Abstract Background The short-term results after using arterial grafts still raise questions and doubts for medical society. Objective To compare the immediate outcomes of patients undergoing single arterial graft versus multiple arterial grafts coronary artery bypass grafting surgery. Methods Cross-sectional cohort study in the São Paulo Registry of Cardiovascular Surgery II (REPLICCAR II). Perioperative data from 3122 patients were grouped by the number of arterial grafts used, and their outcomes were compared: reoperation, deep sternal wound infection (DSWI), stroke, acute kidney injury, prolonged intubation (>24 hours), short hospital stay (<6 days), prolonged hospital stay (>14 days), morbidity and mortality. Propensity Score Matching (PSM) matched 1062 patients, adjusted for the mortality risk. Results After PSM, the single arterial graft group showed patients with advanced age, more former smokers, hypertension, diabetes, stable angina, and previous myocardial infarction. In the multiple arterial grafts, there was a predominance of males, recent pneumonia, and urgent surgeries. After the procedure, there was a higher incidence of pleural effusion (p=0.042), pneumonia (p=0.01), reintubation (p=0.006), DSWI (p=0.007), and sternal debridement (p=0.015) in the multiple arterial grafts group, however, less need for blood transfusion (p=0.005), extremity infections (p=0.002) and shorter hospital stays (p=0.036). Bilateral use of the internal thoracic artery was not related to increased DSWI rate, but glycosylated hemoglobin >6.40% (p=0.048). Conclusion Patients undergoing the multiarterial technique had a higher incidence of pulmonary complications, and DSWI, where glycosylated hemoglobin ≥6.40%, had a greater influence on the infectious outcome than the choice of grafts.

Resumo Fundamento Os resultados a curto prazo após o uso de enxertos arteriais ainda suscitam questionamentos e dúvidas na sociedade médica. Objetivo Comparar os resultados imediatos de pacientes submetidos à cirurgia de revascularização do miocárdio com enxerto arterial único versus enxertos arteriais múltiplos. Métodos Estudo de coorte transversal no Registro Paulista de Cirurgia Cardiovascular II (REPLICCAR II). Os dados perioperatórios de 3122 pacientes foram agrupados pelo número de enxertos arteriais utilizados e seus desfechos foram comparados: reoperação, infecção profunda da ferida torácica (IPFT), acidente vascular cerebral, lesão renal aguda, intubação prolongada (>24 horas), tempo de internação curta (<6 dias), tempo de internação prolongada (>14 dias), morbidade e mortalidade. O Propensity Score Matching (PSM) correspondeu a 1062 pacientes, ajustado para o risco de mortalidade. Resultados Após PSM, o grupo enxerto arterial único apresentou pacientes com idade avançada, mais ex-fumantes, hipertensos, diabéticos, portadores de angina estável e infarto do miocárdio prévio. Nos enxertos arteriais múltiplos houve predomínio do sexo masculino, pneumonia recente e cirurgias de urgência. Após o procedimento, houve maior incidência de derrame pleural (p=0,042), pneumonia (p=0,01), reintubação (p=0,006), IPFT (p=0,007) e desbridamento esternal (p=0,015) no grupo de enxertos multiarteriais, porém, menor necessidade de hemotransfusão (p=0,005), infecções de extremidades (p=0,002) e menor tempo de internação (p=0,036). O uso bilateral da artéria torácica interna não foi relacionado ao aumento da taxa de IPFT, e sim a hemoglobina glicosilada >6,40% (p=0,048). Conclusão Pacientes submetidos a técnica multiarterial apresentaram maior incidência de complicações pulmonares e IPFT, sendo que a hemoglobina glicosilada ≥6,40% teve maior influência no resultado infeccioso do que a escolha dos enxertos.

