Outcomes differ in patients who undergo immediate intraoperative revision versus patients with delayed postoperative revision of residual lesions in congenital heart operations

ObjectivesIn a previous study of infants less than 6 month old, we found that delayed revision of residual lesions resulted in worse patient outcomes compared with intraoperative revision. We explored a larger cohort to determine if this finding persisted.MethodsA prospective cohort followed from index surgery to discharge from January 2011 to September 2013 were divided into 4 groups: (1) intraoperative revisions (IO) of residual lesions, (2) delayed postoperative revision (PO) of residual lesions during the same hospital stay, (3) both intraoperative and delayed (BOTH) revision of residual lesions, (4) no intraoperative or postoperative revision (NO). Linear and logistic regression analyses were used to compare outcomes of postoperative hospital length of stay, postoperative adverse events (AE), hospital costs, and mortality, after adjusting for age, prematurity, presence of extracardiac anomalies, and RACHS-1 (Risk Adjustment for Congenital Heart Surgery-1) risk category known to affect outcomes.ResultsOf the 2427 patients discharged after a congenital cardiac operation, 1886 were eligible for this study after exclusion of adults, procedures performed off cardiopulmonary bypass, and transplants and assist devices. On multivariable modeling adjusting for other significant patient factors, the NO group fared better than the other 3 groups. The IO group had significantly lower postoperative length of stay, AE rate, and hospital costs compared with the PO and BOTH groups, but showed no significant differences in mortality.ConclusionsIntraoperative correction of residual lesions results in shorter length of stay, and lower postoperative AE and costs compared with delayed postoperative revision of residual lesions.