Citations

Prehabilitation with Impella 5.5 offers hemodynamic support while allowing early mobilization, yet its overall effect on post-transplant recovery remains unclear. The aim was to assess recovery during Impella 5.5–supported prehabilitation and determine its association with early post-heart transplant outcomes, including a potential dose–response relationship with ambulatory activity. We conducted a single-center retrospective cohort study of adults bridged to transplant with Impella 5.5 between April 1, 2022 and September 30, 2024. Daily walking distance, recorded by nursing staff, served as the intervention. Primary outcome was postoperative hospital length of stay (LOS); the secondary outcome was time to extubation. Fine–Gray competing-risk models, adjusted for age, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, New York Heart Association (NYHA) class, and days of Impella support, assessed associations. Longitudinal recovery trajectories were analyzed with linear mixed-effects models incorporating restricted cubic splines. Among 82 eligible patients, 65 met the inclusion criteria. Patients who walked farther during Impella 5.5 support in the intensive care unit (ICU) had shorter hospital stays and were taken off the ventilator sooner after transplantation. The overall recovery peaked during the first 2–3 weeks of support, with smaller recovery thereafter, indicating that most functional recovery occurred early during prehabilitation.

Summary Functional high‐risk (FHR) multiple myeloma (FHRMM) is often defined as progression within 12–24 months of front‐line autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (AHSCT). For patients with early progression after suboptimal front‐line therapies, it is challenging to assign the disease progression to a true FHR phenotype versus less effective front‐line therapy. In this study, we combined data from three Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research studies (MM18‐02, MM19‐01 and MM20‐03). We included patients who received front‐line AHSCT between 2008 and 2018 and had progression <12 (FHR12, n = 465), <18 (FHR18, n = 672) or <24 months (FHR24, n = 853) after AHSCT. We classified induction therapy as standard lenalidomide‐containing triplets (bortezomib, lenalidomide, dexamethasone [VRD]/carfilzomib, lenalidomide, dexamethasone [KRD]) versus other (bortezomib, thalidomide, dexamethasone [VTD]/bortezomib, cyclophosphamide, dexamethasone [VCD]/bortezomib, dexamethasone [VD]/lenalidomide, dexamethasone [RD]) and studied the impact of front‐line therapy on post‐FHR overall survival (OS). In the FHR12 cohort (follow‐up 48 months), the OS after VRD/KRD ( n = 238) was 21 versus 17 months with other regimens ( n = 227, hazard ratio [HR] = 1.2, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.6–1.06). In a multivariable model, the HR for OS was 0.94 (95% CI: 0.7–1.3, p = 0.69) for VRD/KRD versus other regimens. There was no significant interaction between type of first‐line (1L) therapy and time from 1L AHSCT to first relapse in predicting OS. Similar results were seen for FHR18 and FHR24. FHRMM remains a negative prognostic factor irrespective of front‐line therapy and warrants consideration of T‐cell engagers' second‐line therapy.

Background Ketamine has demonstrated efficacy in treatment-resistant depression, primarily in psychiatric or outpatient populations. Its use in ICU patients remains underexplored, with limited data beyond case reports and small series. This study evaluated the association between subanesthetic ketamine infusions and improvement in depressive symptoms and hemodynamic changes in ICU patients. Methods We conducted a retrospective study of adults admitted to the ICU who received IV ketamine (0.3-0.75 mg/kg over 40 min on three consecutive days) for depressive symptoms. Changes in depressive symptoms were assessed using routine clinical documentation by physicians, nurses, and occupational and physical therapists. Hemodynamic parameters (blood pressure and heart rate) were recorded before and up to 120 min after infusion. The primary outcome was to evaluate depressive symptoms while the secondary outcome was to assess hemodynamic changes post transfusion. Results Thirty-four patients met criteria, including 18 solid organ transplant recipients. Median age was 59 years; 61.8% were male. Ketamine was associated with improvement in apparent sadness (90.0% vs 52.2%, P < .05) and reported sadness (95.0% vs 59.1%, P < .05). In transplant recipients, improvement in apparent sadness remained significant (80.0% vs 41.7%, P < .05). Hemodynamic parameters remained stable; heart rate increased transiently at 15-30 min post-infusion, returning to baseline by 60-90 min. Adverse effects observed were anxiety (12.5%), restlessness and/or agitation (10.4%), and dissociation (8.16%). Conclusion Subanesthetic ketamine improved specific depressive symptoms in critically ill ICU patients without significant hemodynamic instability. These findings support its potential as a rapid-acting antidepressant in the ICU, warranting further prospective trials.

Lung transplantation presents numerous intraoperative challenges, particularly related to pulmonary artery and vein anastomotic integrity and hemodynamic stability. We present 3 cases where intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) provided real-time diagnostic insights that directly altered surgical decision-making. Case 1 highlights pulmonary vein flow acceleration initially concerning for ostial stenosis, ultimately diagnosed as external compression from a retractor. Case 2 demonstrates true right pulmonary vein stenosis requiring immediate revision. Case 3 illustrates severe right pulmonary artery narrowing, detected by TEE and corrected intraoperatively to prevent early graft dysfunction. These cases underscore the critical role of intraoperative TEE in detecting subtle anastomotic abnormalities, distinguishing functional from structural stenosis, and guiding timely surgical correction. Incorporating comprehensive 2D and 3D TEE evaluation into routine lung transplant protocols enhances diagnostic accuracy, reduces postoperative complications, and contributes to improved long-term allograft function. Intraoperative 3D TEE should be considered an essential imaging modality in cardiothoracic transplantation and an invaluable educational tool for perioperative teams.

