Triple valve repair for young rheumatic patients.

BACKGROUND: Facing young foreign polyvalvular rheumatic patients, for which long-term anticoagulation is not available, we have chosen to attempt triple valve repair procedures in order to avoid prosthetic implantation in this particular population suffering from triple valve disease. METHODS: Twenty-one young rheumatic patients (mean age:11+/-4 years) underwent triple valve repair procedures including cusp extension on the aortic valve aortic between September, 1992 and December, 2000. Valvular pathology characteristics according to Carpentier's classification included mitral insufficiency type III post+II ant (n=10), type III post (n=4), type II ant (n=2), mitral stenosis (n=5), type III aortic insufficiency (n=21), type I (n=13) and type III (n=8) tricuspid insufficiency. RESULTS: Firstly, the mitral valve disease were corrected using Carpentier's techniques of repair: prosthetic ring annuloplasty (n=16), commissurotomy (n=12), chord transposition (n=11) or shortening (n=4), papillary muscle sliding plasty (n=4) and pericardial patch leaflet enlargement (n=6). Secondly, aortic lesions were corrected using glutaraldehyde stabilized autologous pericardium triple cusps extension technique (n=21). Lastly, tricuspid repairs were always performed on beating hearts using commissurotomy (n=8), prosthetic ring (n=12) or other techniques (n=9) of annuloplasty. The operative mortality was 4.7% (one patient died). Echocardiograms before discharge showed grade I mitral insufficiency in seven patients and grade I aortic insufficiency in five patients. There was no late death during a mean follow-up of 51+/-31 months. Two patients underwent valvular redo surgery because of aortic and mitral plasty deterioration due to rheumatic disease progress. After 5 years, 90% of the patients were free from redo valvular surgery. CONCLUSIONS: In rheumatic patients, autologous pericardial patch extension of the aortic valve permitted widespread use of reconstructive surgery even in patients suffering from triple valve disease. Triple valve repair, in this particular challenging setting of patients, has provided satisfactory initial and mid-term results and could be considered as an interesting palliative surgical approach.     

Reoperations in valvular heart disease

Background Reoperations for valvular heart disease are associated with a higher overall mortality than the primary operations. In this retrospective analysis, we present our experience of reoperative valvular heart surgery over a period of 25 years. Methods From January 1975 to July 2000, 13039 operations were performed for valvular heart disease. Of these 665 were reoperations. The mean age of the patients at the primary operation was 24.0±10.2 years (range: 8 to 65 years) and at re-operation was 35.6±11.6 years (range: 9 to 65 years) with an interval of 9.4±2.2 years (range: 0.2 to 25 years) between the 2 procedures. Four hundred and forty reoperations were performed following a previous closed mitral valvotomy and procedures included, redo closed mitral valvotomy (n=28), mitral valve replacement (n=30), open mitral commissurotomy (n=51), mitral valve repair (n=9), homograft mitral valve replacement (n=2), double valve replacement (n=47), aortic valve replacement (n=2) and homograft aortic valve replacement plus open mitral commissurotomy (n=l). Eighty six patients underwent reoperations following mitral valve replacement. Valve thrombosis (n=50) and endocarditis (n=10) were principle causes of reoperation. Forty three patients required reoperation following failed mitral valve repair, 19 following open mitral commissurotomy and 8 following homograft mitral valve replacement. Sixty five patients underwent reoperation following aortic valve operations: prosthetic aortic valve replacement in 43, homograft aortic valve replacement in 5, aortic valve repair in 10, and Ross procedure in 7. Results Majority of patients were operated through midsternotomy. Aortic cannulation was possible in all but 4 patients in whom femoral artery cannulation was required. Operative mortality following reoperations was 7.5% (n=50). Peri-operative bleeding, low cardiac output and infective endocarditis were major causes of operative deaths. Other post-operative complications included cerebrovascular accident (n=3), acute renal failure (n=10) and jaundice (n=25). Fifteen patients developed significant wound infection. Conclusions Patients undergoing operation for valvular heart disease frequently require reoperation. Reoperative valvular heart surgery is safe and can be undertaken with acceptable mortality and morbidity.     

