The impact of implementing an endocarditis team in comparison to the classic heart team in a tertiary referral centre

Background

Infective endocarditis (IE) is a complex disease for which the European Society of Cardiology guideline recommends a dedicated multidisciplinary endocarditis team (ET) approach since 2015. It is currently unknown whether this ET approach is beneficial compared to a classic heart team approach including bedside consultation by an infectious disease specialist in Western Europe.

Methods

This retrospective single centre, observational cohort study was conducted at the Radboudumc, a tertiary referral centre in the Netherlands. Consecutive patients treated for IE were included from September 2017 to September 2018 before implementation of a dedicated ET and from May 2019 to May 2020 afterwards.

Results

In total, 90 IE patients (45 patients before and 45 patients after the implementation of the ET) were included. No significant differences were found in diagnostic workup, surgical treatment (surgery performed 69% vs. 71%, p = 0.82), time to surgery because of an urgent indication (median 4 vs. 6 days, p = 0.82), in-hospital complications (53% vs. 67%, p = 0.20), and 6-month mortality (11% vs. 13%, p = 0.75) between IE patients treated before and after the implementation of the ET.

Conclusion

Formalization of the recommended multidisciplinary endocarditis team might not significantly improve the complication rate nor the short term outcome.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12872-022-02558-0.

Treatment decision for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the role of the heart team : Position statement paper of the Dutch Working Group of Transcatheter Heart Interventions

The current paper presents a position statement of the Dutch Working Group of Transcatheter Heart Valve Interventions that describes which patients with aortic stenosis should be considered for transcatheter aortic valve implantation and how this treatment proposal/decision should be made. Given the complexity of the disease and the assessment of its severity, in particular in combination with the continuous emergence of new clinical insights and evidence from physiological and randomised clinical studies plus the introduction of novel innovative treatment modalities, the gatekeeper of the treatment proposal/decision and, thus, of qualification for cost reimbursement is the heart team, which consists of dedicated professionals working in specialised centres.

Angiosarcoma of the Descending Aorta, Diagnostic Difficulties

Introduction

Primary angiosarcomas of the aorta are rare and because of their non-specific presentation, the initial diagnosis is often very difficult.

Report

A 66 year old woman, initially suffering from night sweats and general malaise, is presented. A computerized tomography (CT) scan was performed which showed a filling defect of the descending aorta. This defect later caused embolic occlusion of the celiac vessels. The patient underwent surgical resection of the filling defect of the descending aorta and an embolectomy of the celiac vessels. The defect was histopathologically diagnosed as an angiosarcoma. The clinical presentation, diagnostic pitfalls, histopathological diagnosis, and the therapeutic management are discussed.

Discussion

In this case report, the importance of carefully diagnosing an angiosarcoma is highlighted as the consequences could be rapid metastasization or embolization.

•

An angiosarcoma of the descending aorta was diagnosed, which is a rare malignancy.

•

This malignancy is very hard to diagnose therefore long-term survival is uncertain.

•

This malignancy is very aggressive for both local and distant recurrence.

•

This case report reflects the difficulty in diagnosing this malignancy.

•

It also shows the rapid progression of this disease.

Preoperative therapy of low-dose aspirin in internal mammary artery bypass operations with and without low-dose aprotinin

The effect of preoperative low-dose aspirin (1 mg/kg of body weight) and intraoperative low-dose aprotinin (2 million kallikrein inactivator units) treatment on perioperative blood loss and blood requirements in patients who undergo internal mammary artery bypass operations is unknown. Therefore, we retrospectively studied 75 matching patients who underwent internal mammary artery operations, and they were allocated to one of three groups: low-dose aspirin and aprotinin treatment (group 1, n = 25), low-dose aspirin treatment without aprotinin (group 2, n = 25), and neither aspirin nor aprotinin treatment (group 3, n = 25). Although the perioperative blood loss was similar, the blood requirements tended to be higher (p = 0.09) in the patients who were treated with aspirin (group 2) than in the control patients (group 3). When aprotinin was added to the priming solution in patients who were treated with aspirin (group 1), blood loss was significantly lower (p < 0.05) than that of group 2 patients but not of control patients. Blood requirements were significantly lower (p < 0.01) than those of patients in groups 2 and 3. Blood products were needed in 29%, 62%, and 75% of patients in groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively.

Bilateral mammary artery surgery or percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty for multivessel coronary artery disease? An analysis of effects and costs

Seventy-two patients with stable or unstable angina treated since 1983 by multivessel-PTCA(MVP) were retrospectively compared with 44 similar patients that were suitable for MVP, but who had undergone bilateral mammary artery (BIMA) surgery (and additional vein grafts in 60.5% of the patients) since 1986. Both groups were comparable (P = not significant [NS]) for gender, age, most risk factors, objective ischaemia and left ventricular function; however, in the BIMA group there were more previous infarctions (P = 0.02), hypertension (P = 0.03), three-vessel disease (P = 0.0001), and less severe angina (P = 0.007). In the BIMA group, a mean of 3.1 (range 2-5) vessels were treated and in the MVP group 2.0 (range 2-3) vessels (P = 0.0001). Both groups were almost completely revascularized (NS). In 39.5% of the BIMA group, no veins were used and in 20.9% the BIMAs were used as sequential grafts. In-hospital mortality was comparable: 2.3% for BIMA and 1.4% for MVP, so were periprocedural infarctions (13.6% vs 8.3%), rethoracotomies (9.1% vs 0%), emergency procedures (0% vs 5.7%), low cardiac output (2.3% vs 5.6%) and other complications (18.2% vs 9.2%). The mean stay (days) on the ICU/CCU for BIMA was 2.3 and for MVP 1.6 (P = 0.005) and the mean hospital stay for BIMA 12.3 and for MVP 6.6 (P = 0.0001). The maximum and mean follow-up (months) of 43 BIMA and 71 MVP hospital survivors was 35 vs 72 and 9.5 vs 22.3 (P = 0.0001) with a late mortality of 0% and 4.2% (NS). MVP patients, including 12 with re-procedures, had more recurrent angina (17.7% vs 4.7%, P less than 0.05) and more often used anti-anginal medications (62.0% vs 18.6%, P less than 0.0001). Late complications (excluding re-procedures) were comparable for MVP and BIMA (20% vs 9.3%, 4.4% vs 0%, 9.2% vs 14%). MVP patients had more re-hospitalizations (34 vs 5, P less than 0.0001), re-catheterizations (33% vs 2.3%, P less than 0.0001) and cardiac re-procedures (16 vs 0, P = 0.0006) than BIMA patients. Recurrent-angina-free survival at 1 year was 96% after BIMA and 64% after MVP (P less than 0.01). Event-free survival at 1 year was 86% after BIMA and 58% after MVP (P less than 0.05).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)