The Annals of thoracic surgery
-
Pulsatile versus nonpulsatile cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) perfusion remains debated. Beneficial effects on tissue perfusion, inflammation, and microvascular fluid exchange have been linked to pulsatile perfusion by some investigators and denied by others. This study evaluated fluid extravasation and tissue perfusion during nonpulsatile or pulsatile roller pump-induced CPB perfusion. ⋯ No important differences were found between pulsatile and nonpulsatile CPB perfusion for microvascular fluid balance and tissue perfusion.
-
There is only limited information on the clinical impact of combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema (CPFE) on postoperative and survival outcomes among patients with resected lung cancer. ⋯ Among patients with resected lung cancer, the presence of TSCT-determined CPFE might predict worse postoperative and survival outcomes.
-
Ischemia-reperfusion injury (IRI) is a major source of morbidity and mortality after lung transplantation. We previously demonstrated a proinflammatory role of adenosine A2B receptor (A2BR) in lung IR injury. The current study tests the hypothesis that A2BR antagonism is protective of ischemic lungs after in vivo reperfusion or ex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP). ⋯ These results demonstrate that A2BR antagonism attenuates lung IRI and augments reconditioning of DCD lungs by EVLP. The protective effects of ATL802 may involve targeting A2BRs on alveolar epithelial cells to prevent IL-8 production. A2BR may be a novel therapeutic target for mitigating IRI to increase the success of lung transplantation.
-
Multicenter Study
Minimally Invasive Versus Open Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Population-Based Analysis.
The objective of this study was to evaluate outcomes of minimally invasive approaches to esophagectomy using population-level data. ⋯ The use of minimally invasive techniques to perform esophagectomy for esophageal cancer is associated with modestly improved perioperative outcomes without compromising survival.
-
The European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation (EuroSCORE) II was developed to reflect a more current dataset and evidence-based improvements in cardiac surgery. In the United States, The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) risk score is more accepted owing to relatively high predictive value despite less user friendliness and inapplicability to some cardiac surgeries. We compared the precision of EuroSCORE II with EuroSCORE I and the STS risk score for operative mortality. ⋯ EuroSCORE II had better predictive discrimination for operative mortality than EuroSCORE I, which greatly overestimated this risk. EuroSCORE II fared well compared with the STS risk score. The inclusive nature of EuroSCORE II for numerous procedures provides more flexibility than the STS score for complex procedures. EuroSCORE II should be considered for calculating risk score for complex cardiac surgical patients.