Prognosis following acute coronary syndromes according to prior coronary artery bypass grafting: Meta-analysis

PURPOSE: Conduct a meta-analysis to study the prognostic influence of a previous coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients admitted for an acute coronary syndrome (ACS). METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was performed using electronic reference databases through January 2013 (MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Web of Knowledge, Google Scholar and references cited in other studies). Studies in which ACS outcomes with a previous history of CABG were compared with ACS outcomes with no history of previous CABG were considered for inclusion. The main endpoints of interest were mortality and non-fatal acute myocardial infarction. Data was aggregated at three follow-up times using random-effects meta-analysis models. RESULTS: Twenty-four studies were included which provided 387,181 patients for analysis. Previous CABG ACS patients were older, more diabetic and had a more frequent history of a previous myocardial infarction. Pooled in-hospital mortality was higher for the previous CABG ACS patients (OR 1.22 [1.04-1.44], p<0.01, I(2) 88%). The pooled adjusted OR showed no significant differences for the two groups (adjusted OR 1.13 [0.93-1.37], p=0.22, I(2) 92%). Previous CABG ACS patient had a higher pooled 30-day mortality (OR 1.28 [1.05-1.55], p=0.02, I(2) 74%); a higher non-adjusted (OR 1.61 [1.38-1.88], p<0.01, I(2) 70%) and adjusted (adjusted OR 1.37 [1.15-1.65], p<0.01, I(2) 0%) long-term mortality. Both the in-hospital and the long-term re-infarction rates were higher for the previous CABG ACS patients. CONCLUSIONS: According to our data, ACS patients with previous CABG history had a higher risk for short- and long-term adverse events.

Endoscopic treatment of bleeding gastric varices with histoacryl (N-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate): a South European single center experience

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic injection of N-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate is the current recommended treatment for gastric variceal bleeding. Despite the extensive worldwide use, there are still differences related to the technique, safety, and long term-results. We retrospectively evaluated the efficacy and safety of cyanoacrylate in patients with gastric variceal bleeding. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between January 1998 and January 2010, 97 patients with gastric variceal bleeding underwent endoscopic treatment with a mixture of N-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate and Lipiodol(TM). Ninety-one patients had cirrhosis and 6 had non-cirrhotic portal hypertension. Child-Pugh score at presentation for cirrhotic patients was A-12.1 %; B-53.8 %; C-34.1 % and median MELD score at admission was 13 (3-26). Successful hemostasis, rebleeding rate and complications were reviewed. Median time of follow up was 19 months (0.5-126). RESULTS: A median mixture volume of 1.5 mL (0.6 to 5 mL), in 1 to 8 injections, was used, with immediate hemostasis rate of 95.9 % and early rebleeding rate of 14.4 %. One or more complications occurred in 17.5 % and were associated with the use of Sengstaken-Blakemore tube before cyanoacrylate and very early rebleeding (p < 0.05). Hospital mortality rate during initial bleeding episode was 9.3 %. Very early rebleeding was a strong and independent predictor for in-hospital mortality (p < 0.001). Long-term mortality rate was 58.8 %, in most of the cases secondary to hepatic failure. CONCLUSION: N-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate is a rapid, easy and highly effective modality for immediate hemostasis of gastric variceal bleeding with an acceptable rebleeding rate. Patients with very early rebleeding are at higher risk of death.

Gender mismatch between donor and recipient is a factor of morbidity but does not condition survival after cardiac transplantation

We intended to evaluate the influence of sex mismatch between donor and recipient, which is still under much debate, on survival and comorbidities after cardiac transplantation. From November 2003 to December 2013, a total of 258 patients were transplanted in our center. From these, 200 receptors were male (77.5%) and constituted our study population, further divided into those who received the heart from a female donor (Group A) - 44 patients (22%) and those who received it from a male donor (Group B) - 156 (78%). Median follow-up was 4.2 ± 3.0 years (1-10 years). The two groups were quite comparable with each other, except for body mass index, systolic pulmonary artery pressure, and transpulmonary gradient, which were significantly lower in Group A. A low donor/recipient weigh ratio (<0.8) was avoided whenever possible. Hospital mortality was not different in the two groups. During follow-up, global survival was similar, as was survival free from acute cellular rejection and cardiac allograft vasculopathy. However, patients in Group A had decreased survival free from serious infections and malignant tumors. Allocation of female donors to male receptors can be done safely, at least in receptors without pulmonary hypertension and when an adequate donor/recipient weigh ratio is ensured.

Heart Transplantation in Patients Older than 65 Years: Worthwhile or Wastage of Organs?

BACKGROUND: Patients older than 65 years have traditionally not been considered candidates for heart transplantation. However, recent studies have shown similar survival. We evaluated immediate and medium-term results in patients older than 65 years compared with younger patients. METHODS: From November 2003 to December 2013, 258 patients underwent transplantation. Children and patients with other organ transplantations were excluded from this study. Recipients were divided into two groups: 45 patients (18%) aged 65 years and older (Group A) and 203 patients (81%) younger than 65 years (Group B). RESULTS: Patients differed in age (67.0 ± 2.2 vs. 51.5 ± 9.7 years), but gender (male 77.8 vs. 77.3%; p = 0.949) was similar. Patients in Group A had more cardiovascular risk factors and ischemic cardiomyopathy (60 vs. 33.5%; p < 0.001). Donors to Group A were older (38.5 ± 11.3 vs. 34.0 ± 11.0 years; p = 0.014). Hospital mortality was 0 vs. 5.9% (p = 0.095) and 1- and 5-year survival were 88.8 ± 4.7 versus 86.8 ± 2.4% and 81.5 ± 5.9 versus 77.2 ± 3.2%, respectively. Mean follow-up was 3.8 ± 2.7 versus 4.5 ± 3.1 years. Incidence of cellular/humoral rejection was similar, but incidence of cardiac allograft vasculopathy was higher (15.6 vs. 7.4%; p = 0.081). Incidence of diabetes de novo was similar (p = 0.632), but older patients had more serious infections in the 1st year (p = 0.018). CONCLUSION: Heart transplantation in selected older patients can be performed with survival similar to younger patients, hence should not be restricted arbitrarily. Incidence of infections, graft vascular disease, and malignancies can be reduced with a more personalized approach to immunosuppression. Allocation of donors to these patients does not appear to reduce the possibility of transplanting younger patients.