Tomonari Shimoda

Background: Transvenous pacemaker implantation after tricuspid valve surgery may cause adverse outcomes due to lead–valve interactions. Although leadless pacemakers may mitigate these risks, empirical data remain limited. Methods: We compared outcomes of leadless versus transvenous pacemakers following tricuspid surgery using a target trial emulation framework. We analyzed Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥65 years who underwent tricuspid valve surgery and received a pacemaker during the index admission between 2017 and 2021, using propensity score matching weight analysis to control for confounders. Primary outcomes were in‐hospital death and 2‐year heart failure hospitalization. Secondary outcomes included 2‐year death. Results: We included 185 and 1336 patients in the leadless and transvenous groups, respectively. Use of leadless pacemakers increased from 6.3% in 2017 to 17.5% in 2021. Leadless pacemaker recipients more often underwent tricuspid valve replacement (29.2% versus 8.5%) while concomitant mitral surgery was less common (69.2% versus 86.8%). After adjustment, we found no evidence that in‐hospital death (adjusted odds ratio, 1.82 [95% CI, 0.65–5.13] for leadless) and 2‐year heart failure hospitalizations (subdistribution hazard ratio [HR], 0.88 [95% CI, 0.60–1.30] for leadless) differed between the 2 groups. We also found no evidence that 2‐year death (adjusted HR, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.69–1.57] for leadless) differed between groups. Conclusions: No statistically significant differences were detected between leadless versus transvenous pacemaker implantations after tricuspid valve surgery. However, CIs were wide, and a clinically meaningful difference in either direction cannot be excluded. The study may therefore be underpowered, and the absence of echocardiographic data limits assessment of tricuspid regurgitation, warranting prospective studies.

Background: Percutaneous aspiration thrombectomy is increasingly used as an alternative to surgery for right‐sided heart masses, but nationwide data are limited. Methods: We analyzed Medicare fee‐for‐service beneficiaries aged ≥65 years who underwent percutaneous or surgical removal of right‐sided heart masses from 2016 to 2021. We examined the temporal change in the number of percutaneous and surgical cases. The association between procedural types and patient characteristics was assessed using a multivariable logistic regression analysis. The primary outcomes were in‐hospital and 2‐year death. Given baseline differences between groups, we reported overall outcomes from the unadjusted cohort and comparative outcomes after adjustment using propensity score matching. Results: A total of 831 patients were included (447 percutaneous, 384 surgical), with the proportion of percutaneous cases increasing from 45.8% in 2016 to 65.0% in 2021. Patients with thrombosis (adjusted odds ratio, 3.42 [95% CI, 2.14–5.46]) and infective endocarditis (adjusted odds ratio, 10.08 [95% CI, 5.39–18.85]) were more often treated with percutaneous interventions. In‐hospital and 2‐year death in the percutaneous group were 11.0% and 43.0%, respectively. In the surgery group, those were 21.1% and 42.9%, respectively. Propensity score matching yielded 221 pairs. In the matched cohort, in‐hospital death remained lower with the percutaneous group (10.4% versus 19.5%; P =0.01), while 2‐year death was similar (hazard ratio, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.74–1.34]). Conclusions: This study from a national database demonstrated that percutaneous intervention for right‐sided heart masses has become the predominant strategy compared with surgery. Further trials are required to compare efficacy and safety between these interventions.

