement or transvenous lead removal between 2010 and 2021.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Covariates were selected a priori within multivariate models to assess predictors of anesthetic type. A total of 87,530 patients underwent pacemaker placement, 76,140 had ICD placement, 2,568 had pacemaker transvenous lead removal, and 4,861 had ICD transvenous lead extraction; 51.2%, 45.64%, 16.82%, and 45.64% received monitored anesthesia care, respectively. A 2%, 1% (both p < 0.0001), and 2% (p = 0.0003) increase in monitored anesthesia care occurred for each 1-year increase in age for pacemaker placement, ICD placement, and pacemaker transvenous lead removal, respectively. American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status ≤III for pacemaker placement, ASA ≥IV for ICD placement, and ASA ≤III for pacemaker transvenous lead removal were 7% (p = 0.0013), 5% (p = 0.0144), and 27% (p = 0.0247) more likely to receive monitored anesthesia care, respectively. Patients treated in the Northeast were more likely to receive monitored anesthesia care than in the West for all groups analyzed (p < 0.0024). Male patients were 24% less likely to receive monitored anesthesia care for pacemaker transvenous lead removal (p = 0.0378). For every additional 10 pacemaker or ICD lead removals performed in a year, a 2% decrease in monitored anesthesia care was evident (p = 0.0271, p < 0.0001, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

General anesthesia still has a strong presence in the anesthetic management of both CIED placement and transvenous lead removal. Anesthetic choice, however, varies with patient demographics, hospital characteristics, and geographic region.

The relationship between body mass index and mortality is not linear in patients requiring venovenous extracorporeal support

OBJECTIVE

Morbid obesity may influence candidacy for venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VVECMO) support. Indeed, body mass index (BMI) >40 is considered to be a relative contraindication due to increased mortality observed in patients with BMI above this value. There is scant evidence to characterize this relationship beyond speculating about the technical challenges of cannulation and difficulty in optimizing flows. We examined a national cohort to evaluate the influence of BMI on mortality in patients requiring VVECMO for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort analysis on National COVID Cohort Collaborative data evaluating 1,033,229 patients with BMI ≤60 from 31 US hospital systems diagnosed with severe acute respiratory syndrome virus coronavirus 2 infection from September 2019 to August 2022. We performed univariate and multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression analysis on data pertaining to those who required VVECMO support during their hospitalization. A subgroup risk-adjusted analysis comparing ECMO mortality in patients with BMI 40 to 60 with the 25th, 50th, and 75th BMI percentile was performed. Outcomes of interest included BMI, age, comorbidity score, body surface area, and ventilation days.

RESULTS

A total of 774 adult patients required VVECMO. Of these, 542 were men, median age was 47 years, mean adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index was 1, and median BMI was 33. Overall mortality was 47.8%. There was a nonsignificant overall difference in mortality across hospitals (SD, 0.31; 95% CI, 0-0.57). After mixed multivariable logistic regression analysis, advanced age (P < .0001) and Charlson Comorbidity Index (P = .009) were each associated with increased mortality. Neither gender (P = .14) nor duration on mechanical ventilation (P = .39) was associated with increased mortality. An increase in BMI from 25th to 75th percentile was not associated with a difference in mortality (P = .28). In our multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression analysis, there exists a nonlinear relationship between BMI and mortality. Between BMI of 25 and 32, patients experienced an increase in mortality. However, between BMI of 32 and 37, the adjusted mortality in these patients subsequently decreased. Our subgroup analysis comparing BMIs 40 to 60 with the 25th, 50th, and 75th percentile of BMI found no significant difference in ECMO mortality between BMI values of 40 and 60 with the 25th, 50th, 75th percentile.

CONCLUSIONS

Advancing age and higher CCI are each associated with increased risk for mortality in patients requiring VVECMO. A nonlinear relationship exists between mortality and BMI and those between 32 and 37 have lower odds of mortality than those between BMI 25 and 32. This nonlinear pattern suggests a need for further adjudication of the contraindications associated with VVECMO, particularly those based solely on BMI.

Decision-Making Prepandemic: University Curtailment of Academic Operations Closure Processes During the Novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Outbreak

OBJECTIVE

Through in-depth interviews, this study aimed to understand perspectives of key stakeholders regarding the decision to curtail academic operations in the setting of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) outbreak before the declaration of a pandemic on March 11, 2020, and how such processes may be optimized in the future to best protect public health and safety.

METHODS

Virtual interviews with key stakeholders from 4 academic institutions were conducted from September to December 2020 using a standardized interview question template. The interviews lasted approximately 30-45 minutes and each interview was recorded with permission. The interviews were then transcribed and reviewed for qualitative analysis.

RESULTS

The decision to curtail academic operations involved several common themes, such as discussing how institutions would control the outbreak and the process of transitioning to virtual learning and remote work. Universities were monitoring other universities' responses as well as evaluating the prevalence of cases nationally and globally. Risks and challenges identified included housing for international students, financial implications, and loss of academic productivity.