复杂性感染性心内膜炎的外科治疗

目的评价瓣周脓肿、心肌脓肿以及瓣膜严重毁损等复杂性感染性心内膜炎手术治疗的近、远期疗效.方法回顾性分析1988年12月至2002年6月手术治疗的复杂性心内膜炎患者57例临床资料,均为原发性心内膜炎,其中感染侵犯主动脉瓣25例、二尖瓣16例、二尖瓣和主动脉瓣16例.术中发现瓣叶严重毁损32例、主动脉瓣周脓肿19例、主动脉根部环形脓肿导致左心室-主动脉连接破坏4例、二尖瓣后瓣环脓肿11例、心肌脓肿6例、瓣膜赘生物形成55例.脓肿清除后遗留残腔采用间断褥式缝合6例、自体心包片修补19例、牛心包片修补6例、聚四氟乙烯膨体补片修补4例;施行以带瓣管道作升主动脉根部替换和左、右冠状动脉移植术4例,主动脉瓣替换术21例,二尖瓣替换术16例,主动脉瓣及二尖瓣双瓣替换术16例.结果早期死亡6例(11%),死亡主要原因为低心输出量综合征、人造心脏瓣膜性心内膜炎和多脏器功能衰竭.随访4个月至14年,平均(5.93±0.20)年.晚期死亡5例,晚期主要并发症为人造瓣膜性心内膜炎.术后1年心功能恢复NYHA分组Ⅰ～Ⅱ级占96%(44/46);5年再手术免除率为(84±3)%,5年实际生存率为(61±9)%.结论复杂性心内膜炎局部组织破坏较多,应限期手术或急症手术,清创后残腔的处理是影响手术本身能否成功以及术后近、远期效果的关键.     

Aortic and mitral prosthetic valve reoperations: early and late results.

A total of 232 valvular reoperations (123 mitral valve reoperations [RMVR] and 109 aortic valve reoperations [RAVR] were performed in 194 patients with previously implanted prosthetic valves. Early mortality was 10% (12/123) for the RMVR subgroup and 14% (15/109) for the RAVR subgroup (P = NS). Late mortality was 16% (18/111) for the RMVR subgroup and 25% (23/94) for the RAVR subgroup (P = NS). Patients with prosthetic endocarditis or prosthetic stenosis constituted higher-risk subpopulations. Principal determinants of both operative mortality and late attrition were preoperative cardiac functional status and the nature of the pathology mandating valve replacement. Early prosthetic valve replacement is advocated to correct hemodynamic abnormalities before advanced ventricular decompensation ensues, especially when prosthetic valvular endocarditis or prosthetic stenosis exists.     

原发性感染性心内膜炎的外科治疗（附102例报告）

回顾性分析原发性感染性心内膜炎１０２例，其中主动脉瓣病变７１例，二尖瓣病变１６例，主动脉瓣与二尖瓣联合病变６例，三尖瓣病变５例，肺动脉瓣病变４例。按照病人术前心功能状态，分为：（１）急性心功能不全组（２５例）；（２）慢性心功能不全组（７７例）。施行主动脉瓣替换术７１例，二尖瓣替换术１６例，双瓣替换术６例，三尖瓣修复成形术５例，肺动脉瓣成形术４例。术后早期死亡９例（８．８％）。９３例生存者随访时间３个月～１６年，平均随访时间４．３年。晚期死亡６例，其中２例为人工瓣膜心内膜炎，复发率为２％。作者对手术时机与手术方式的选择作了讨论，并介绍了围术期处理的经验。     

A New Modification of Debridement Valvuloplasty for Acquired Aortic Valve Disease