Abstract Background Global data demonstrate an inverse relationship between hospital ileoanal pouch volume and adverse outcomes, highlighting the need for quality metrics for this technically demanding procedure.1-4 Currently, there are no standardised quality indicators to define high-quality pouch surgery. This study aimed to establish international consensus on key performance indicators (KPIs) in pouch surgery. Methods A modified Delphi process was conducted among an international, multidisciplinary panel of experts. Participants were identified through professional networks, literature review, and direct email invitation; additional participants recruited via a snowball sampling approach over one month. Candidate KPIs were generated from literature review and expert input across 5 domains. Each item was rated on a 9-point Likert scale (1 = not important, 9 = critically important); consensus was predefined as ≥ 80% of respondents rating an item 7–9. Items not reaching consensus were re-rated in a second round following anonymized group feedback. Results Round 1 included 312 participants from 37 countries. Demographics (Table 1): 53% were age 45 years, 35.2% were female, and included surgeons (68.6%) and gastroenterologists (31.1%). Most (76.6%) practice at academic or university hospitals, with a median of 11 (5–17) years in practise; 78.9% perform &gt;1 pouchoscopy per month, and 39.5% of surgeons perform 5 pouches/year. Respondents’ regions included North America (51%), Europe (26%), Oceania (9%), Asia (6%), Latin America (4%), and the Middle East/Africa (4%). Seven (18%) countries (Denmark, Lithuania, Malaysia, Norway, United Arab Emirates, Sweden, and Switzerland) reported pouch surgery is already centralised, while 70.6% agreed pouch centralisation should be implemented. Cost/logistics and professional autonomy were the most important barriers to centralisation, whereas capacity and training exposure were least important. Overall, 37/59 (62.7%) candidate KPIs reached consensus after Round 1. The Round 2 response rate was 61%, and 2 additional KPIs reached consensus (preop ileitis and long-term risk of pouchitis). Additionally, 14 of 25 (56%) informed consent items reached consensus, and 64% of respondents felt informed consent for pouch surgery requires 2 or more office visits. Consensus items were used to populate a KPIPS Checklist (Figure 1). Conclusion Through an international Delphi process, the KPIPS study identified a consensus-derived set of key performance indicators to measure quality in pouch surgery. These quality metrics provide a foundation for benchmarking outcomes and represent a critical step towards centralization and the development of designated pouch centres of excellence to improve global standards of care for pouch patients. References: 1. Worley GHT, Fearnhead NS, Brown SR, et al. Review of current practice and outcomes following ileoanal pouch surgery: Lessons learned from the ileoanal pouch registry and the 2017 ileoanal pouch report. Colorectal Dis 2018;20:913–22. 2. Giddings HL, Yang PF, Steffens D, Solomon MJ, Ng KS. Influence of hospital-level and surgeon factors on the outcomes after ileo-anal pouch surgery for inflammatory bowel disease: Systematic review. Br J Surg 2024;111. 3. Hoang CM, Maykel JA, Davids JS, et al. Distribution of elective ileal pouch-anal anastomosis cases for ulcerative colitis: A study utilizing the university health system consortium database. J Gastrointest Surg 2020;24:2613–9. 4. Moojen TB, Visser E, Reijntjes MA, et al. One-year stoma-free survival of ileoanal pouches for uc in european centers: The miracle project. Ann Surg Open 2025;6:e596. Conflict of interest: Prof. Holubar, Stefan: No conflict of interest Soop, Mattias: No conflict of interest Poskus, Tomas: No conflict of interest Neary, Peter: No conflict of interest Uchino, Tairin: No conflict of interest Yang, Song-soo: No conflict of interest Adamina, Michel: No conflict of interest Avellaneda, Nicolas Luis: No conflict of interest Barnes, Edward: No conflict of interest Brouquet, Antoine: No conflict of interest Brown, Steven Ross: No conflict of interest De Buck Van Overstraeten, Anthony: No conflict of interest Buskens, Christianne J.: No conflict of interest Chiorean, Michael: No conflict of interest Clark, David: No conflict of interest Cohen, Benjamin: No conflict of interest El Ouali, Sara: No conflict of interest Faiz, Omar Darius: No conflict of interest Fichera, Alessandro: No conflict of interest Hahnloser, Dieter: No conflict of interest Hancock, Laura: No conflict of interest Herfarth, Hans: No conflict of interest Johnston, Michael: No conflict of interest Kayal, Maia: No conflict of interest Laharie, David: No conflict of interest Liberman, Sender: No conflict of interest Loftus, Jr, Edward: No conflict of interest Moeslein, Gabriela: No conflict of interest Myrelid, Pär: No conflict of interest Poylin, Vitaliy: No conflict of interest Qazi, Taha: No conflict of interest Raffals, Laura: No conflict of interest Rubin, David T.: No conflict of interest Spinelli, Antonino: No conflict of interest Steinhagen, Emily: No conflict of interest Tozer, Philip: No conflict of interest Verstockt, Bram: No conflict of interest Warusavitarne, Janindra: No conflict of interest Wexner, Steven: No conflict of interest Winter, Desmond: No conflict of interest