Background: Despite advanced diagnosis and treatment, infective endocarditis (IE) is a potentially life-threatening condition. The impact of COVID-19 on the diagnosis and outcome of the surgical treatment of IE is uncertain. The aim of this study was to analyze the incidence, characteristics, and outcomes of surgically treated IE before and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: This study retrospectively analyzed the data of 535 patients who underwent valve surgical procedures for IE between January 2010 and December 2022 in a single cardiac surgery center. Patients were divided into two groups depending on the date of their operation: before (n = 393) and after (n = 142) COVID-19 onset. In order to balance the groups, inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) calculated from the propensity score (PS) was applied. Weighted univariate logistic regressions were reported for outcomes; weights were derived from IPTW. Interrupted time series analysis (ITSA) according to Linden’s method was used to evaluate the changes in the manifestation of IE after 11 March 2020. Results: Patients from the post-COVID-19 cohort (after 11 March 2020) had a greater number of comorbidities such as diabetes (29.6% vs. 16.3% p = 0.001), hypertension (71.1% vs. 59.5% p = 0.015), and preoperative kidney injury requiring dialysis (9.2% vs. 2.5% p = 0.002), but the median additive and logistic EuroSCORE were not statistically different. In the post-COVID-19 group, we observed a greater prevalence of Staphylococcus aureus-related endocarditis (24.5% vs. 15.4% p = 0.026), a consequent reduction in Staphylococcus non aureus-related endocarditis (12.2% vs. 20.1% p = 0.048), and a decrease in aortic valve replacements (43.0% vs. 53.9%), while the number of mitral valve replacements and repair was greater (21.1% vs. 15.0% and 6.3% vs. 4.3%, respectively). No differences were found in the two groups concerning early death, death, or relapse at 1 year after surgery. Data obtained by multivariable analysis identified preoperative renal dysfunction requiring dialysis as the only common risk factor for early mortality via stratifying by time periods in analysis. Conclusions: The incidence of surgically treated IE significantly increases after the COVID-19 pandemic with a higher incidence of mitral valve involvement with respect to the aortic valve. Although a delay in surgical timing occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic, data in terms of mortality and outcomes were largely unaffected.

Background: Nowadays, one of the main goals of aortic valve surgery is to reduce the biological impact, mortality, and complications. It is well-known that long operative times in terms of the extracorporeal circulation, but above all, of the aortic cross-clamp time (ACC), represent a risk factor for mortality in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. In order to shorten the aortic cross-clamp time, many technological improvements, such as sutureless prostheses, have been introduced, but their actual effectiveness has not been proven yet. The aim of this study was to assess the 30-day outcomes of patients undergoing aortic valve replacement surgery, focusing on the ACC length. Methods: All 3139 patients undergoing aortic valve replacement between January 2013 and July 2022 at our institution were enrolled. The data were retrospectively collected and the baseline characteristics and intraoperative variables were recorded. In order to adjust the results according to the differences in the baseline characteristics, propensity score matching was performed and four groups of 351 patients were obtained based on the first, second, third, and fourth quartile of the ACC time. Results: The patient population included 132 redo surgeries (9.4%) and 61 cases of active endocarditis (4.3%), with an overall median EuroSCORE II of 1.8 (IQR 1.2–3.1). An increase across the groups was observed in terms of the acute kidney failure (p < 0.001) incidence, the number of blood transfusions (p = 0.022), prolonged hospital stays (p < 0.001), the and respiratory failure (p < 0.001) incidence. A p of < 0.1 was found for the 30-day mortality (p = 0.079). The predictors of an early 30-day mortality were standard full sternotomy (OR 2.48, 95% CI 1.14–5.40, p = 0.022), EuroSCORE II (OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.05–1.16, p < 0.001), and a trend for a longer ACC time (Q4 vs. Q1: OR 2.62, 95% CI 0.89–7.68, p = 0.080). Conclusions: Shortening the operative times resulted in marked improvements of the patients’ outcomes. The combined use of minimally invasive approaches and sutureless aortic valve prostheses allows for a lower 30-day events rate. New technologies should be assessed to obtain the best results with the least risk.

In elderly patients undergoing cardiac surgery, extracorporeal circulation affects the incidence of post-operative delirium and cognitive impairment with an impact on quality of life and mortality. In this study, a new oxygenator system (RemoweLL 2) was tested against a conventional system to assess its efficacy in reducing the onset of postoperative delirium and cognitive dysfunction and the levels of serum inflammatory markers. A total of 154 patients (>65 y.o.) undergoing cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) were enrolled and randomly assigned to oxygenator RemoweLL 2 (n = 81) or to gold standard device Inspire (n = 73) between September 2019 and March 2022. The aims of the study were to assess the incidence of delirium and the cognitive decline by neuropsychiatric tests and the MoCa test intra-hospital and at 6 months after CPB. Inflammation biomarkers in both groups were also evaluated. Before the CPB, the experimental groups were comparable for all variables. After CPB, the incidence of severe post-operative delirium showed a better trend (p = 0.093) in patients assigned to RemoweLL 2 (16.0%) versus Inspire (26.0%). Differences in enolase levels (p = 0.049), white blood cells (p = 0.006), and neutrophils (p = 0.003) in favor of RemoweLL 2 were also found. The use of novel and better construction technologies in CPB oxygenator devices results in measurable better neurocognitive and neurological outcomes in the elderly population undergoing CPB.

