OBJECTIVES: The frozen elephant trunk technique is an increasingly common treatment for extensive disease of the thoracic aorta. The objective of the study was to evaluate the outcomes of frozen elephant trunk specifically in chronic (residual) aortic dissections, focusing on downstream aortic remodelling. METHODS: Between 2013 and 2019, a total of 28 patients were treated using the Vascutek Thoraflex hybrid graft at our institution for chronic dissections/post-dissection aneurysms. Immediate and follow-up outcomes were studied, as well as the changes in total aortic diameter, true lumen and false lumen diameter and the status of the false lumen at 3 different levels of the thoraco-abdominal aorta. RESULTS: No in-hospital or 30-day mortality was observed, temporary paraparesis rate was 7% and disabling stroke incidence was 14.3%. Freedom from all-cause mortality at 2 years was 91.6 ± 5.7%, while freedom from reintervention on the downstream aorta at 2 years was 59.1 ± 10.8%. Positive aortic remodelling was achieved in 50.0%, with an enlargement in the true lumen and a reduction of the false lumen not only at the level of the proximal descending aorta with 73.1% of complete thrombosis but also at the level of the distal descending thoracic aorta, with 41.7% of complete thrombosis. CONCLUSIONS: The frozen elephant trunk is a good solution in chronic (residual) downstream aortic dissections inducing positive aortic remodelling and preventing from II stage operations or allowing an endovascular approach.

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.

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.

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.

Background: The minimally invasive approach, performed via ministernotomy, is now often preferred for isolated aortic valve replacement (AVR). However, its benefits in patients with prior cardiac surgery remain unclear. This article compares traditional and minimally invasive surgery for isolated aortic valve replacement in reoperative cases. Methods: A retrospective analysis of 382 patients who underwent reoperative AVR between January 2010 and June 2024 divided them into two groups: 309 patients (80.1%) had a traditional full sternotomy, while 73 patients (19.1%) had minimally invasive AVR via upper ministernotomy. Results: Significant differences were noted between the groups. The full sternotomy group had a higher logistic EuroSCORE (SMD = 0.203), more patients with active endocarditis (SMD = 0.312), and a higher pacemaker rate. To minimize bias, inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used. The minimally invasive group had shorter aortic cross-clamp (50 vs. 65 min, p < 0.001) and cardiopulmonary bypass times (62 vs. 85 min, p < 0.001), shorter intensive care unit (ICU) stays (p < 0.001), lower rates of acute renal failure (p = 0.001), and less blood loss (p < 0.001), but similar transfusion needs. Early mortality was higher in the full sternotomy group (4.5% vs. 1.6%, p = 0.025). Conclusions: Minimally invasive aortic valve reoperation via upper “J” sternotomy is as safe as full sternotomy. Patients experienced lower rates of acute renal failure and less postoperative bleeding, contributing to a safer recovery with decreased hospital mortality.