Loading…

The fate of non-revisited transesophageal findings after cardiopulmonary bypass managed conservatively

Transoesophageal echocardiography (TOE) use has experienced an exponential growth in cardiac surgery (CS). The latest guidelines recommend TOE for all adult patients undergoing CS, but the management of unexpected-TOE findings (ATOEF) after cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) might be controversial. We rev...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia 2019-09, Vol.33, p.S116-S117
Main Authors: Esteve, C. Ibanez, Rodríguez, G. Fita, Casado, M.J. Carretero, Dominguez, A. Carramiñana, Jimenez, P. Matute, Ripoll, R. Navarro, Gimenez, M.J. Arguis, Sancho, C. Gomar, Canudas, I. Rovira, Obrador, E. Quintana, Martinez, E. Sandoval, Pereda, D., Linares, J. Perdomo
Format: Article
Language:English
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Transoesophageal echocardiography (TOE) use has experienced an exponential growth in cardiac surgery (CS). The latest guidelines recommend TOE for all adult patients undergoing CS, but the management of unexpected-TOE findings (ATOEF) after cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) might be controversial. We reviewed the outcomes of those patients with ATOEF after CBP managed without immediate surgical revision. A systematic TOE use policy is applied in our institution for patients undergoing CS. Intraoperative TOE is performed by a senior anaesthesiologist. Data from intraoperative TOE cases were collected prospectively between January 2014 and December 2017. The presence of post-CPB ATOEF and its impact on the immediate surgical treatment decision-making was analysed. A total of 2421 TOE examinations were registered, with 197 post-CPB ATOEF. Among those with post-CPB ATOF, 108 (55%) led to immediate surgical treatment. The remaining 89 (45%) cases with post-CPB ATOEF did not received surgical treatment. These non-treated ATOEF were characterised into: 25 (28%) periprosthetic leak, 1 (1%) intraprosthetic regurgitation, 20 (22%) regurgitations after mitral valve (MV) repair, 11 (12%) regurgitations after aortic valve (AoV) repair, 7 (8%) and 2 (2%) regurgitations related to native MV and AoV respectively, 12 (13%) systolic anterior motion of the MV and 11 (12%) classified as other findings. The immediate postoperative follow-up showed the persistence of 36% of periprosthetic regurgitations, 100% of intraprosthetic regurgitations, 70% and 91% related to MV and AoV repair respectively, 86% and 100% related to native MV and AoV respectively. Two patients died in the immediate postoperative period and none required immediate re-do surgery due to the findings. The 6-12 month follow-up showed the persistence of 34% of periprosthetic leaks, 100% of intraprosthetic regurgitations, 70% and 91% of those related to MV and AoV repair, 71% and 100% of those related to native MV and AoV. Among all post-CPB ATOEF, 2 (2%) patients have required surgical treatment related to the finding in the long-term follow-up. Almost half of the post-CBP ATOEF did not lead to an immediate surgical treatment. Follow up echocardiography in the immediate postoperative period and at 6-12months, showed reduction of periprosthetic leaks. However, we observed stability of left-sided valve repair regurgitations. The incidence of reinterventions due to post-CBP ATOEF was low, reinforcing our current decisio
ISSN:1053-0770
1532-8422
DOI:10.1053/j.jvca.2019.07.068