Pleural effusion post coronary artery bypass surgery: associations and complications

Timing of Chest Tube Removal Following Adult Cardiac Surgery: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVES

Early chest tube removal following cardiac surgery may be associated with an increased risk of pleural or pericardial effusions following cardiac surgery. This study compares the effects of two fast-track chest tube removal protocols regarding the risk of pleural or pericardial effusions, requirement of opioids, respiratory function, and postoperative complications.

DESIGN

Prospective non-blinded cluster-randomized study with alternating chest tube removal protocol in adult patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery. Monthly changing allocation to scheduled chest tube removal on the day of surgery (Day 0) versus removal on the 1st postoperative day (Day 1) provided no air leakage and output < 200 mL within the last four hours.

RESULTS

A total of 527 patients were included in the study from September 1st 2020 until October 29th 2021 and randomly allocated to chest tube removal at day 0 (n = 255), and day 1 (n = 272). More than every fourth patient required drainage for pleural effusion with no significant difference between the groups. Earlier removal of chest tubes did not reduce requirement of analgesics, improve early respiratory function, or reduce postoperative complications. The study was halted for futility after halfway interim analysis showed insufficient promise of any treatment benefit.

CONCLUSION

Fast-track protocols with chest tube removal within the first 24 h after cardiac surgery may be associated a high rate of pleural effusions.

Effect of autologous platelet-rich plasma on patients with acute type A aortic dissection underwent aortic arch replacement: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Coagulopathy and massive bleeding are common complications of patients with Stanford type A acute aortic dissection repair, and patients with these complications require many transfusions. Autologous platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is widely used to reduce the need for blood products. In the present study, we aimed to investigate the effects of PRP on blood conservation and the postoperative conditions of patients who underwent aortic arch replacement.

METHODS

Patients with aortic dissection undergoing aortic arch replacement were included initially application In all, 837 patients were divided into the PRP and non-PRP groups according to PRP use, whereupon a propensity score match was performed. The data analyzed included patient basic information, intraoperative information, postoperative biochemical examinations, and CTA reports.

RESULTS

In total, 610 patients were finally included (305 patients per group). Groups were well balanced after matching. Compared to the non-PRP group, less cryoprecipitate was transfused in the PRP group (10.0 [7.5, 11.0] vs. 10.0 [10.0, 11.5], P = 0.021), while no differences were found in packed RBC, FFP, and platelets between the two groups. Also, the surgery variables showed no differences. After surgery, patients in the PRP group showed higher postoperative serum albumin (36.43±4.20 vs. 35.39±4.40 g/L, P = 0.004) and total protein levels (59.38±6.25 vs. 58.06±7.19 g/L, P = 0.019) than the non-PRP group, but no significant differences in the levels of ALT, AST, Scr, and BUN. CTA reports showed that the proportion of patients with pleural effusion was lower in the PRP group (76.66% vs. 83.99%, OR = 1.59, 95% CI: 1.04-2.45, P = 0.028), while the proportions of pericardial effusion were not significantly different.

CONCLUSIONS

PRP application in aortic arch replacement surgery reduced the transfusion of cryoprecipitate, increased the postoperative serum albumin and total protein levels, and reduced the incidence of pleural effusion. No effect of PRP application was found on other postoperative blood indicators and CTA reports.

Coronary artery bypass grafting in active or recent COVID-19 infection: a systematic review

Introduction

Even though there have been few studies on coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), data on patients with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) infection show that cardiac surgery has poor outcomes in this subset. From the available studies in the literature, we conducted a systematic review with the aim of determining the outcome of COVID-19 patients who underwent CABG.

Methods

Between December 2019 and October 2022, searches were conducted in PubMed, the Directory of Open Access Journals, and Google Scholar to find studies reporting results of COVID-19 patients undergoing CABG. We extracted data on the clinical profile and outcomes of the patients from the eligible studies. The quality of the studies was assessed using a standardised tool.

Results

The total sample size across the 12 included studies was 99 patients who underwent CABG in active disease or within 30 days of COVID-19 infection. The median and interquartile range (IQR) for the length of time spent on a mechanical ventilator, stay in the intensive care unit (ICU), and the total hospital stay were 0.9 (0.47–2), 4.5 (2.5–8), and 12.5 (8.5–22.5) days respectively. Seventy-six patients developed postoperative complications, and there were eleven deaths.

Conclusion

The findings of the present study indicate that mortality risk goes down when the time between COVID-19 diagnosis and surgery increases. When compared to data from other high-risk urgent or emergent CABG patients around the world who were not infected with COVID-19, patients who underwent CABG in the COVID-19 subgroup had similar postoperative outcomes.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12055-023-01495-7.

Chest Tube Management: Past, Present, and Future Directions for Developing Evidence-Based Best Practices

In the field of modern cardiothoracic surgery, chest drainage has become ubiquitous and yet characterized by a wide variation in practice. Meanwhile, the evolution of chest drain technology has created gaps in knowledge that represent opportunities for new research to support the development of best practices in chest drain management. The chest drain is an indispensable tool in the recovery of the cardiac surgery patient. However, decisions about chest drain management-including those about type, material, number, maintenance of patency, and the timing of removal-are largely driven by tradition due to a scarcity of quality evidence. This narrative review surveys the available evidence regarding chest-drain management practices with the objective of highlighting scientific gaps, unmet needs, and opportunities for further research.