CONCLUSIONS

The decision-making process may be optimized in the future by focusing on communication within a smaller committee, prioritizing epidemiology over fiscal implications, and embracing an openness to consider new strategies. Further research regarding this topic should be pursued to best protect public health and safety.

Mortality and cost of post-cardiotomy extracorporeal support in the United States

BACKGROUND

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has been used increasingly for cardiopulmonary rescue. Despite recent advances however, post-cardiotomy shock (PCS)-ECMO survival remains comparatively poor. We sought to evaluate outcomes and define factors that predict in-hospital mortality.

METHODS

We used the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) to evaluate adult hospitalizations with a primary procedure code for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), and/or valve procedures performed between 2013 and 2018, which also required post cardiotomy ECMO support. Patient-related factors and hospital costs were evaluated to identify those associated with in-hospital mortality.

RESULTS

There were 1,247,835 admissions for cardiac surgical procedures during the study period. Post-cardiotomy shock-ECMO support was provided in 4475 (0.3%) within the study cohort. A total of 2000 (44.7%) hospitalizations involved isolated valvular procedures, 1700 (38.0%) isolated CABG, and 775 (17.3%) involved a combination of both. Overall, in-hospital mortality was 42.1% (n = 1880). Factors significantly associated with in-hospital mortality included patients with multiple comorbidities (> 7) and those undergoing combination of valve and CABG procedures. Only 26.6% of those who survived to discharge, were discharged home independently.

CONCLUSION

Survival to independent home discharge is rare following PCS-ECMO. Its high mortality is associated with multiple comorbidities and combination of CABG and valve surgery.

Cannulate, extubate, ambulate approach for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for COVID-19

OBJECTIVE

We compared outcomes in patients with severe COVID-19 versus non-COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) managed using a dynamic, goal-driven approach to venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO).

METHODS

We performed a retrospective, single-center analysis of our institutional ECMO registry using data from 2017 to 2021. We used Kaplan-Meier plots, Cox proportional hazard models, and propensity score analyses to evaluate the association of COVID-19 status (COVID-19-related ARDS vs non-COVID-19 ARDS) and survival to decannulation, discharge, tracheostomy, and extubation. We also conducted subgroup analyses to compare outcomes with the use of extracorporeal cytoreductive techniques (CytoSorb [CytoSorbents Corp] and plasmapheresis).

RESULTS

The sample comprised 128 patients, 50 with COVID-19 and 78 with non-COVID-19 ARDS. Advancing age was associated with decreased probability of survival to decannulation (P = .04). Compared with the non-COVID-19 ARDS group, patients with COVID-19 had a greater probability of survival to extubation (P < .01) and comparable survival to discharge (P = .14).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with COVID-19 managed with ECMO had comparable outcomes as patients with non-COVID ARDS. A strategy of early extubation and ambulation might be a safe and effective strategy to improve outcomes and survival, even for patients with severe COVID-19.

Intravenous aviptadil and remdesivir for treatment of COVID-19-associated hypoxaemic respiratory failure in the USA (TESICO): a randomised, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

There is a clinical need for therapeutics for COVID-19 patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure whose 60-day mortality remains at 30-50%. Aviptadil, a lung-protective neuropeptide, and remdesivir, a nucleotide prodrug of an adenosine analog, were compared with placebo among patients with COVID-19 acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure.

METHODS

TESICO was a randomised trial of aviptadil and remdesivir versus placebo at 28 sites in the USA. Hospitalised adult patients were eligible for the study if they had acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure due to confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and were within 4 days of the onset of respiratory failure. Participants could be randomly assigned to both study treatments in a 2 × 2 factorial design or to just one of the agents. Participants were randomly assigned with a web-based application. For each site, randomisation was stratified by disease severity (high-flow nasal oxygen or non-invasive ventilation vs invasive mechanical ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation [ECMO]), and four strata were defined by remdesivir and aviptadil eligibility, as follows: (1) eligible for randomisation to aviptadil and remdesivir in the 2 × 2 factorial design; participants were equally randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to intravenous aviptadil plus remdesivir, aviptadil plus remdesivir matched placebo, aviptadil matched placebo plus remdesvir, or aviptadil placebo plus remdesivir placebo; (2) eligible for randomisation to aviptadil only because remdesivir was started before randomisation; (3) eligible for randomisation to aviptadil only because remdesivir was contraindicated; and (4) eligible for randomisation to remdesivir only because aviptadil was contraindicated. For participants in strata 2-4, randomisation was 1:1 to the active agent or matched placebo. Aviptadil was administered as a daily 12-h infusion for 3 days, targeting 600 pmol/kg on infusion day 1, 1200 pmol/kg on day 2, and 1800 pmol/kg on day 3. Remdesivir was administered as a 200 mg loading dose, followed by 100 mg daily maintenance doses for up to a 10-day total course. For participants assigned to placebo for either agent, matched saline placebo was administered in identical volumes. For both treatment comparisons, the primary outcome, assessed at day 90, was a six-category ordinal outcome: (1) at home (defined as the type of residence before hospitalisation) and off oxygen (recovered) for at least 77 days, (2) at home and off oxygen for 49-76 days, (3) at home and off oxygen for 1-48 days, (4) not hospitalised but either on supplemental oxygen or not at home, (5) hospitalised or in hospice care, or (6) dead. Mortality up to day 90 was a key secondary outcome. The independent data and safety monitoring board recommended stopping the aviptadil trial on May 25, 2022, for futility. On June 9, 2022, the sponsor stopped the trial of remdesivir due to slow enrolment. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04843761.

