The use of extracorporeal circulation leads to a higher incidence of postoperative atrial fibrillation compared with the use of minimal extracorporeal circulation or with surgery without extracorporeal circulation, probably due to enhanced systemic inflammatory response.

Background: The discussion about the feasibility of empiric pacemaker implantation in patients with preexisting atrioventricular (AV) conduction disorders continues. The aim of the study was to determine the etiology of syncope and the need for pacemaker insertion in patients with AV conduction impairment using implantable loop recorder (ILR). Methods: ILR was implanted after negative diagnostic workup in 37 patients with syncope (24 men, 13 women, age 72 ± 10 years) and preexisting impairment of AV conduction. First-degree AV block (AVB I) was present in 26 patients, and bundle branch block (BBB) in 17 patients. Results: ILR-based diagnosis was made in 28 patients (75%)-sinus arrest in 13 patients, complete AVB in 10 patients, and vasodepressor syncope in five patients. In patients with preexisting BBB, sinus arrest occurred during ILR monitoring significantly more frequently than in patients without BBB (53% vs 20%, P = .03). Complete AVB was significantly less common in patients with preexisting BBB than in patients without BBB (12% vs 40%, P = .04). On multivariate regression analysis, the only independent predictor of AVB occurrence during ILR monitoring was preexisting AVB I (P = .03). The only independent predictor of sinus arrest during ILR monitoring was preexisting BBB (P = .03). Conclusions: In patients with preexisting AV conduction disorders, prevailing syncopal mechanism during ILR monitoring was asystole. However, sinus arrest occurred more often than complete AVB and was predicted by preexisting BBB. Preexisting AVB was a predictor of complete AVB during ILR monitoring.

Objectives: The primary aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate short-term (one-to-six months) and mid-term (six-to-forty-eight months) results of aortic valve-sparing procedures. The second endpoint was to compare the results with the group of patients undergoing mechanical aortic valve replacement during the same period. Methods: Between April 2008 and May 2012 at our institution, we treated 76 patients either with ascending aorta/root aneurysm/dissection or with isolated aortic regurgitation. A total of seventy-six patients undergoing aortic valve surgery. Results: Analyzed parameters were divided into two parts as function of time. In the fi rst part, i.e. during hospitalization, the mortality, duration of hospitalization, duration of extra corporeal circulation (ECC), and duration of cardiac arrest (CA) were compared and assessed. In the second part, i.e. during monitoring of the patients after their discharge from hospital (one-to-six months, and six-to-forty-eight months), the grade of postoperative AR aimed mainly at the group of aortic valve-sparing operations (subgroups A1, A2, A3), postoperative peak gradient, presence of thromboembolic and bleeding complications, postoperative endocarditis and need for reoperation or hospitalization due to cardiac reasons were analyzed. Conclusion: Based on our fi rst experience, we believe that in spite of higher technical diffi culty, the aortic valvesparing operations can be possibly performed with the same or respectively lower rate of postoperative morbidity and mortality. Presented results show that compared with the aortic valve replacement, the aortic valve-sparing operation is a promising method, and an interesting therapeutic alternative for patients. After proper indications, we consider it to be a method of choice (Tab. 6, Fig. 7, Ref. 28).

Background Primary and secondary aortopathy are frequently encountered in patients with congenital heart disease. The aim of this study is to present our experience and the incidence of primary and secondary adult CHD-associated aortopathy. Methods The cohort is comprised of adult patients with congenital heart disease from the registry of the Eastern Slovakia Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases. Data from the last follow-up examinations are included in this study. In the primary and secondary aortopathy groups were 35 and 12 patients respectively. As a control group were selected 64 patients with non aortopathy associated congenital heart disease (atrial and ventricular septal defect). Results Patients with primary and secondary aortopathy had larger ascending aorta/aortic root diameters than the control group (36.28 (26–49) mm vs 30.25 (21–41) mm p = 0.000113, 33.82 27–49) mm vs 29.03 (19–38)mm p = 0.000366 and 42.1 (30–50) mm vs 30.25 (21–41) mm, p = 0.000106, 35.67 (27–48) mm vs 29.03 (19–38) mm, p = 0.000119 respectively). Moreover, patients with secondary aortopathy had statistically significant larger ascending aorta diameter compared to the patients with primary aortopathy (42.1 (30–50) mm vs 36.28 (26–49) mm p = 0.030). During the follow-up period, were performed only in 2 patients (one from each group) operations on the aortic root and the ascending aorta due to aortic root or ascending aorta dilatation. Conclusion More patients with secondary aortopathy had dilated ascending aorta/ aortic root, as well as larger aortic diameters compare to the patients with primary aortopathy. Routine follow-up of these patients with attention to aortic diameter is necessary.

No abstract