A high speed electric rasp was used to remove fibrous thickening from the aortic valve in conjunction with aortic valve commissurotomy in ten patients. All patients had moderate rheumatic aortic valve disease combined with severe mitral valve disease, and were treated by mitral valve replacement and aortic valve repair. All patients survived the operative procedure. There were no deaths or complications during hospitalization related to the valve repair process. The transaortic valve gradient was relieved from an average of 21.0 ± 8.6 mmHg to 5.6 ± 4.0 mmHg (catheterization), and from moderate to less-than-mild stenosis (echocardiography). Aortic valve regurgitation was reduced from an average of 2.2+ to 0.7+ on a scale of 0 to 4+ (aortography), and from an average of 2.5+ to 1.1+ on a scale of 0 to 4+ (echocardiography). During the follow-up period, no patients were reoperated on because of aortic valve dysfunction. Follow-up echocardiographic study demonstrated that the transaortic pressure gradient and valvular regurgitation had not progressed, and immediate postoperative conditions were maintained. There were two late deaths not related to the aortic valve. One patient died of prosthetic valve endocarditis in the mitral prosthesis 14 months postoperatively, and the other of a cerebrovascular accident 21 months postoperatively. Based on these data, we believe that aortic valve repair with a high speed electric rasp can effectively relieve aortic stenosis, reduce valvular regurgitation, and provide an excellent hemodynamlc result at early and mid-term follow-up. (J Card Surg 1994;9:103–108)     

Proximal aortic reoperations in patients with composite valve grafts

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to examine our experience with proximal aortic reoperations in patients with composite valve grafts (CVGs) and assess postoperative survival and morbidity. METHODS: Since 1991, 33 patients with CVGs underwent reoperation for one or more of the following indications: aneurysms distal to the CVG (n = 20, 61%), false aneurysms (n = 13, 39%) and graft infection (n = 7, 21%). Operations included false aneurysm repair (n = 13, 39%), graft replacement of distal ascending aortic or transverse aortic arch aneurysm (n = 20, 61%) and aortic root re-replacement with a new CVG (n = 6, 18%) or homograft (n = 4, 12%). RESULTS: Operative mortality was 15% (n = 5), including 2 of the 7 patients who had infected CVGs (29%). All 4 patients who had infected CVGs replaced with aortic root homografts survived. Complications included vocal cord paralysis (n = 4, 12%), bleeding requiring reoperation (n = 3, 9%) and stroke (n = 2, 6%). Actuarial 3-year survival was 74.4% +/- 7.9%. CONCLUSIONS: Reoperations in patients with CVGs remain challenging procedures with high associated morbidity and mortality, especially in the setting of graft infection. The results of homograft aortic root re-replacement for infected CVGs are encouraging.     

Increased morbidity and mortality in patients with antiphospholipid syndrome undergoing valve replacement surgery

OBJECTIVE: Heart valve abnormalities are commonly found in patients with antiphospholipid syndrome but experience with valve replacement in such patients is limited. We analyzed the results of valve replacement in patients with this condition at our institution. METHODS: Between 1989 and 2002, 10 patients with antiphospholipid syndrome (8 women, 2 men; aged 38-73 years, mean 49 years) with severe mitral valve disease (n = 7), aortic valve disease (n = 2), or combined mitral-aortic disease (n = 1) underwent valve replacement. We reviewed retrospectively their clinical data, operative and postoperative courses, and the long-term results. Pathological reassessment was performed in all cases. RESULTS: Procedures performed included mitral valve replacement in 7 patients, aortic valve replacement in 2 patients, and combined aortic valve replacement plus mitral valve replacement in 1 patient. In addition, 2 patients underwent tricuspid annuloplasty. The immediate mortality was 20% (2 patients). Major complications occurred in 2 other cases. During a follow-up period of up to 8 years, 2 patients required repeat operation for valve-related complications (1 death). An additional patient died of cardiac causes 13 months after surgery. One patient had major thromboembolic events 3 and 10 months after the operation. The late outcome was uneventful in only 4 patients. CONCLUSION: Valve replacement in patients with antiphospholipid syndrome may carry significant early and late mortality and morbidity, particularly when such patients are referred with advanced valvular heart disease.     

Is repair of aortic valve regurgitation a safe alternative to valve replacement?

