OBJECTIVES It is uncertain whether Thunderbeat has a place in harvesting the left internal mammary artery (LIMA) and whether skeletonization is superior to pedicle-harvested LIMA. Some investigations have shown improved flowrates in the skeletonized graft. The aim of this study was to compare 3 groups of harvesting techniques: Pedicled, surgical skeletonized and skeletonized with Thunderbeat in terms of flow rates in the LIMA and postoperative in-hospital outcomes. METHODS Patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting with the LIMA to the anterior descending artery were randomized to pedicled (n = 56), surgical skeletonized (n = 55) and skeletonized with Thunderbeat (n = 54). Main outcomes were blood flow and pulsatility index in the graft. RESULTS No statistical difference between groups regarding flow in LIMA or pulsatility index. Similarly, no difference in postoperative bleeding or days of hospitalization. The duration of harvesting was faster for the pedicled technique compared with surgical skeletonized and skeletonized with Thunderbeat [mean total min: pedicled 20.2 min standard deviation (SD) +/- 5.4; surgical skeletonized 28.6 min SD +/- 8.7; skeletonized with Thunderbeat 28.3 min SD +/- 9.11, P < 0.001]. No grafts discarded due to faulty harvesting and there was no graft failure within hospital stay. CONCLUSIONS We found no difference between the harvesting methods except for a significantly faster harvesting time with the pedicled technique. However, non-touch skeletonized LIMA harvesting with Thunderbeat seems to be an effective alternative to traditional surgical skeletonized LIMA. The future will reveal whether patency is harvesting dependent. Clinical trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05562908.

Purpose of ReviewStroke is the most feared complication of atrial fibrillation. To prevent stroke, left atrial appendage exclusion has been targeted, as it is the prevalent site for formation of heart thrombi during atrial fibrillation.We review the historic development of methods for exclusion of the left atrial appendage and the evidence to support its amputation during routine cardiac surgery.Recent FindingsEvidence is not yet sufficient to routinely recommend left atrial exclusion during heart surgery, despite a high prevalence of postoperative atrial fibrillation. Observational studies indicate that electrical isolation of scarring from clip or suture techniques reduces the arrhythmogenic substrate.SummaryRandomized studies comparing different methods of closure of the left atrial appendage before amputation do not exist. Such studies are therefore warranted, as well as studies that can elucidate whether amputation is superior to leaving the left atrial appendage stump. Potentially, thrombogenic remaining pouch after closure should be addressed.

BACKGROUND:Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia, and associated with increased risk of morbidity and mortality. AF surgery is widely used for rhythm control of AF, but previous studies have shown varying results. This study sought to investigate the long-term efficacy of concomitant maze IV (CMIV) surgery in an unselected AF population and identify predictors of late AF recurrence.METHODS:In total 144 consecutive patients, who underwent CMIV between January 2006 and December 2010 were enrolled. By data from electronic medical records, registers, and rhythm prints, late AF recurrences and heart rhythm at latest follow-up were retrospectively registered. All patients still alive were invited to an ambulant follow-up to update rhythm status.RESULTS:During a median (IQR) follow-up of 7.39 (2.67) years, 114 (79.2%) patients had recurrence. The cumulative incidence of sinus rhythm (SR) without antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) was 52.3% after 1 year. Long-term results after 2, 5 and 7 years were 47.9%, 32.6% and 25.1%, respectively. At latest follow-up 34.7% were in SR off AADs. No difference in 10-year event-free survival stratified by recurrence were found (p = 0.678). Contrary, time to death (5.40 vs. 3.43 years, p = 0.004) revealed death as competing risk event. The Fine-Gray model identified preoperative sustained AF (SAF) (SHR 3.54, 95%CI [2.35;5.32], p < 0.001), AF duration (1.08, [1.05;1.11], p < 0.001), and postoperative atrial tachyarrhythmia (ATA) (2.29, [1.21;4.35], p = 0.011) as predictors.CONCLUSION:CMIV in the present cohort provided limited long-term success in obtaining SR. SAF, longer AF duration, and postoperative ATA were associated with late AF recurrence.

OBJECTIVE:To determine the cost-effective operative strategy for coronary artery bypass surgery in patients above 70 years.DESIGN:Randomized, controlled trial of 900 patients above 70 years of age subjected to coronary artery bypass surgery. Patients were randomized to either on-pump or off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery. Data on direct and indirect costs were prospectively collected. Preoperatively and six months postoperatively, quality of life was assessed using EuroQol-5D questionnaires. Perioperative in-hospital costs and costs of re-intervention were included.RESULTS:The Summary Score of EuroQol-5D increased in both groups between preoperatively and postoperatively. In the on-pump group, it increased from 0.75 (0.16) (mean (SD)) to 0.84 (0.17), while the increase in the off-pump group was from 0.75 (0.15) to 0.84 (0.18). The difference between the groups was 0.0016 QALY and not significantly different. The mean costs were 148.940 D.Kr (CI, 130.623 D.Kr-167.252 D.Kr) for an on-pump patient and 138.693 D.Kr (CI, 123.167 D.Kr-154.220 D.Kr) for an off-pump patient. The ICER base-case point estimate was 6,829,999 D.Kr/QALY. The cost-effectiveness acceptability curve showed 89% probability of off-pump being cost-effective at a threshold value of 269,400 D.Kr/QALY.CONCLUSIONS:Off-pump surgery tends to be more cost-effective than on-pump surgery. Long-term comparisons are warranted.