FINDINGS

Between April 21, 2021, and May 24, 2022, we enrolled 473 participants in the study. For the aviptadil comparison, 471 participants were randomly assigned to aviptadil or matched placebo. The modified intention-to-treat population comprised 461 participants who received at least a partial infusion of aviptadil (231 participants) or aviptadil matched placebo (230 participants). For the remdesivir comparison, 87 participants were randomly assigned to remdesivir or matched placebo and all received some infusion of remdesivir (44 participants) or remdesivir matched placebo (43 participants). 85 participants were included in the modified intention-to-treat analyses for both agents (ie, those enrolled in the 2 x 2 factorial). For the aviptadil versus placebo comparison, the median age was 57 years (IQR 46-66), 178 (39%) of 461 participants were female, and 246 (53%) were Black, Hispanic, Asian or other (vs 215 [47%] White participants). 431 (94%) of 461 participants were in an intensive care unit at baseline, with 271 (59%) receiving high-flow nasal oxygen or non-invasive ventiliation, 185 (40%) receiving invasive mechanical ventilation, and five (1%) receiving ECMO. The odds ratio (OR) for being in a better category of the primary efficacy endpoint for aviptadil versus placebo at day 90, from a model stratified by baseline disease severity, was 1·11 (95% CI 0·80-1·55; p=0·54). Up to day 90, 86 participants in the aviptadil group and 83 in the placebo group died. The cumulative percentage who died up to day 90 was 38% in the aviptadil group and 36% in the placebo group (hazard ratio 1·04, 95% CI 0·77-1·41; p=0·78). The primary safety outcome of death, serious adverse events, organ failure, serious infection, or grade 3 or 4 adverse events up to day 5 occurred in 146 (63%) of 231 patients in the aviptadil group compared with 129 (56%) of 230 participants in the placebo group (OR 1·40, 95% CI 0·94-2·08; p=0·10).

INTERPRETATION

Among patients with COVID-19-associated acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure, aviptadil did not significantly improve clinical outcomes up to day 90 when compared with placebo. The smaller than planned sample size for the remdesivir trial did not permit definitive conclusions regarding safety or efficacy.

FUNDING

National Institutes of Health.

Extracorporeal hemoadsorption in critically ill COVID-19 patients on VV ECMO: the CytoSorb therapy in COVID-19 (CTC) registry

OBJECTIVES

The CytoSorb therapy in COVID-19 (CTC) registry evaluated the clinical performance and treatment parameters of extracorporeal hemoadsorption integrated with veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) in critically ill COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and respiratory failure under US FDA Emergency Use Authorization.

DESIGN

Multicenter, observational, registry (NCT04391920).

SETTING

Intensive care units (ICUs) in five major US academic centers between April 2020 and January 2022.

PATIENTS

A total of 100 critically ill adults with COVID-19-related ARDS requiring VV ECMO support, who were treated with extracorporeal hemoadsorption.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Baseline demographics, clinical characteristics, laboratory values and outcomes were recorded following individual ethics committee approval at each center. Detailed data on organ support utilization parameters and hemoadsorption treatments were also collected. Biomarker data were collected according to the standard practice at each participating site, and available values were compared before and after hemoadsorption. The primary outcome of mortality was evaluated using a time-to-event analysis. A total of 100 patients (63% male; age 44 ± 11 years) were included. Survival rates were 86% at 30 days and 74% at 90 days. Median time from ICU admission to the initiation of hemoadsorption was 87 h and was used to define two post hoc groups: ≤ 87 h (group-early start, GE) and > 87 h (group-late start, GL). After the start of hemoadsorption, patients in the GE versus GL had significantly shorter median duration of mechanical ventilation (7 [2-26] vs. 17 [7-37] days, p = 0.02), ECMO support (13 [8-24] vs. 29 [14-38] days, p = 0.021) and ICU stay (17 [10-40] vs 36 [19-55] days, p = 0.002). Survival at 90 days in GE was 82% compared to 66% in GL (p = 0.14). No device-related adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

In critically ill patients with severe COVID-19-related ARDS treated with the combination of VV-ECMO and hemoadsorption, 90-day survival was 74% and earlier intervention was associated with shorter need for organ support and ICU stay. These results lend support to the concept of "enhanced lung rest" with the combined use of VV-ECMO plus hemoadsorption in patients with ARDS.

Surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation is associated with improved survival compared with appendage obliteration alone: An analysis of 100,000 Medicare beneficiaries

OBJECTIVE

Societal guidelines support the concomitant surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Recent evidence has highlighted the stroke reduction of left atrial appendage obliteration with or without surgical ablation in similar populations. To inform clinical decision-making, we evaluated real-world outcomes of patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing cardiac surgery by comparing no atrial fibrillation management with left atrial appendage obliteration alone versus surgical ablation + left atrial appendage obliteration.

METHODS

By using the US Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services inpatient claims database, we evaluated all beneficiaries aged 65 years and older with a diagnosis of atrial fibrillation undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting or mitral/aortic/tricuspid valve repair or replacement between January 2018 and December 2020. Diagnosis-related group and International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision procedure codes were used to define variables. Risk adjustment was performed with regression analysis using inverse probability weighting of propensity scores and Cox proportional hazards models. Subgroup analyses stratified patients by primary operation and paroxysmal or persistent atrial fibrillation.

RESULTS

A total of 103,382 patients with preoperative atrial fibrillation were stratified by surgical ablation + left atrial appendage obliteration (10,437; 10.1%), left atrial appendage obliteration alone (12,901; 12.5%), or no atrial fibrillation management (80,044; 77.4%). Patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (21,076; 20.4%) received the highest proportion of surgical ablation + left atrial appendage obliteration (4661 19.4%) and left atrial appendage obliteration alone (3%724%; 15.4%) versus no atrial fibrillation management (15,688; 65.2%). Likewise, patients undergoing open atrial operations (mitral/tricuspid; 17,204; 16.6%) had higher proportions of atrial fibrillation treatment (surgical ablation + left atrial appendage obliteration 5267 30.6%; left atrial appendage obliteration alone 4259 24.8%; no atrial fibrillation management 7678 44.6%). After robust risk adjustment, surgical ablation + left atrial appendage obliteration was independently associated with reduced 3-year mortality compared with no atrial fibrillation treatment (hazard ratio, 0.68, P < .001) and left atrial appendage obliteration alone (hazard ratio, 0.90, P < .001). Compared with no atrial fibrillation treatment, readmissions for embolic stroke were lower with both surgical ablation + left atrial appendage obliteration (hazard ratio, 0.77, P = .009) and left atrial appendage obliteration alone (hazard ratio, 0.73, P < .001). Reduction in 3-year composite mortality or stroke after surgical ablation + left atrial appendage obliteration was superior to left atrial appendage alone (hazard ratio, 0.90, P = .035).

CONCLUSIONS

In Medicare beneficiaries with atrial fibrillation undergoing cardiac surgery, the surgical management of atrial fibrillation was associated with lower 3-year mortality and readmission for stroke, with surgical ablation + left atrial appendage obliteration being associated with higher survival compared with left atrial appendage obliteration alone.

ECMO During COVID-19: A Society of Thoracic Surgeons/Extracorporeal Life Support Organization Survey

BACKGROUND

The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Workforce on Critical Care and the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization sought to identify how the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has changed the practice of venoarterial (VA) and venovenous (VV) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) programs across North America.

METHODS

A 26-question survey covering 6 categories (ECMO initiation, cannulation, management, anticoagulation, triage/protocols, and credentialing) was emailed to 276 North American Extracorporeal Life Support Organization centers. ECMO practices before and during the COVID-19 pandemic were compared.

RESULTS

Responses were received from 93 (34%) programs. The percentage of high-volume (>20 cases per year) VV ECMO programs increased during the pandemic from 29% to 41% (P < .001), as did institutions requiring multiple clinicians for determining initiation of ECMO (VV ECMO, 25% to 43% [P = .001]; VA ECMO, 20% to 32% [P = .012]). During the pandemic, more institutions developed their own protocols for resource allocation (23% before to 51%; P < .001), and more programs created sharing arrangements to triage patients and equipment with other centers (31% to 57%; P < .001). Direct thrombin inhibitor use increased for both VA ECMO (13% to 18%; P = .025) and VV ECMO (12% to 24%; P = .005). Although cardiothoracic surgeons remained the primary cannulating proceduralists, VV ECMO cannulations performed by pulmonary and critical care physicians increased (13% to 17%; P = .046).

CONCLUSIONS

The Society of Thoracic Surgeons/Extracorporeal Life Support Organization collaborative survey indicated that the pandemic has affected ECMO practice. Further research on these ECMO strategies and lessons learned during the COVID-19 pandemic may be useful in future global situations.

