The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery
-
J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. · Nov 2020
Non-vitamin K oral anticoagulant use after cardiac surgery is rapidly increasing.
The prevalence of non-vitamin K oral anticoagulant use after cardiac surgery is unknown, particularly in patients with bioprosthetic valves. We sought to define the contemporary use and short-term safety of non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants after cardiac surgery. ⋯ Non-vitamin K oral anticoagulant use after cardiac surgery has dramatically increased since 2011. This trend is consistent regardless of indication for anticoagulation including bioprosthetic valves. Short-term outcomes support their safety in the cardiac surgery setting with shorter postoperative hospital stays. Long-term studies on the efficacy of non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants after cardiac surgery are still necessary.
-
J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. · Nov 2020
Multicenter StudyEarly outcomes of robotic versus thoracoscopic segmentectomy for early-stage lung cancer: A multi-institutional propensity score-matched analysis.
Anatomical segmentectomy via robotic thoracic surgery and video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) are minimally invasive surgical approaches for treatment of early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, few research studies have compared early outcomes. ⋯ Segmentectomy with robotic and VATS are safe and feasible for early-stage NSCLC treatment. A robotic approach might lead to a better N1 lymph node dissection.
-
J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. · Nov 2020
Comparative StudyUtilization and outcomes in biventricular assist device support in pediatrics.
Patients with biventricular assist devices (BiVADs) have worse outcomes than those with left ventricular assist devices (LVADs). It is unclear whether these outcomes are due to device selection or patient factors. We used propensity score matching to reduce patient heterogeneity and compare outcomes in pediatric patients supported with BiVADs with a similar LVAD cohort. ⋯ When propensity scores were used to reduce differences in patient characteristics, there were no differences in survival but more major adverse events in the patients with BiVADs, particularly bleeding. Differences in unmatched patient outcomes between LVAD and BiVAD cohorts likely represent differences in severity of illness rather than mode of support.