Objective: Acute limb ischemia (ALI) is a limb- and life-threatening vascular emergency that necessitates prompt revascularization. While both surgical and endovascular interventions are established treatment modalities, contemporary comparative data remain limited. The study aims to evaluate and compare outcomes between these revascularization strategies. Methods: A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)-guided systematic review and meta-analysis were performed. Three databases were searched through January 2026. All studies comparing endovascular versus surgical treatment for ALI were identified. Outcomes of interest included periprocedural and mid-term mortality, major amputation, and reintervention rates. Mid-term outcomes were defined as events occurring at any point during the reported follow-up period. Risk ratios (RRs) or hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were extracted and analyzed using a random-effects model. Results: Twenty-four studies (5 randomized controlled trials, 2 prospective, and 17 retrospective observational studies) comprising 382 465 patients (endovascular: 172 308; surgical: 210 157) were analyzed. In these studies, there was no difference in periprocedural mortality between endovascular and surgical treatment (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.62-1.14). Endovascular treatment was associated with lower mid-term mortality compared with surgical revascularization (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.76-0.94). Major amputation showed a similar trend, with comparable periprocedural risk (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.51-1.71) and reduced mid-term risk with endovascular therapy (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.77-0.91). Periprocedural reintervention rates were significantly higher in the endovascular group (RR 1.94, 95% CI 1.80-2.08), while mid-term reintervention rates were comparable (HR 1.79, 95% CI 0.79-4.06). Conclusion: In this contemporary meta-analysis of patients treated for ALI, endovascular revascularization was associated with lower mid-term mortality and major amputation rates, whereas surgical intervention was linked to a lower risk of periprocedural reintervention. These findings underscore the importance of a multidisciplinary approach involving a dedicated vascular team to ensure optimal, patient-tailored management. Clinical Trial Registration: Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews, ID=1042195. Clinical Impact: Acute limb ischemia (ALI) carries high morbidity and mortality, yet comparative data on endovascular versus surgical revascularization are limited. In this meta-analysis of 24 studies including 382 465 patients, periprocedural mortality was similar between approaches, but endovascular therapy reduced mid-term mortality and major amputation risk, despite higher periprocedural reintervention rates. These findings suggest that endovascular-first strategies may be a safe and effective alternative to surgical revascularization. Optimal care requires a multidisciplinary vascular team to tailor interventions, balancing immediate procedural risks with long-term outcomes for each patient.

Objectives: There is debate regarding the optimal choice for a second conduit in coronary artery bypass grafting. The right internal mammary artery (RIMA) is commonly employed as a second conduit; however, it is unclear whether the free (fRIMA) or in situ (isRIMA) configuration yields superior outcomes. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare clinical outcomes between fRIMA and isRIMA as the second conduit. Methods: A comprehensive search of PubMed (MEDLINE), EMBASE, and CENTRAL was performed through May 2025 to identify studies comparing outcomes in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting with either fRIMA or isRIMA as a second conduit. The outcomes of interest were overall mortality, graft occlusion, major adverse cardiac events (MACE), and repeat revascularization. Data with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were extracted. Pooled analysis was performed using a random-effects model. Results: A total of 13 studies with 9899 patients were included (fRIMA, n = 3095; isRIMA, n = 6804). The median study follow-up duration ranged from 1 to 20 years across the studies. No statistically significant differences were observed in overall mortality (hazard ratio [95% CI] = 1.16 [0.79-1.69]), graft occlusion (1.04 [0.90-1.21]), MACE (0.87 [0.62-1.21]), and repeat revascularization (1.34 [0.68-2.66]). Conclusions: In this meta-analysis, no statistically significant differences were observed between fRIMA and isRIMA configurations across the evaluated clinical outcomes. These findings suggest that, within the limitations of available evidence, the choice between fRIMA and isRIMA may be guided by clinical context, surgeon preference, patient anatomy, and target vessel characteristics rather than expected differences in major clinical outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Evidence is limited as to whether outcomes differ between patients with tricuspid regurgitation (TR) treated with tricuspid transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (T-TEER) versus surgical tricuspid valve repair. We aimed to compare outcomes between these 2 approaches. METHODS: We analyzed the data on Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 65 to 99 years with TR who underwent T-TEER or isolated surgical repair between July 2016 and December 2020. The primary outcome was 2-year all-cause mortality. Other outcomes included in-hospital mortality and permanent pacemaker implantation as well as 2-year heart failure hospitalization and tricuspid valve reintervention. A propensity score matching weight analysis was used to adjust for potential confounders. RESULTS: A total of 1143 patients were included (409 T-TEER versus 734 surgery). The proportion of T-TEER cases increased from 2% in the third quarter of 2016 to 67% in the last quarter of 2020 among all isolated TR procedures. After adjustment for potential confounders, we found no evidence that 2-year all-cause mortality differs between patients treated with T-TEER versus surgical repair (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.63–1.13]). Patients treated with T-TEER experienced lower in-hospital mortality (2.5% versus 12.5%, P P <0.001) than those treated by surgical repair. At 2 years, we found no differences in heart failure hospitalizations, but tricuspid valve reinterventions were more frequent in the T-TEER group (subdistribution hazard ratio, 8.03 [95% CI, 2.87–22.48]). CONCLUSIONS: Among Medicare beneficiaries with TR, the 2-year mortality rate was comparable between T-TEER and surgical repair. T-TEER showed advantages in perioperative outcomes, including lower in-hospital mortality and pacemaker implantation rates, whereas tricuspid valve reinterventions were more frequent in the T-TEER group. Further studies are necessary to refine indications, patient selections, and optimal timing for intervention with either treatment strategy.