Comparison of Standard-Dose Versus High-Dose Dexmedetomidine in Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation

BACKGROUND

Dexmedetomidine is commonly used to achieve light sedation in patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) despite minimal evidence. In vivo studies have shown dexmedetomidine sequestration in ECMO circuits, and higher doses may be used to overcome sequestration.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare safety and efficacy of dexmedetomidine at standard versus high doses in ECMO.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of adult ECMO patients was performed. Patients were compared as receiving either standard-dose (≤1.5 µg/kg/h) or high-dose (>1.5 µg/kg/h) dexmedetomidine. Safety outcomes included new onset bradycardia or hypotension. Efficacy was compared by the addition of concomitant sedative and analgesic agents.

RESULTS

One hundred five patients were evaluated, with 20% of patients in the high-dose group. Comparing standard and high dosing, no significant differences were seen in primary safety outcomes including bradycardia (49% vs 38%, P = 0.46), hypotension (79% vs 71%, P = 0.56), or addition of vasopressors (75% vs 71%, P = 0.78). Need for concomitant analgesic agents and propofol was similar between groups.

CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE

This represents the first evaluation of use of high-dose dexmedetomidine in ECMO. Rates of dexmedetomidine higher than 1.5 µg/kg/h were commonly used in patients on ECMO, with similar rates of adverse effects and need for concomitant propofol and analgesic agents. While high-dose dexmedetomidine may be as safe as standard dose, no additional efficacy was found.

Anesthetic management for transcatheter aortic valve replacement: A national anesthesia clinical outcomes registry analysis

Background

General anesthesia has traditionally been used in transcatheter aortic valve replacement; however, there has been increasing interest and momentum in alternative anesthetic techniques.

Aims

To perform a descriptive study of anesthetic management options in transcatheter aortic valve replacements in the United States, comparing trends in use of monitored anesthesia care versus general anesthesia.

Settings and Design

Data evaluated from the American Society of Anesthesiologists' (ASA) Anesthesia Quality Institute's National Anesthesia Clinical Outcomes Registry.

Materials and Methods

Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors associated with use of monitored anesthesia care compared to general anesthesia.

Results

The use of monitored anesthesia care has increased from 1.8% of cases in 2013 to 25.2% in 2017 (p = 0.0001). Patients were more likely ages 80+ (66% vs. 61%; p = 0.0001), male (54% vs. 52%; p = 0.0001), ASA physical status > III (86% vs. 80%; p = 0.0001), cared for in the Northeast (38% vs. 22%; p = 0.0001), and residents in zip codes with higher median income ($63,382 vs. $55,311; p = 0.0001). Multivariable analysis revealed each one-year increase in age, every 50 procedures performed annually at a practice, and being male were associated with 3% (p = 0.0001), 33% (p = 0.012), and 16% (p = 0.026) increased odds of monitored anesthesia care, respectively. Centers in the Northeast were more likely to use monitored anesthesia care (all p < 0.005). Patients who underwent approaches other than percutaneous femoral arterial were less likely to receive monitored anesthesia care (adjusted odds ratios all < 0.51; all p = 0.0001).

Conclusion

Anesthetic type for transcatheter aortic valve replacements in the United States varies with age, sex, geography, volume of cases performed at a center, and procedural approach.

The Association of Baseline Plasma SARS-CoV-2 Nucleocapsid Antigen Level and Outcomes in Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Levels of plasma SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid (N) antigen may be an important biomarker in patients with COVID-19 and enhance our understanding of the pathogenesis of COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether levels of plasma antigen can predict short-term clinical outcomes and identify clinical and viral factors associated with plasma antigen levels in hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study of baseline plasma antigen level from 2540 participants enrolled in the TICO (Therapeutics for Inpatients With COVID-19) platform trial from August 2020 to November 2021, with additional data on day 5 outcome and time to discharge.

SETTING

114 centers in 10 countries.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults hospitalized for acute SARS-CoV-2 infection with 12 days or less of symptoms.

MEASUREMENTS

Baseline plasma viral N antigen level was measured at a central laboratory. Delta variant status was determined from baseline nasal swabs using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction. Associations between baseline patient characteristics and viral factors and baseline plasma antigen levels were assessed using both unadjusted and multivariable modeling. Association between elevated baseline antigen level of 1000 ng/L or greater and outcomes, including worsening of ordinal pulmonary scale at day 5 and time to hospital discharge, were evaluated using logistic regression and Fine-Gray regression models, respectively.

