J. Michael DiMaio M.D.

Shih, E., DiMaio, J. M., Squiers, J. J., Banwait, J. K., Meyer, D. M., George, T. J. and Schwartz, G. S. (2022). “Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for patients with refractory coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): Multicenter experience of referral hospitals in a large health care system.” J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 163(3): 1071-1079.e1073.

Full text of this article.

BACKGROUND: The benefit of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for patients with severe acute respiratory distress from coronavirus disease 2019 refractory to medical management and lung-protective mechanical ventilation has not been adequately determined. METHODS: We reviewed the clinical course of 37 patients with laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection supported by venovenous ECMO at 4 ECMO referral centers within a large health care system. Patient characteristics, progression of hemodynamics and inflammatory markers, and clinical outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: The patients had median age of 51 years (interquartile range, 40-59), and 73% were male. Peak plateau pressures, vasopressor requirements, and arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide all improved with ECMO support. In our patient population, 24 of 37 patients (64.8%) survived to decannulation and 21 of 37 patients (56.8%) survived to discharge. Among patients discharged alive from the ECMO facility, 12 patients were discharged to a long-term acute care or rehabilitation facility, 2 were transferred back to the referring hospital for ventilatory weaning, and 7 were discharged directly home. For patients who were successfully decannulated, median length of time on ECMO was 17 days (interquartile range, 10-33.5). CONCLUSIONS: Venovenous ECMO represents a useful therapy for patients with refractory severe acute respiratory distress syndrome from coronavirus disease 2019.

Shih, E., DiMaio, J.M., Squiers, J.J., Krueger, A.R., Schwartz, G.S., Herd, J. and Bleich, A.T. (2021). “Treatment of acute respiratory distress syndrome from COVID-19 with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in obstetrical patients.” Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM 4(2): 100537.

Full text of this article.

BACKGROUND: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation therapy has been used as a rescue therapy for patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome from COVID-19 who have failed conventional ventilatory strategies. Little is known about the outcome of pregnant and postpartum patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation therapy. OBJECTIVE: To describe the medical and surgical outcomes of pregnant and postpartum patients who were placed on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation therapy for severe acute respiratory distress syndrome from COVID-19. STUDY DESIGN: A case series reviewing pregnant or postpartum patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 who were placed on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation therapy was conducted within the Baylor Scott & White Healthcare system. The demographics and the medical and surgical outcomes were collected and reviewed. RESULTS: Between March 2020 and October 2021, 5 pregnant and 5 postpartum women were supported with venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation therapy. The median age was 30 years (interquartile range, 26-33.5) and the median body mass index was 36.6 kg/m(2) (interquartile range, 29.5-42.0). There was a median of 4.5 days (interquartile range, 1.5-6.8) from admission to any hospital to intubation and 9 days (interquartile range, 7-13) to extracorporeal membrane oxygenation therapy cannulation. One patient had an ischemic stroke, 1 patient had a presumed hemorrhagic stroke, and 9 patients developed bleeding while on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation therapy. Of the 5 pregnant women, 2 patients had intrauterine fetal demise and 3 underwent delivery for maternal hemodynamic instability. The 5 postpartum women were initiated on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation therapy a median of 10 days (interquartile range, 3-11) after delivery. The median length of time on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation therapy was 22 days (interquartile range, 11-31). At the time of the study, there were 2 inpatient mortalities, 6 patients survived to discharge from the extracorporeal membrane oxygenation therapy hospital, and 2 patients were still admitted. CONCLUSION: There is limited information regarding the use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation therapy for COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome in obstetrical patients. This case series describes the use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation therapy and survival in pregnant and postpartum patients with COVID-19.

Gaudino, M., Sanna, T., Ballman, K.V., Robinson, N.B., Hameed, I., Audisio, K., Rahouma, M., Di Franco, A., Soletti, G.J., Lau, C., Rong, L.Q., Massetti, M., Gillinov, M., Ad, N., Voisine, P., DiMaio, J.M., Chikwe, J., Fremes, S.E., Crea, F., Puskas, J.D. and Girardi, L. (2021). “Posterior left pericardiotomy for the prevention of atrial fibrillation after cardiac surgery: an adaptive, single-centre, single-blind, randomised, controlled trial.” Lancet 398(10316): 2075-2083.

