Explore the vast range of titles available.

Literature regarding monitoring and consequences of distal limb ischemia due to femoral artery cannulation for Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery (MICS) remains limited. The primary objective was to determine its incidence, defined as a ≥ 15% difference in regional Oxygen Saturation (rSO 2 ) lasting ≥ four consecutive minutes between the cannulated and non-cannulated limb. The secondary objectives included: determination of distal limb ischemia, defined as a Tissue Oxygenation Index (TOI) < 50% in the cannulated limb, identification of predictors for distal limb ischemia, determination of a possible association of NIRS-diagnosed ischemia with acute kidney injury, and the need for vascular surgery up to six months after cardiac surgery. A prospective, observational cohort study with blinded rSO 2 -measurements to prevent intraoperative clinical decision-making. A single-center, community-hospital, clinical study. All consecutive patients ≥ 18 years old, and scheduled for predefined MICS. Patients underwent MICS with bilateral calf muscle rSO 2 -measurements conducted by Near-Infrared Spectroscopy (NIRS). In total 75/280 patients (26.79%) experienced distal limb ischemia according to the primary objective, while 18/280 patients (6.42%) experienced distal limb ischemia according to the secondary objective. Multivariate logistic regression showed younger age to be an independent predictor for distal limb ischemia ( p  = 0.003). None of the patients who suffered intraoperative ischemia required vascular surgery within the follow-up period. The incidence of NIRS-diagnosed ischemia varied from 6.4% to 26.8% depending on the used criteria. Short and long-term vascular sequelae, however, are limited and not intraoperative ischemia related. The added value of intraoperative distal limb NIRS monitoring for vascular reasons seems limited. Future research on femoral artery cannulation in MICS should shift focus to other outcome parameters such as acute kidney injury, postoperative pain or paresthesias.

The Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score has been developed to score the severity of organ dysfunction in critically ill sepsis patients and has been proven to have a high predictive value for intensive care unit (ICU) mortality in severely ill patients. Our goal was to evaluate the prognostic value of the SOFA score as well as trends in SOFA score for ICU mortality in COVID-19 patients. All consecutive patients with confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia admitted to the ICU between March 13th, 2020, and October 17th, 2020 were included in this retrospective cohort study. The worst SOFA score was evaluated daily. Multiple logistic regression models were used to evaluate the predictive value of SOFA in ICU mortality. 103 patients were included in this study. 30 patients (29%) died during their ICU stay and 73 (71%) patients were discharged alive. The ICU admission SOFA score was 5.2 ± 3.3 in ICU non-survivors vs. 4.3 ± 2.9 in ICU survivors (P = 0.15). The maximum SOFA score in ICU non-survivors was 11.7 ± 4.7 vs. 7.4 ± 4.3 in ICU survivors. SOFA scores increased the first week in both survivors and non-survivors, but the increase was less pronounced in survivors. In the multiple logistic regression models, neither admission SOFA score nor combination with delta SOFA in the first 48 hours was statistically significantly related to ICU mortality. Only the maximum SOFA score remained significant (OR = 1.23, 95% CI: 1.11-1.37, P < 0.001) in the multiple logistic models with an AUC of 0.91. Evaluation of SOFA scores in the first 48 hours after ICU admission is not a good prognostic indicator in COVID-19 patients. Only the maximum SOFA score was predictive for ICU mortality.

In this randomized, controlled trial involving critically ill patients not receiving early parenteral nutrition, tight glucose control did not affect the length of time that ICU care was needed or mortality.

Objective Minimally invasive procedures have been developed to reduce surgical trauma after cardiac surgery. Clinical recovery is the main focus of most research. Still, patient-centred outcomes, such as the quality of life, can provide a more comprehensive understanding of the impact of the surgery on the patient’s life. This systematic review aims to deliver a detailed summary of all available research investigating the quality of recovery, assessed with quality of life instruments, in adults undergoing minimally invasive cardiac surgery. Methods All randomised trials, cohort studies, and cross-sectional studies assessing the quality of recovery in patients undergoing minimally invasive cardiac surgery compared to conventional cardiac surgery within the last 20 years were included, and a summary was prepared. Results The randomised trial observed an overall improved quality of life after both minimally invasive and conventional surgery. The quality of life improvement in the minimally invasive group showed a faster course and evolved to a higher level than the conventional surgery group. These findings align with the results of prospective cohort studies. In the cross-sectional studies, no significant difference in the quality of life was seen except for one that observed a significantly higher quality of life in the minimally invasive group. Conclusions This systematic review indicates that patients may benefit from minimally invasive and conventional cardiac surgery, but patients undergoing minimally invasive cardiac surgery may recover sooner and to a greater extent. However, no firm conclusion could be drawn due to the limited available studies. Therefore, randomised controlled trials are needed.