RESULTS

Plasma antigen was below the level of quantification in 5% of participants at enrollment, and 1000 ng/L or greater in 57%. Baseline pulmonary severity of illness was strongly associated with plasma antigen level, with mean plasma antigen level 3.10-fold higher among those requiring noninvasive ventilation or high-flow nasal cannula compared with room air (95% CI, 2.22 to 4.34). Plasma antigen level was higher in those who lacked antispike antibodies (6.42 fold; CI, 5.37 to 7.66) and in those with the Delta variant (1.73 fold; CI, 1.41 to 2.13). Additional factors associated with higher baseline antigen level included male sex, shorter time since hospital admission, decreased days of remdesivir, and renal impairment. In contrast, race, ethnicity, body mass index, and immunocompromising conditions were not associated with plasma antigen levels. Plasma antigen level of 1000 ng/L or greater was associated with a markedly higher odds of worsened pulmonary status at day 5 (odds ratio, 5.06 [CI, 3.41 to 7.50]) and longer time to hospital discharge (median, 7 vs. 4 days; subhazard ratio, 0.51 [CI, 0.45 to 0.57]), with subhazard ratios similar across all levels of baseline pulmonary severity.

LIMITATIONS

Plasma samples were drawn at enrollment, not hospital presentation. No point-of-care test to measure plasma antigen is currently available.

CONCLUSION

Elevated plasma antigen is highly associated with both severity of pulmonary illness and clinically important patient outcomes. Multiple clinical and viral factors are associated with plasma antigen level at presentation. These data support a potential role of ongoing viral replication in the pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2 in hospitalized patients.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

U.S. government Operation Warp Speed and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

2021: Perioperative and Critical Care Year in Review for the Cardiothoracic Surgery Team

For yet another year, our lives have been dominated by a pandemic. This year in review, we feature an expert panel opinion regarding extracorporeal support in the context of COVID-19, challenging previously held standards. We also feature survey results assessing the impact of the pandemic on cardiac surgical volume. Furthermore, we focus on a single center experience that evaluated the use of pulmonary artery catheters and the comparison of transfusion strategies in the Restrictive and Liberal Transfusion Strategies in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction (REALITY) trial. Additionally, we address the impact of acute kidney injury on cardiac surgery and highlight the controversy regarding the choice of fluid resuscitation. We close with an evaluation of dysphagia in cardiac surgery and the impact of prehabilitation to optimize surgical outcomes.

Difficult Decisions in Minimally Invasive Surgery of the Thymus

A minimally invasive resection of thymomas has been accepted as standard of care in the last decade for early stage thymomas. This is somewhat controversial in terms of higher-staged thymomas and myasthenia gravis patients due to the prognostic importance of complete resections and the indolent characteristics of the disease process. Despite concerted efforts to standardize minimally invasive approaches, there is still controversy as to the extent of excision, approach of surgery, and the platform utilized. In this article, we aim to provide our surgical perspective of thymic resection and a review of the existing literature.

Robotic Aortic Valve Replacement: First 50 Cases

BACKGROUND

Existing management challenges in selecting transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) include bicuspid stenosis, low clinical risk, horizontal valve position, aortic insufficiency (AI), and need for concomitant procedures or mechanical valves. To address these gaps, we present our early experience with fully robotic-assisted aortic valve replacement (RAVR).

METHODS

Between January 2020 and February 2021, 50 consecutive RAVR operations were performed utilizing a 3-4 cm lateral mini-thoracotomy three-port technique with transthoracic aortic clamping, similar to our robotic mitral platform. Conventional SAVR prostheses were implanted with interrupted braided sutures in all cases.

RESULTS

Median age was 67.5 years, BMI was 29, calcified bicuspid disease was present in 28/50 (56%), and severe AI in 8/50 (16%). Ejection fraction was 54.8±8.4% (mean±SD), and STS PROM was 1.54±0.7%. Mechanical prostheses were used in 16/50 (32%), and 7 required concomitant procedures including Cox-Maze (3), left atrial appendage clipping (1), aortic root enlargement (2), mitral repair (1), and left atrial myxoma excision (1). Median times for cardiopulmonary bypass, cross-clamp, valvectomy, annular sutures, and aortotomy closure were 166, 117, 4, 20, and 31 minutes, respectively. All times plateaued after the initial five cases. Most patients (42/50, 84%) were extubated in the operating room, and the remainder (8/50, 16%) within 4 hours. There was no 30-day operative mortality or stroke. All had 30-day echocardiography demonstrating no valvular or perivalvular abnormalities.

CONCLUSIONS

RAVR appears to have procedural safety and short-term outcomes to rival alternatives. Incremental experience may facilitate the safe performance of concomitant procedures as deemed necessary.

Multi-institutional Analysis of 200 COVID-19 Patients treated with ECMO:Outcomes and Trends

Background

The role of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in the management of patients with COVID-19 continues to evolve. The purpose of this analysis is to review our multi-institutional clinical experience involving 200 consecutive patients at 29 hospitals with confirmed COVID-19 supported with ECMO.

Methods

This analysis includes our first 200 COVID-19 patients with complete data who were supported with and separated from ECMO. These patients were cannulated between March 17 and December 1, 2020. Differences by mortality group were assessed using χ² tests for categoric variables and Kruskal-Wallis rank sum tests and Welch’s analysis of variance for continuous variables.