Abstract Objectives To evaluate the impact of adherence to the cardiac surgical checklist on mortality at the teaching hospital. Methods A retrospective cohort study after the implementation of the cardiac surgical safety checklist in a reference hospital in Latin America. All patients undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery and/or heart valve surgery from 2013 to 2019 were analyzed. After the implementation of the project InCor-Checklist “Five steps to safe cardiac surgery” in 2015, the correlation between adherence and completeness of this instrument with surgical mortality was assessed. The EuroSCORE II was used as a reference to assess the risk of expected mortality for patients. Cross-sectional questionnaires were during the implementation of the InCor-Checklist. To perform the correlation, Pearson’s coefficient was calculated using R software. Results Since 2013, data from 8139 patients have been analyzed. The average annual mortality was 5.98%. In 2015, the instrument was used in only 58% of patients; in contrast, it was used in 100% of patients in 2019. There was a decrease in surgical mortality from 8.22% to 3.13% for the same group of procedures. The results indicate that the greater the checklist use, the lower the surgical mortality (r = 88.9%). In addition, the greater the InCor-Checklist completeness, the lower the surgical mortality (r = 94.1%). Conclusion In the formation of the surgical patient safety culture, the implementation and adherence to the InCor-Checklist “Five steps to safe cardiac surgery” was associated with decreased mortality after cardiac surgery. HIGHLIGHTS Checklists avoid human errors and are commonly used in high-reliability industries. The “InCor Checklist” was associated with decreased mortality over time. Adherence, completeness, and sustainability within public policies are necessary.

Abstract Since the beginning of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, in March 2020, the number of people infected with COVID-19 worldwide increases continuously. Brazil is being followed with great concern in the international media, as it can, very soon, be the epicenter of the pandemic. Initial surgical data suggest that patients who acquire COVID-19 in the perioperative period are prone to a higher morbidity and mortality, however, evidence in cardiac surgery is still scarce. This article aims to aggregate to the growing evidence suggesting that perioperative infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 contributes to a more morbid evolution of the case.

Abstract Introduction: Advances in modern medicine have led to people living longer and healthier lives. Frailty is an emerging concept in medicine yet to be explored as a risk factor in cardiac surgery. When it comes to CABG surgery, randomized controlled clinical trials have primarily focused on low-risk (ROOBY, CORONARY), elevated-risk (GOPCABE) or high-risk patients (BBS), but not on frail patients. Therefore, we believe that off-pump CABG could be an important technique in patients with limited functional capacity to respond to surgical stress. In this study, the authors introduce the new national, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial "FRAGILE", to be developed in the main cardiac surgery centers of Brazil, to clarify the potential benefit of off-pump CABG in frail patients. Methods: FRAGILE is a two-arm, parallel-group, multicentre, individually randomized (1:1) controlled trial which will enroll 630 patients with blinded outcome assessment (at 30 days, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years and 3 years), which aims to compare adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events after off-pump versus on-pump CABG in pre-frail and frail patients. Primary outcomes will be all-cause mortality, acute myocardial infarction, cardiac arrest with successful resuscitation, low cardiac output syndrome/cardiogenic shock, stroke, and coronary reintervention. Secondary outcomes will be major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, operative time, mechanical ventilation time, hyperdynamic shock, new onset of atrial fibrillation, renal replacement therapy, reoperation for bleeding, pneumonia, length of stay in intensive care unit, length of stay in hospital, number of units of blood transfused, graft patency, rate of complete revascularization, neurobehavioral outcomes after cardiac surgery, quality of life after cardiac surgery and costs. Discussion: FRAGILE trial will determine whether off-pump CABG is superior to conventional on-pump CABG in the surgical treatment of pre-frail and frail patients. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT02338947. Registered on August 29th 2014; last updated on March 21st 2016.

ResumoFundamento:Escores de risco para cirurgia cardíaca não podem continuar sendo neglicenciados.Objetivo:Avaliar o desempenho do Age, Creatinine and Ejection Fraction Score (ACEF Score) na predição de mortalidade dos pacientes submetidos à cirurgia de revascularização miocárdica e/ou valvar eletiva, e compará-lo a outros escores.Métodos:Estudo de coorte prospectivo no banco de um centro terciário brasileiro. Foram avaliados 2.565 pacientes operados de maneira eletiva entre maio de 2007 e julho de 2009. Para uma análise mais detalhada, o desempenho do ACEF Score foi comparado ao do InsCor e ao do EuroSCORE por meio de testes de correlação, calibração e discriminação.Resultados:Os pacientes foram estratificados em leve, moderado e grave para todos os modelos. A calibração foi inadequada para o ACEF Score (p = 0,046) e adequada para o InsCor (p = 0,460) e o EuroSCORE (p = 0,750). Na discriminação, a área abaixo da curva ROC apresentou-se questionável para o ACEF Score (0,625) e apropriada para o InsCor (0,744) e o EuroSCORE (0,763).Conclusão:Embora simples e prático, o ACEF Score, ao contrário do InsCor e do EuroSCORE, não se mostrou acurado para predizer mortalidade nos pacientes submetidos à cirurgia de revascularização miocárdica e/ou valvar eletiva em centro terciário brasileiro. (Arq Bras Cardiol. 2015; [online].ahead print, PP.0-0)

