Is Resident Training Safe in Cardiac Surgery?

Abstract

Background: There exists a knowledge gap regarding the safety of training in cardiac surgery. The purpose of this analysis was to establish the safety of resident training in cardiac surgery and compare the results of the trainee cases to those performed by consultants.

Methods: In all, 5894 (trainee, 3343; consultant, 2551) major cardiac operations (European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation less than 10) from 2013 to 2018 were reviewed. Multivariate analysis was performed for inhospital mortality and composite outcome of length of stay longer than 30 days, deep sternal infection, new hemodialysis, new stroke or transient ischemic attack, inhospital death, or reoperation. Observations were propensity matched to consultant or trainee with the 16 covariates.

Results: Trainees performed 56.7% of cases. Multivariate analysis identified renal disease (odds ratio [OR] 2.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3 to 6.7; P < .02), peripheral vascular disease (OR 4.62; 95% CI, 1.82 to 11.71; P < .01), and emergency/salvage procedure (OR 7.23; 95% CI, 2.00 to 26.11; P < .01) as predictors of inhospital mortality. Emergency/salvage procedure was the only predictor of worse composite outcomes (OR 2.65; 95% CI, 1.54 to 4.55; P < .001). Trainee cases had similar inhospital mortality and composite outcomes. After propensity matching (1842 observations), bypass time and cross-clamp time were significantly longer for trainees for isolated coronary artery bypass graft surgery and aortic valve replacement. There was no difference between deep sternal infection, new hemodialysis, new stroke/transient ischemic attack, inhospital death, or reoperation. Overall composite outcome differed between groups (trainee 9% vs consultant 16.6%, P = .001) owing to difference in the length of stay longer than 30 days (trainee 4.2% vs consultant 9.9%, P = .001).

Conclusions: Resident training is safe in cardiac surgery without compromising the quality of patient care.