Results

Median ECMO time was 15 days (interquartile range, 9 to 28). All 200 patients have separated from ECMO: 90 patients (45%) survived and 110 patients (55%) died. Survival with venovenous ECMO was 87 of 188 patients (46.3%), whereas survival with venoarterial ECMO was 3 of 12 patients (25%). Of 90 survivors, 77 have been discharged from the hospital and 13 remain hospitalized at the ECMO-providing hospital. Survivors had lower median age (47 versus 56 years, P < .001) and shorter median time from diagnosis to ECMO cannulation (8 versus 12 days, P = .003). For the 90 survivors, adjunctive therapies on ECMO included intravenous steroids (64), remdesivir (49), convalescent plasma (43), anti-interleukin-6 receptor blockers (39), prostaglandin (33), and hydroxychloroquine (22).

Conclusions

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation facilitates survival of select critically ill patients with COVID-19. Survivors tend to be younger and have a shorter duration from diagnosis to cannulation. Substantial variation exists in drug treatment of COVID-19, but ECMO offers a reasonable rescue strategy.

Outcome and Cost of Nurse-led versus Perfusionist-led Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation

BACKGROUND

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is a resource-intense modality of care whose use has grown exponentially. We examined volume and utilization trends to identify the financial break-even point that might serve to dichotomize between nurse specialist-led and perfusionist-led ECMO programs.

METHODS

Data pertaining to patients who required ECMO support between 2018 and 2019 were reviewed. ECMO staffing costs were estimated based on national trends and modelled by annual utilization and case volume. A break-even point was derived from a comparison between nurse specialist-led and perfusionist-led models. For each scenario, direct medical costs were calculated based on utilization which was in turn defined by "low" (4 days), "average" (10 days), and "high" (30 days) duration of time spent on ECMO.

RESULTS

Within the time frame, there was a total of 107 ECMO cases with a mean ECMO duration of 11 days, within the study time frame. Overall, ECMO nursing personnel costs were less than those for perfusionists ($108,000 vs $175,000). Programmatic costs were higher in the perfusionist-led versus nurse specialist-led model when annual utilization was greater than 10 cases and ECMO duration was longer than a mean of 9.7 days. There was no difference in survival between the two models.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of a perfusionist-led ECMO model may be more cost-conscious in the context of low utilization, smaller case volume and shorter ECMO duration. However, once annual case volume exceeds 10 and mean ECMO duration exceeds 10 days, the nurse specialist-led model may be more cost-conscious.

A 34-Year-Old Male Intravenous Drug User with a Third Episode of Tricuspid Valve Endocarditis Treated with Repeat Valve Surgery

Patient: Male, 34-year-old

Final Diagnosis: Infective endocarditis of the tricuspid valve

Symptoms: Lethargy • weakness

Medication: —

Clinical Procedure: Tricuspid valve repair • tricuspid valve replacement

Specialty: Anesthesiology • Cardiac Surgery • Infectious Diseases • Psychiatry

Incremental effect of complications on mortality and hospital costs in adult ECMO patients

INTRODUCTION

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is a resource-intense modality whose usage is expanding rapidly. It is a costly endeavor and best conducted in a multidisciplinary setting. There is a growing impetus to mitigate the mortality and costs associated with ECMO. We sought to examine the impact of complications on mortality and hospital costs in patients on ECMO.

METHODS

Using the NIS database, we performed multivariable logistic regression to assess the influence of complications on the primary outcome, in-hospital mortality. Similarly, we performed multivariable survey linear regression analysis to evaluate the effect of the complications on hospital costs.

RESULTS

Of the 12,637 patients supported using ECMO between 2004 and 2013, 9836 (78%) developed at least one complication. The three most common complications were acute kidney injury (32.8%), bloodstream infection (31.8%), and bleeding (27.8%). An ECMO hospitalization with no complications was associated with median costs of $53,470, a single complication with costs of $97,560, two complications with costs of $139,035, and three complication with costs of $162,284. A single complication was associated with a 165% increase in odds of mortality. Two or three complications resulted in 375% or 627% higher odds of mortality, respectively. Having one, two, or three complications was associated with 24%, 38%, or 38% increase in median costs respectively (Figure 1). Complications associated with the highest median costs were central line-associated bloodstream infection $217,751; liver failure $176,201; bloodstream infection $169,529.

CONCLUSION

In-hospital mortality and costs increase with each incremental complication in patients on ECMO. Accurate prediction and mitigation of complications is likely to improve outcomes and cost.

Anesthetic Choice for Atrial Fibrillation Ablation: A National Anesthesia Clinical Outcomes Registry Analysis

OBJECTIVE

The authors evaluated the type of anesthesia administered in atrial fibrillation ablation, hypothesizing that monitored anesthesia care is used less frequently than general anesthesia.

