Right axillary artery cannulation for venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: A retrospective single centre observational study

Abstract Objectives: Our goal was to assess the safety, outcomes and complication rate of axillary artery cannulation for venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO). Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on data obtained from the review of medical charts of all consecutive patients undergoing VA-ECMO implantation between January 2013 and December 2017 at a teaching hospital. Only patients with right axillary VA-ECMO implantation in a non-emergency setting were included. Post-procedural outcomes and local and systemic complications were analysed. Results: One hundred and seventy-four [131 male (75.3%), 43 female (24.7%); mean age 56.8 ± 15.1 years] patients underwent femoral-axillary VA-ECMO. Indications were cardiogenic shock from any cause (n = 78, 44.8%) or post-cardiotomy syndrome (n = 96, 55.2%). Fifty-three (30.5%) patients died while on VA-ECMO support. At the time of VA-ECMO ablation, 89 (51.1%) patients had recovered; 13 (7.5%) patients were bridged to a long-term mechanical support device and 19 (10.9%) patients underwent heart transplants. Thirty-day and 1-year mortality was 36.2% (n = 63) and 49.4% (n = 86), respectively. The 1-year survival rate of patients who were weaned from VA-ECMO support was 72.7% (n = 88). The complications of axillary cannulation were bleeding (n = 7, 4%), local infection (n = 3, 1.7%), upper limb ischaemia (n = 2, 1.1%) and brachial plexus injury (n = 1, 0.6%). Left ventricle unloading was required for 9 (5.2%) patients. The median duration of VA-ECMO support was 7 (range 1-26) days. Conclusions: Right axillary artery cannulation is a safe and reliable method for VA-ECMO support with a low rate of local complications. In the absence of a control group with femoro-femoral cannulation, no definitive conclusion about the superiority of axillary over femoral cannulation can be drawn

Transseptal transcatheter mitral valve implantation versus redo surgical mitral valve replacement for degenerated mitral bioprostheses

Abstract Background The growing use of surgical bioprostheses raises concerns about a future reoperation for bioprosthesis degeneration. There are few data on outcome after transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve implantation (TMVI) compared with redo surgical mitral valve replacement (SMVR). Purpose To compare the feasibility, safety and outcomes of TMVI versus SMVR for degenerated mitral bioprosthesis in high-risk patients. Methods In our institution, 52 patients underwent TMVI by transseptal approach and 33 SMVR for degenerated mitral bioprosthesis. The composite endpoint of event-free survival included cardiovascular mortality, stroke, major bleeding, hospitalization for heart failure or mitral valve reintervention. Results Mean age and EuroSCORE II were higher in TMVI group vs. SMVR group (age 63±21 years vs. 51±15 years, p=0.002; EuroSCORE II 12.5±12.2% vs. 6.2±3.3%, p=0.001) (Table). In-hospital mortality was 3.8% after TMVI vs. 3.0% after SMVR (p=1.0). Median follow-up was 2.2 years. At 5 years, survival was 69.7±9.4% after TMVI vs. 86.6±7.6% after SMVR (p=0.10) and event-free survival was lower after TMVI (40.1±9.9% vs 78.7±8.8% respectively, p=0.003) (Figure). In multivariate analysis, older age (p=0.02), neurologic history (p=0.05) and non-elective procedure (p&amp;lt;0.0001) were associated with lower event-free survival, while TMVI vs. SMVR was no longer significant (p=0.17). At last follow-up, 84% patients from TMVI group and 78% from SMVR group were NYHA I-II class. Mean mitral valve gradient and pulmonary artery systolic pressure were respectively 6.8±2.5 mmHg and 45±14 mmHg in TMVI group, and 4.8±2.0 mmHg and 37±11 mmHg in SMVR group. Conclusion TMVI is an alternative to SMVR in high-risk patients with degenerated mitral bioprosthesis. Comparison of mid-term results of the two techniques must take into account the differences in patient characteristics. Event-free survival Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None </jats:sec