Besides size of the graft, age of the patients, and the non-anatomical position of the graft, the use of the Contegra conduit was found to be an independent risk factor for graft replacement in the RVOT. Patients receiving this conduit were more than twice as likely to undergo re-operation for graft replacement as those receiving a homograft.

A best evidence topic in cardiac surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was: is patient-prosthesis mismatch an independent risk factor for 30-day and mid-term overall mortality in adult patients undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR)? Altogether, almost 400 papers were found using the reported search, of which 22 represented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The authors, journal, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes and results of these papers are tabulated. The majority of the selected articles have focused their analysis on moderate mismatch defined mostly by the presence of an indexed effective orifice area (IEOA)0.65 cm(2)/m(2)) is an independent risk factor for 30-day or mid-term overall mortality for adult patients undergoing AVR. An exception could be represented by patients with poor ejection fraction, a condition that can make moderate mismatch a predictor of overall mortality after AVR. On the other hand, severe mismatch is a predictor of overall 30-day or mid-term mortality for patients undergoing AVR independently from the presence of poor ejection fraction. In conclusion, our review suggests that the condition of severe PPM should be always avoided, while the presence of moderate mismatch could be tolerated in patients with normal ejection fraction without any impact on overall survival.

Over the last few years, both sides of the North Atlantic have witnessed compulsory duty-hour restrictions for doctors. It has been suggested that the reduction in working hours for surgeons in training may have a negative impact on their exposure to surgical procedures and therefore, on the quality of training. A best evidence topic in cardiac surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was: among surgeons enrolled in a training program, does the introduction of duty-hour restrictions have a negative impact on their exposure to surgical procedures and therefore, on the quality of training? In total, more than 74 papers were found using the reported search, of which 15 represented the best evidence to answer the question. All these manuscripts came from the USA. The authors, journal, date and country of publication, group studied, study type, relevant outcomes and results of these papers are tabulated. Studies from different surgical disciplines, such as general, orthopedic, pediatric, cardiothoracic and vascular surgery were included. Among the studies analysed, eight revealed a decrease, five showed no change, and two studies demonstrated an increase in the operative experience of residents following the introduction of the 80-hour limit. The changes appear to have more negatively affected junior residents in favor of more senior ones due to a shift in the surgical workload to the latter. Interestingly, some studies demonstrated better results in the in-training examinations (testing for clinical and basic science knowledge) following the duty-hour restrictions. We conclude that although most of the studies included in this review revealed that the introduction of working-hour restrictions in the USA has produced a decrease in number of cases performed by trainees, some have failed to do so. Changes in the residents' working patterns, such as 'night float' and 'leave early' models, may be useful to preserve exposure to surgical procedures.

A best evidence topic in cardiac surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was: In patients undergoing off-pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) surgery, does the off-pump to on-pump conversion rate have an impact on post-operative results? Altogether more than 420 papers were found using the reported search, of which 14 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) represented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The authors, journal, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes and results of these papers are tabulated and ordered according to the sample size. In the 14 RCTs reviewed, the off-pump to on-pump conversion rate incidence ranged from 0 to 13.3%. The most frequent causes of conversion were haemodynamic instability and intramyocardial-coronary target. A low conversion rate (<2%) was reported by five studies. Three of them did not show any difference in terms of mortality between the OPCAB and on-pump groups, one showed better survival of the OPCAB group at 5 years, and one reported better early survival of the OPCAB group. Three of these trials describe a high OPCAB experience and reported that patients undergoing OPCAB had a shorter post-operative stay and lower morbidity compared with patients undergoing on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting. Five RCTs showed a high conversion rate (>9%), and among them, one reported lower morbidity of the OPCAB patients, three were not able to show any benefit in terms of morbidity of the OPCAB, and one reported worse survival and patency graft rate of the OPCAB group. Four RCTs reported conversion rates ranging from 3.7 to 7.0%, describing a wide spectrum of results. We conclude that RCTs with a high off-pump to on-pump conversion rate were often associated with a lower experience in OPCAB of the surgeons participating in the trials. These studies were also mostly unable to show any benefit in terms of mortality or morbidity of OPCAB over the on-pump strategy. On the contrary, a low conversion rate is mostly reported by RCTs with a high structured experience in OPCAB. These trials were mostly able to show a benefit, in terms of morbidity and survival, of the OPCAB over the on-pump strategy.