Background and Objectives: Vasopressin increases blood pressure through aquaporin-2-mediated water retention and is useful for managing hemodynamics after surgery. However, even after decades of study, clear clinical guidelines on doses and ideal use cases after cardiovascular surgery remain unclear. Here, the existing literature is synthesized on vasopressin use for cardiac surgeries and coupled with real-world clinical experience to outline a clearer clinical path for vasopressin use. Materials and Methods: Literature from 1966 to the present was searched, and information on surgical outcomes for cardiovascular surgery was extracted. Clinicians from the University of Tsukuba with extensive vasopressin experience in pediatric cardiovascular patients were consulted for general use guidelines. Results: Vasopressin response after cardiovascular surgery is multifaceted, and low-power trials, plus conflicting study reports, generally render it as a secondary choice behind norepinephrine. Clinical experience indicates that low doses of 0.2–0.3 mU/kg/min with constant blood pressure and oxygen monitoring for response are required. Although sole use is not recommended, vasopressin may aid in controlling hemodynamics when given with other volemic or osmolal drugs. Conclusions: Vasopressin may work in a select population of first-line non-responders, but relevant response factors remain unanalyzed and clear guidelines for use remain unestablished. Future, large-scale studies are needed to delineate temporal and demographic characteristics that affect response to vasopressin for the purpose of managing post-surgical capillary leakage and hemodynamics.

OBJECTIVES: Concerns persist regarding pulmonary regurgitation after transannular patch repair (TAP) for tetralogy of Fallot. Despite the introduction of various architectural preservation techniques, the optimal strategy remains controversial. Our goal was to compare different right ventricular outlet tract reconstruction techniques. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Central were searched through March 2024 to identify comparative studies on right ventricular outlet tract reconstruction techniques (PROSPERO ID: CRD42024519404). The primary outcome was mid-term pulmonary regurgitation, with secondary outcomes including postoperative mortality, postoperative pulmonary regurgitation, length of intensive care unit stays, postoperative right ventricular outlet tract pressure gradient and mid-term mortality. We performed a network meta-analysis to compare outcomes among TAP, valve-repairing (VR), TAP with neo-valve creation (TAPN) and valve-sparing (VS). RESULTS: Two randomized controlled studies and 32 observational studies were identified with 8890 patients. TAP carried a higher risk of mid-term pulmonary regurgitation compared to TAPN [hazard ratio, 0.53; 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.33; 0.85)] and VS [hazard ratio, 0.27; 95% CI (0.19; 0.39)], with no significant difference compared to VR. VS was also associated with reduced postoperative mortality compared to TAP [risk ratio, 0.31; 95% CI (0.18; 0.56)], in addition to reduced ventilation time. TAP also carried an increased risk of postoperative pulmonary regurgitation compared to the other groups. The groups were comparable in terms of length of intensive care unit stay, right ventricular outlet tract pressure gradient and mid-term mortality. CONCLUSIONS: VR was associated with a reduced risk of postoperative pulmonary regurgitation, whereas TAPN was associated with reduced risks of both postoperative and mid-term pulmonary regurgitation.