AbstractBackground:Risk scores for cardiac surgery cannot continue to be neglected.Objective:To assess the performance of “Age, Creatinine and Ejection Fraction Score” (ACEF Score) to predict mortality in patients submitted to elective coronary artery bypass graft and/or heart valve surgery, and to compare it to other scores.Methods:A prospective cohort study was carried out with the database of a Brazilian tertiary care center. A total of 2,565 patients submitted to elective surgeries between May 2007 and July 2009 were assessed. For a more detailed analysis, the ACEF Score performance was compared to the InsCor’s and EuroSCORE’s performance through correlation, calibration and discrimination tests.Results:Patients were stratified into mild, moderate and severe for all models. Calibration was inadequate for ACEF Score (p = 0.046) and adequate for InsCor (p = 0.460) and EuroSCORE (p = 0.750). As for discrimination, the area under the ROC curve was questionable for the ACEF Score (0.625) and adequate for InsCor (0.744) and EuroSCORE (0.763).Conclusion:Although simple to use and practical, the ACEF Score, unlike InsCor and EuroSCORE, was not accurate for predicting mortality in patients submitted to elective coronary artery bypass graft and/or heart valve surgery in a Brazilian tertiary care center. (Arq Bras Cardiol. 2015; [online].ahead print, PP.0-0)

Introdução: O modelo mais utilizado para predição de mortalidade em cirurgia cardíaca foi recentemente remodelado, mas dúvidas referentes à sua metodologia e desenvolvimento têm sido relatadas. Objetivo: O objetivo deste estudo foi avaliar o desempenho do EuroSCORE II na predição de mortalidade em pacientes submetidos a cirurgia de coronária e/ou valva na instituição. Métodos: Mil pacientes, operados consecutivamente de coronária e/ou valva, entre outubro de 2008 e julho de 2009, foram analisados. O desfecho de interesse foi mortalidade intra-hospitalar. A calibração foi realizada pela correlação entre mortalidade esperada e observada por meio do teste de Hosmer Lemeshow. A discriminação foi calculada pela área abaixo da curva ROC. O desempenho do EuroSCORE II foi comparado com os modelos EuroSCORE e InsCor (modelo local). Resultados: Na calibração, o teste de Hosmer Lemeshow foi inadequado para o EuroSCORE II (P=0,0003) e bom para os modelos EuroSCORE (P=0,593) e InsCor (P=0,184). No entanto, na discriminação, a área abaixo da curva ROC para o EuroSCORE II foi de 0,81 [IC 95% (0,76-0,85), P<0,001]; para o EuroSCORE foi de 0,81 [IC 95% (0,77-0,86), P<0,001] e para o InsCor foi de 0,79 [IC 95% (0,74-0,83), P<0,001], revelando-se adequada para todos. Conclusão: O EuroSCORE II se tornou mais complexo e, à semelhança com a literatura internacional, mal calibrado para predizer mortalidade nos pacientes operados de coronária e/ou valva em nosso meio. Esses dados reforçam a importância do modelo local.

Introduction: The most widely used model for predicting mortality in cardiac surgery was recently remodeled, but the doubts regarding its methodology and development have been reported. Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the performance of the EuroSCORE II to predict mortality in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafts or valve surgery at our institution. Methods: One thousand consecutive patients operated on coronary artery bypass grafts or valve surgery, between October 2008 and July 2009, were analyzed. The outcome of interest was in-hospital mortality. Calibration was performed by correlation between observed and expected mortality by Hosmer Lemeshow. Discrimination was calculated by the area under the ROC curve. The performance of the EuroSCORE II was compared with the EuroSCORE and InsCor (local model). Results: In calibration, the Hosmer Lemeshow test was inappropriate for the EuroSCORE II (P=0.0003) and good for the EuroSCORE (P=0.593) and InsCor (P=0.184). However, the discrimination, the area under the ROC curve for EuroSCORE II was 0.81 [95% CI (0.76 to 0.85), P<0.001], for the EuroSCORE was 0.81 [95% CI (0.77 to 0.86), P<0.001] and for InsCor was 0.79 [95% CI (0.74-0.83), P<0.001] showing up properly for all. Conclusion: The EuroSCORE II became more complex and resemblance to the international literature poorly calibrated to predict mortality in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafts or valve surgery at our institution. These data emphasize the importance of the local model.