Full text of this article.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation is the most common complication after cardiac surgery and is associated with extended in-hospital stay and increased adverse outcomes, including death and stroke. Pericardial effusion is common after cardiac surgery and can trigger atrial fibrillation. We tested the hypothesis that posterior left pericardiotomy, a surgical manoeuvre that drains the pericardial space into the left pleural cavity, might reduce the incidence of atrial fibrillation after cardiac surgery. METHODS: In this adaptive, randomised, controlled trial, we recruited adult patients (aged ≥18 years) undergoing elective interventions on the coronary arteries, aortic valve, or ascending aorta, or a combination of these, performed by members of the Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery from Weill Cornell Medicine at the New York Presbyterian Hospital in New York, NY, USA. Patients were eligible if they had no history of atrial fibrillation or other arrhythmias or contraindications to the experimental intervention. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1), stratified by CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc score and using a mixed-block randomisation approach (block sizes of 4, 6, and 8), to posterior left pericardiotomy or no intervention. Patients and assessors were blinded to treatment assignment. Patients were followed up until 30 days after hospital discharge. The primary outcome was the incidence of atrial fibrillation during postoperative in-hospital stay, which was assessed in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. Safety was assessed in the as-treated population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02875405, and is now complete. FINDINGS: Between Sept 18, 2017, and Aug 2, 2021, 3601 patients were screened and 420 were included and randomly assigned to the posterior left pericardiotomy group (n=212) or the no intervention group (n=208; ITT population). The median age was 61·0 years (IQR 53·0-70·0), 102 (24%) patients were female, and 318 (76%) were male, with a median CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc score of 2·0 (IQR 1·0-3·0). The two groups were balanced with respect to clinical and surgical characteristics. No patients were lost to follow-up and data completeness was 100%. Three patients in the posterior left pericardiotomy group did not receive the intervention. In the ITT population, the incidence of postoperative atrial fibrillation was significantly lower in the posterior left pericardiotomy group than in the no intervention group (37 [17%] of 212 vs 66 [32%] of 208 [p=0·0007]; odds ratio adjusted for the stratification variable 0·44 [95% CI 0·27-0·70; p=0·0005]). Two (1%) of 209 patients in the posterior left pericardiotomy group and one (<1%) of 211 in the no intervention group died within 30 days after hospital discharge. The incidence of postoperative pericardial effusion was lower in the posterior left pericardiotomy group than in the no intervention group (26 [12%] of 209 vs 45 [21%] of 211; relative risk 0·58 [95% CI 0·37-0·91]). Postoperative major adverse events occurred in six (3%) patients in the posterior left pericardiotomy group and in four (2%) in the no intervention group. No posterior left pericardiotomy related complications were seen. INTERPRETATION: Posterior left pericardiotomy is highly effective in reducing the incidence of atrial fibrillation after surgery on the coronary arteries, aortic valve, or ascending aorta, or a combination of these without additional risk of postoperative complications. FUNDING: None.

Schaffer, J.M., Squiers, J.J., Banwait, J.K., Hale, S., Ryan, W.H., Mack, M.J. and DiMaio, J.M. (2021). “Differences in Administrative Claims Data for Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Between International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision and Tenth Revision Coding.” JAMA Cardiol Jun 9;e211595. [Epub ahead of print].

Full text of this article.

This cross-sectional study examines the changes in coding of coronary artery bypass graft procedures after the transition from the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision to the Tenth Revision.

Shih, E., Squiers, J.J. and DiMaio, J.M. (2021). “Systematic Review of Minimally Invasive Surgery for Mitral Valve Infective Endocarditis.” Innovations (Phila): 1556984521997086.

Full text of this article.

OBJECTIVE: The scope of application of minimally invasive mitral valve surgery is expanding. However, the safety and efficacy of minimally invasive mitral valve surgery in the setting of infective endocarditis is not well known. We sought to identify the best evidence available to support a minimally invasive surgical approach for mitral valve infective endocarditis. METHODS: A systematic review of minimally invasive mitral valve surgery for infective endocarditis was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. RESULTS: A total of 6 manuscripts describing 271 patients were identified. Mean age was 60.4 ± 14.9 years old, and 60.1% patients were male. Mean EuroSCORE II was 24.6 ± 23.2. Mitral valve repair was achieved in 32.4% of cases. The average in-hospital mortality was 9.4%, and average length of hospital stay was 21.6 days. Survival was 89.1% at 30 days, and 1-year survival was 79.3%. Rate of conversion to sternotomy was 1.8%. Postoperative complications included: 6.9% postoperative bleeding, 9.3% new postoperative dialysis, 2.3% postoperative stroke, and 3.4% recurrence of endocarditis. Reoperation over the long-term was required in 9.3% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery for infective endocarditis has acceptable perioperative morbidity as well as short- and intermediate-term mortality at experienced centers. Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery may be an acceptable alternative approach to infective endocarditis and warrants further study.