Background: The benefits of mitral repair versus replacement for endocarditis are inconclusive. This study compares outcomes of patients with infective endocarditis undergoing mitral valve repair versus replacement and investigates the impact of microbial etiology. Methods: All 251 patients undergoing mitral valve surgery for active endocarditis between 2010 and 2023 were enrolled, 180 (71.7%) replacement and 71 (28.3%) repair. To adjust for imbalances, inverse probability of treatment weighting was applied and 187 patients were obtained. Results: The analysis between groups, following the application of inverse probability of treatment weighting, showed no statistically significant differences across all considered outcomes. Early and late death was observed respectively in 6 (8.5%) and 11 (15.5%) patients in the repair group versus 24 (13.3%) and 45 (25.0%) in the replacement group without statistical significance (p = 0.221 and p = 0.446). Relapse occurred in six patients (8.5%) in the repair group after a median time of 4.0 months and in six (3.3%) in the replacement after 6.9 months (p = 0.071). Conclusions: Surgical strategy in mitral endocarditis has no effect on major postoperative complications, mortality, or medium/long-term survival. Staphylococcus aureus and Coagulase-negative Staphylococci represent a risk for early mortality and relapse. However, mitral valve repair for endocarditis can be pursued when it ensures the complete eradication of all infected tissue, particularly in cases caused by Streptococcus infection, in young patients, and after a minimum of 18 days of antibiotic therapy.

Purpose: To analyze the treatment patterns of psoriatic arthritis (PSA) or ankylosing spondylitis (AS) patients under biological therapies and to evaluate in this population the health-care resource consumption and related costs. Patients and Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on administrative databases of the Veneto region. Patients ≥ 18 years with at least one prescription of biological drugs and a diagnosis at any level for PSA or AS from January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2016 (inclusion period) were included. Index date (ID) was defined as date of first biological drug prescription during inclusion period. Patients were characterized the year before ID and followed-up for one year after ID. The drug utilization profile in terms of adherence, persistence and therapeutic regimen changes, and the health-care resource consumption was analyzed during follow-up. Results: A total of 2602 patients were included: 1857 with PSA and 745 with AS. In the PSA cohort, 40.3% of patients were prescribed adalimumab, 35.6% etanercept, 8.0% golimumab, 7.5% infliximab, 5.6% ustekinumab and 3.0% certolizumab. Percentage of PSA patients adherent to treatment was higher among ustekinumab patients (91.3%) and lower among etanercept users (54.3%). Persistence ranged from 53.2% (infliximab) to 70.3% (etanercept). Regarding AS cohort, 45.5% of patients were prescribed adalimumab, 26% etanercept, 17.3% infliximab, 9.7% golimumab and 1.5% certolizumab. Adherence ranged from 46.9% (etanercept) to 90.9% (certolizumab) and persistence from 62.8% (adalimumab) to 81.8% (certolizumab). Mean annual health-care costs (including costs for drug treatment, diagnostic services, specialist visits and hospital admissions) ranged from € 9727 (certolizumab) to € 14,994 (ustekinumab) among PSA patients and from € 9875 (infliximab) to € 12,991 (golimumab) among AS patients. Conclusion: This study in Veneto region gave a picture of biological treatment patterns among PSA and AS patients in a real-world setting. Our findings showed the high degree of variability concerning utilization of each biological drug and provided insight on the economic burden of both diseases.

Background: This study evaluates the outcomes of isolated mitral valve surgery for infective endocarditis performed via conventional full sternotomy or minimally invasive right minithoracotomy. While minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is well-established for elective mitral procedures, its role in infective endocarditis remains less explored due to the complexity of the disease. Methods: A retrospective analysis of 134 patients who underwent isolated mitral valve surgery for infective endocarditis between January 2010 and March 2024 was conducted. Patients were divided into two groups based on the surgical approach: full sternotomy (n = 94) and MIS via right minithoracotomy (n = 40). Variables analyzed included preoperative characteristics, intraoperative details, and postoperative outcomes, such as mortality, complications, and hospital stay duration. Given significant baseline differences, inverse probability weighting was applied for comparability. Results: Mitral valve replacement was performed in 77% of cases. After adjustment, the MIS group demonstrated shorter intensive care unit stays (p = 0.018), with no significant differences in in-hospital mortality (p = 0.145) or total hospitalization length (p = 0.151). Conclusions: Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery is a safe and effective alternative to sternotomy in infective endocarditis, offering comparable outcomes with shorter ICU stays. Further research is needed to refine patient selection and validate these findings.