Background: Cardiac surgery often represents the only treatment option in patients with infective endocarditis (IE). However, IE surgery may lead to a sudden release of inflammatory mediators, which is associated with the severity of postoperative organ dysfunction. We investigated the impact of hemoadsorption during IE surgery on postoperative organ dysfunction. Methods: This multi-center, randomized, non-blinded, controlled trial assigned patients undergoing cardiac surgery for IE to hemoadsorption [integration of CytoSorb® to cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB)] or control. The Primary outcome (ΔSOFA) was defined as the difference between the mean total postoperative sequential organ failure assessment score (SOFA), calculated maximally to the 9th postoperative day, and the basal SOFA score. The analysis was by modified intention-to-treat. A predefined inter-group comparison was done using a linear mixed model for ΔSOFA including surgeon and baseline SOFA as fixed effect covariates and with the surgical center as random effect. The SOFA score assesses dysfunction in six organ systems, each scored from zero to four. Higher scores indicate worsening dysfunction. Secondary outcomes were 30-day mortality, durations of mechanical ventilation, vasopressor and renal replacement therapy. Cytokines were measured in the first 50 patients. Results: Between January 17, 2018 and January 31, 2020, A total of 288 patients were randomly assigned to hemoadsorption (n=142) or control (n=146). Four patients in the hemoadsorption and two in the control group were excluded as they did not undergo surgery. The primary outcome ΔSOFA did not differ between the hemoadsorption and the control group (1.79 ± 3.75 and 1.93 ± 3.53, respectively, 95% CI: −1.30 to 0.83, p=0.6766). Mortality at 30 days (21% hemoadsorption vs 22% control, p=0.782), the durations of mechanical ventilation, vasopressor and renal replacement therapy did not differ between groups. Levels of IL-1β and IL-18 at the end of CPB were significantly lower in the hemoadsorption than in the control group. Conclusions: This randomized trial failed to demonstrate a reduction in postoperative organ dysfunction through intraoperative hemoadsorption in patients undergoing cardiac surgery for IE. Although hemoadsorption reduced plasma cytokines at the end of CPB, there was no difference in any of the clinically relevant outcome points.

Redo coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is still associated with increased morbidity and mortality compared to primary operation. Myocardial protection is one of the key issues in redo on pump CABG and is still a matter of debate. Off pump redo CABG seems to be an attractive alternative as native coronary blood flow remains and cross clamping of the aorta is avoided. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the outcome of redo CABG with and without CPB. From 1/1998 to 5/2004 redo CABG was performed in 195 patients (pts): 162 male (83.1%) and 33 female (16.9%) pts, age 66 +/- 9 years. In 160 pts, CPB with isolated antegrade myocardial protection was used for redo CABG. Off pump redo CABG was performed in 35 pts (30 male (85.7%) and 5 female (14.3%), age 67 +/- 8 years). Perioperative overall mortality rate was 3.6% (n = 7) and comparable in both groups (on pump 3.8% versus off pump 2.9%; p = 0.90), as well as perioperative myocardial infarction, intraaortic balloon pump implantation rate and secondary morbidity. Complete revascularization was achieved in 139 pts (86.9%) after on pump CABG and in 17 pts (48.6%) of the off pump group (p < 0.01). The average number of grafts was significantly higher in the on pump group (2.8 +/- 0.78 versus 1.6 +/- 0.6; p = 0.04).Furthermore, 20 pts (12.5%) in the on pump group died during follow-up (50 +/- 16 months). Five pts (25.0%) died due to cardiac reasons. In the off pump group 3 pts (8.6%) died during follow-up (44 +/- 13 months), noncardiac related. Overall survival was 83.8% in the on pump group and 88.6% in the off pump group (p = 0.92). On pump redo CABG and off pump redo CABG can be safely performed with low mortality and morbidity. Off pump redo CABG might be limited due to incomplete revascularization.

Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) provides temporary cardiac and respiratory support and has emerged as an established salvage intervention for patients with hemodynamic compromise or shock. It is thereby used as a bridge to recovery, bridge to permanent ventricular assist devices, bridge to transplantation, or bridge to decision. However, weaning from VA-ECMO differs between centers, and information about standardized weaning protocols are rare. Given the high mortality of patients undergoing VA-ECMO treatment, it is all the more important to answer the many questions still remaining unresolved in this field Standardized algorithms are recommended to optimize the weaning process and determine whether the VA-ECMO can be safely removed. Successful weaning as a multifactorial process requires sufficient recovery of myocardial and end-organ function. The patient should be considered hemodynamically stable, although left ventricular function often remains impaired during and after weaning. Echocardiographic and invasive hemodynamic monitoring seem to be indispensable when evaluating biventricular recovery and in determining whether the VA-ECMO can be weaned successfully or not, whereas cardiac biomarkers may not be useful in stratifying those who will recover. This review summarizes the strategies of weaning of VA-ECMO and discusses predictors of successful and poor weaning outcome.

No abstract

OBJECTIVES Venoarterial extracorporeal life support (ECLS) has emerged as a potentially life-saving treatment option in therapy-refractory cardiocirculatory failure, but longer-term outcome is poorly defined. Here, we present a comprehensive follow-up analysis covering all major organ systems. METHODS From February 2012 to December 2016, 180 patients were treated with ECLS for therapy-refractory cardiogenic shock or cardiac arrest. The 30-day survival was 43.9%, and 30-day survivors (n = 79) underwent follow-up analysis with the assessment of medium-term survival, quality of life, neuropsychological, cardiopulmonary and end-organ status. RESULTS After a median of 1.9 (1.1–3.6) years (182.4 patient years), 45 of the 79 patients (57.0%) were alive, 35.4% had died and 7.6% were lost to follow-up. Follow-up survival estimates were 78.0% at 1, 61.2% at 3 and 55.1% at 5 years. NYHA class at follow-up was ≤II for 83.3%. The median creatinine was 1.1 (1.0–1.4) mg/dl, and the median bilirubin was 0.8 (0.5–1.0) mg/dl. No patient required dialysis. Overall, 94.4% were free from moderate or severe disability, although 11.1% needed care. Full re-integration into social life was reported by 58.3%, and 39.4% were working. Quality of life was favourable for mental components, but a subset showed deficits in physical aspects. While age was the only peri-implantation parameter significantly predicting medium-term survival, adverse events and functional status at discharge or 30 days were strong predictors. CONCLUSIONS This study demonstrates positive medium-term outcome with high rates of independence in daily life and self-care but a subset of 10–20% suffered from sustained impairments. Our results indicate that peri-implantation parameters lack predictive power but downstream morbidity and functional status at discharge or 30 days can help identify patients at risk for poor recovery.