Hypothermic circulatory arrest is essential to aortic arch surgery, although consensus regarding optimal cerebral protection strategy remains lacking. We evaluated the current use and comparative effectiveness of hypothermia/cerebral perfusion (CP) strategies in aortic arch surgery. Using the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Database, cases of aortic arch surgery with hypothermic circulatory arrest from 2011 to 2014 were categorized by hypothermia strategy—deep/profound (D/P; ≤20°C), low–moderate (L-M; 20.1–24°C), and high–moderate (H-M; 24.1–28°C)—and CP strategy—no CP, antegrade (ACP), retrograde (RCP) or both ACP/RCP. After adjusting for potential confounders, strategies were compared by composite end-point (operative mortality or neurologic complication). Of the 12 521 aortic arch repairs with hypothermic circulatory arrest, the most common combined strategies were straight D/P without CP (25%), D/P + RCP (16%) and D/P + ACP (14%). Overall rates of the primary end-point, operative mortality and stroke were 23%, 12% and 8%, respectively. Among the 7 most common strategies, the 2 not utilizing CP (straight D/P and straight L-M) appeared inferior, associated with significantly higher risk of the composite end-point (odds ratio: 1.6; P < 0.01); there was no significant difference in composite outcome between the remaining strategies (D/P + ACP, D/P + RCP, L-M + ACP, L-M + RCP and H-M + ACP). In a comparative effectiveness study of cerebral protection strategies for aortic arch repair, strategies without adjunctive CP, including the most commonly utilized strategy of straight D/P hypothermia, appeared inferior to those utilizing CP. There was no clearly superior strategy among remaining techniques, and randomized trials are needed to define best practice.

Background Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is being increasingly used as a bridge to lung transplantation. Small, single-institution series have described increased success using ECMO in spontaneously breathing patients compared with patients on ECMO with mechanical ventilation, but this strategy has not been evaluated on a large scale. Methods Using the United Network for Organ Sharing database, all adult patients undergoing isolated lung transplantation from May 2005 through September 2013 were identified. Patients were categorized by their type of pretransplant support: no support, ECMO only, invasive mechanical ventilation (iMV) only, and ECMO + iMV. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis with log-rank testing was performed to compare survival based on type of preoperative support. A Cox regression model was used to determine whether type of preoperative support was independently associated with survival, using previously established predictors of survival as covariates. Results Approximately 12,403 primary adult pulmonary transplantations were included in this analysis. Sixty-five patients (0.52%) were on ECMO only, 612 (4.93%) required only iMV, 119 (0.96%) were on ECMO + iMV, and the remaining 11,607 (94.6%) required no invasive support before transplantation. One-year survival was decreased in all patients requiring support, regardless of type. However, mid-term survival was similar between patients on ECMO alone and those not on support but significantly worse with patients requiring iMV only or ECMO + iMV. In multivariable analysis, ECMO + iMV and iMV alone were independently associated with decreased survival compared with nonsupport patients, whereas ECMO alone was not significant. Conclusions In patients with worsening pulmonary disease awaiting lung transplantation, those supported via ECMO with spontaneous breathing demonstrated improved survival compared with other bridging strategies.