The lack of benefit in terms of mid-term survival and the increase in the risk of sternal wound complications published in a recent randomized controlled trial have raised concerns about the use of bilateral internal thoracic artery (BITA) in myocardial revascularization surgery. For this reason, we decided to explore the current evidence available on the subject by carrying out a meta-analysis of propensity score-matched studies comparing BITA versus single internal thoracic artery (SITA). PubMed, EMBASE and Google Scholar were searched for propensity score-matched studies comparing BITA versus SITA. The generic inverse variance method was used to compute the combined hazard ratio (HR) of long-term mortality. The DerSimonian and Laird method was used to compute the combined risk ratio of 30-day mortality, deep sternal wound infection and reoperation for bleeding. Forty-five BITA versus SITA matched populations were included. Meta-analysis showed a significant benefit in terms of long-term survival in favour of the BITA group [HR 0.78; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71–0.86]. These results were consistent with those obtained by a pooled analysis of the matched populations comprising patients with diabetes (HR 0.65; 95% CI 0.43–0.99). When compared with the use of SITA plus radial artery, BITA did not show any significant benefit in terms of long-term survival (HR 0.86; 95% CI 0.69–1.07). No differences between BITA and SITA groups were detected in terms of 30-day mortality or in terms of reoperation for bleeding. Compared with the SITA group, patients in the BITA group had a significantly higher risk of deep sternal wound infection (risk ratio 1.66; 95% CI 1.41–1.95) even when the pooled analysis was limited to matched populations in which BITA was harvested according to the skeletonization technique (risk ratio 1.37; 95% CI 1.04–1.79). The use of BITA provided a long-term survival benefit compared with the use of SITA at the expense of a higher risk of sternal deep wound infection. The long-term survival advantage of BITA is undetectable when compared with SITA plus radial artery.

Background and Aim of the Study We explored the current evidence available on total arterial revascularization (TAR) carrying out a meta‐analysis of propensity score‐matched studies comparing TAR versus non‐TAR strategy. Methods PubMed, EMBASE, and Google Scholar were searched for propensity score‐matched studies comparing TAR vs non‐TAR. The generic inverse variance method was used to compute the combined hazard ratio (HR) of long‐term mortality. The Der‐Simonian and Laird method were used to compute the combined risk ratio (RR) of 30‐day mortality, deep sternal wound infection, and reoperation for bleeding. Results Eighteen TAR vs non‐TAR matched populations were included. Meta‐analysis showed a significant benefit in terms of long‐term survival of the TAR group over the non‐TAR group (HR: 0.73; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.68‐0.78). Better long‐term survival over non‐TAR strategy was confirmed by both subgroups: TAR with the bilateral internal mammary artery (BIMA) and TAR without BIMA. Meta‐regression suggests that TAR may offer a higher protective survival effect in diabetic patients (coefficient: −0.0063; 95% CI: −0.01 to 0.0006), when carried out with BIMA (coefficient: −0.15; 95% CI: −0.27 to −0.03) or using three arterial conduits (coefficient: −0.12; 95% CI: −0.25 to 0.007). A TAR strategy carried out using BIMA, differently from TAR without BIMA, increases the risk of deep sternal infection (RR: 1.44; 95% CI: 1.17‐1.77). Conclusions TAR provides a long‐term survival benefit compared with the non‐TAR strategy. Also, compared with TAR without BIMA, TAR with BIMA may offer a higher protective long‐term survival effect at the expense of a higher risk of sternal deep wound infection.

Cardiovascular events are the main cause of death in hemodialysis patients. Nevertheless, acute myocardial infarction may be misdiagnosed in uremic patients, because typical markers have a high rate of false positivity. A recent two-year prospective study showed that predialytic high serum concentrations of troponin T and CK-MB mass were associated with high mortality, cardiac mortality, myocardial infarction and unstable angina (MACEs). We studied 16 uremic patients (13 M; 3 W) on standard HD and 6 patients (4 M; 2 W) on on-line HDF, who had been taking folic acid for at least three months. Patients who suffered from acute or chronic cardiac ischemic disease were excluded. Anthropometric parameters, pre and post-dialytic pH, HCO3 and electrolytes did not differ between the two groups. Kt/V and URR % were lower in conventional HD vs on-line HDF (p<0.04; p<0.04). ORR % was strongly elevated in on-line HDF compared with HD (p<0.005). In conventional HD, ORR % was directly correlated with Kt/V and URR% (r = 0.49, p<0.04; r = 0.48, p<0.04, respectively). Even in on-line HDF ORR % was directly correlated with Kt/V and URR % (r = 0.79, p<0.04; r = 0.76, p<0.05, respectively). Troponin I and CK-MB mass were not significantly different in pre vs post-dialysis, both in standard HD and on-line HDF. Nevertheless, in standard HD postdialytic troponin I correlated with serum sodium concentration (r = 0.93, p < 0.000), potassium (r = 0.67, p < 0.004) and serum chlorine (r = 0.92, p < 0.92, p < 0.000). CK-MB mass showed a correlation with serum chlorine (r = 0.49, p < 0.05). Postdialytic CK-MB mass correlated with serum potassium in on-line HDF (r = 0.83, p < 0.03). Our data suggest that hemodialytic treatments, both standard HD and on-line HDF, do not modify serum troponin I and CK-MB mass. Consequently, we can use these parameters for the diagnostic approach in acute or chronic ischemic heart disease in hemodialysis patients.

Patients suffering from mismatch were twice as likely to undergo reoperation for aortic bioprosthesis replacement for SVD than those without mismatch.