DESIGN

A retrospective study.

SETTING

National Anesthesia Clinical Outcomes Registry data, which are multi-institutional from across the United States.

PARTICIPANTS

Adult patients who underwent elective atrial fibrillation ablation between 2013 and 2018.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

National Anesthesia Clinical Outcomes Registry data were evaluated, and covariates were selected a priori within multivariate models to assess for predictors of anesthetic type. A total of 54,321 patients underwent atrial fibrillation ablation; 3,251 (6.0%) received monitored anesthesia care. Patients who received monitored anesthesia care were more likely to be >80 years old (12.4% v 4.9%; p < 0.0001), female (36.1% v 34.3%; p < 0.0001), have American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status >III (17.28% v 10.48%; p < 0.0001), and reside in urban areas (62.23% v 53.37%; p < 0.0001). They received care in the Northeast (17.6% v 10.1%; p < 0.0001) at low-volume centers (median 224 v 284 procedures; p < 0.0001). Multivariate analysis revealed that each five-year increase in age, being female, and having an American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status >III resulted in a 7% (p < 0.0001), 9% (p = 0.032), and 200% (p < 0.0001) increased odds of receiving monitored anesthesia care, respectively. Requiring additional ablation of atria or of a second arrhythmia and residing outside the Northeast resulted in a decreased odds of monitored anesthesia care (adjusted odds ratio 0.24 [p=0.002] and < 0.5 [p < 0.03], respectively). For each 50 cases performed annually at a center, the odds decreased by 5% (p = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

General anesthesia is the most common type of anesthesia administered for atrial fibrillation ablation. The type of anesthesia administered, however, varies with patient, procedural, and hospital characteristics.

Vascular Complications Increase Hospital Charges and Mortality in Adult Patients on Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in the United States

Patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) who suffer vascular complications frequently accrue additional procedures and costs. We sought to evaluate the effect of ECMO-related vascular complications on hospital charges and in-hospital mortality. Adult discharges involving ECMO from 2004 to 2013 in the National Inpatient Sample were examined. There were 12,636 patients in the cohort. Vascular complications, focusing on arterial complications were identified using ICD-9-CM diagnosis and procedure codes. A multivariable survey linear regression model using median hospital charges was used to model the effect of vascular complications on charges. We used multivariable survey logistic regression to evaluate the effect of vascular complications on in-hospital mortality. Of the 12,636 patients examined, 6467 (51.2%) had ECMO-related vascular complications. Median charges in patients with vascular complications were $ 477,363 (interquartile range: 258,660-875,823) and were $ 282,298 (interquartile range: 130,030-578,027) without vascular complications. On multivariable analysis, patients with vascular complications had 24% higher median charges than patients without vascular complications (Ratio: 1.24; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.16-1.33; P < 0.0001) and 34% higher odds of experiencing in-hospital mortality than patients without vascular complications (adjusted odds ratio: 1.34; 95% CI:1.08-1.66; P = 0.009). Vascular complications occur in over half of ECMO patients and are associated with an increased risk of high hospital charges and in-hospital mortality. These findings support the need for identification and modification of risk factors for ECMO-related vascular complications. Furthermore, the standardization of protocols using evidence-based measures to mitigate vascular complications may improve overall ECMO outcomes.

Transplantation for work-related lung disease in the USA

OBJECTIVES

Work-related lung diseases (WRLDs) are entirely preventable. To assess the impact of WRLDs on the US transplant system, we identified adult lung transplant recipients with a WRLD diagnosis specified at the time of transplant to describe demographic, payer and clinical characteristics of these patients and to assess post-transplant survival.

METHODS

Using US registry data from 1991 to 2018, we identified lung transplant recipients with WRLDs including coal workers' pneumoconiosis, silicosis, asbestosis, metal pneumoconiosis and berylliosis.

RESULTS

The frequency of WRLD-associated transplants has increased over time. Among 230 lung transplants for WRLD, a majority were performed since 2009; 79 were for coal workers' pneumoconiosis and 78 were for silicosis. Patients with coal workers' pneumoconiosis were predominantly from West Virginia (n=31), Kentucky (n=23) or Virginia (n=10). States with the highest number of patients with silicosis transplant were Pennsylvania (n=12) and West Virginia (n=8). Patients with metal pneumoconiosis and asbestosis had the lowest and highest mean age at transplant (48.8 and 62.1 years). Median post-transplant survival was 8.2 years for patients with asbestosis, 6.6 years for coal workers' pneumoconiosis and 7.8 years for silicosis. Risk of death among patients with silicosis, coal workers' pneumoconiosis and asbestosis did not differ when compared with patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Lung transplants for WRLDs are increasingly common, indicating a need for primary prevention and surveillance in high-risk occupations. Collection of patient occupational history by the registry could enhance case identification and inform prevention strategies.