OBJECTIVE: To assess outcome of valve repair in patients with aortic valve regurgitation with emphasis on incidence and risk of reoperation. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 160 consecutive patients (127 men) who underwent aortic valve repair between 1986 and 2001. Ages ranged from 14 to 84 years (mean 55 +/- 17 years). Patients were categorized according to the main etiology of valve disease; 63 patients (39%) had annular dilation leading to central leakage, 54 (34%) had bicuspid valve, 34 (21%) with tricuspid valve had cusp prolapse, and 9 (6%) had cusp perforation. Repair methods included commissural plication (n = 154, 96%), partial cusp resection with plication (n = 47, 29%), resuspension or cusp shortening (n = 44, 28%), and closure of cusp perforation (n = 10, 6%). RESULTS: There was 1 early death (0.6%). Two patients required re-repair of the aortic valve during initial hospitalization. During a mean follow-up of 4.2 years, there were 16 late deaths. Overall, 16 of 159 hospital survivors had late reoperation on the aortic valve (mean interval 2.8 years) without early mortality. Risks of reoperation on the aortic valve were 9%, 11%, and 15% at 3, 5, and 7 years, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Aortic valve repair can be performed with low risk and excellent freedom from valve-related morbidity and mortality. Late recurrence of aortic valve regurgitation led to reoperation in 8.8% of patients, but mortality associated with subsequent procedures is low. Aortic valve repair appears to be a good option for selected patients, particularly young patients who wish to avoid chronic anticoagulation with warfarin.     

Reoperations after tricuspid valve repair

OBJECTIVE: The objective was to analyze the short- and long-term results of patients with previous tricuspid valve repair who had valve dysfunction and required cardiac reoperations. METHODS: Between 1976 and 2002, 74 patients with a mean age of 53.8 +/- 12.2 years underwent valve reoperations for dysfunction of previous tricuspid valve repair. Mitral and tricuspid lesions were diagnosed in 40 patients (54%), triple valve disease (mitral, aortic, tricuspid) was diagnosed in 26 patients (35.1%), isolated tricuspid disease was diagnosed in 6 patients (8.1%), and aortic and tricuspid lesions were diagnosed in 2 patients (2.7%). Reoperations included tricuspid valve replacement in 43 patients (58.1%) and a new tricuspid valve repair procedure in the remaining 31 patients (41.9%). RESULTS: Hospital mortality (30-day or within first admission) was 35.1% (n = 26). In the multivariate analysis, risk factors for hospital mortality included body mass index less than 20 kg/m2 and greater than 24 kg/m2 , triple valve disease, use of intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation, and presence of postoperative complications. The follow-up was complete in 100% of patients, with a mean follow-up of 14.2 years (range 4 months to 26 years). The late mortality was 40.5% (n = 30). Predictors of late mortality were body mass index less than 20 kg/m2 , cardiac surgery before 1991, and development of dysfunction early after tricuspid valve repair. At the follow-up closing date, 19 patients are alive (25.7%). The actuarial survival was 11.8% +/- 4.9% at 26 years. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with failure of a tricuspid valve repair procedure requiring reoperation have a poor prognosis with a high mortality rate both in-hospital and in the long-term.     

Valve-preserving surgery of the proximal aorta.

BACKGROUND: Surgical treatment of proximal aortic disease currently offers a variety of surgical options. Traditionally, replacement of the proximal aorta has been performed with a composite graft in most cases; supracommissural aortic replacement was the only alternative if preservation of the native aortic valve was attempted. Valve-preserving root operations currently allow us to avoid the disadvantages of prosthetic heart valves and completely eliminate aortic root pathology. METHODS: Between 10/95 and 5/99, 219 patients were treated for proximal aortic disease. The diagnoses included degenerative disease (n=158), acute dissection (n=48), and chronic dissection (n=13). Composite replacement of valve and root (n=99) was used only in patients with significant degeneration or stenosis of the aortic valve. For near-normal root dimensions supracommissural aortic replacement (n=44) was chosen. Root remodeling (n=60) and reimplantation of the valve within a vascular graft (n=16) were performed for aortic valve regurgitation and root dilatation. RESULTS: Overall hospital mortality was 5.7%; in elective operations, mortality was expectedly lower compared to emergency interventions (2.4% vs 16.3%; p<0.05). Hospital mortality for valve preserving procedures was similar (elective procedures 1.9%, emergency operations 9.5%). Two-year freedom from aortic regurgitation grade II or higher was 89% for remodeling and 92% for reimplantation. Freedom from reoperation for secondary and increasing regurgitation at two years was 96% for remodeling and 100% after reimplantation. CONCLUSIONS: Using current techniques of valve preserving surgery, combined disease of the aortic valve, root, and extended segments of the aorta can be corrected without the disadvantages of prosthetic heart valves in the majority of patients. Further experience will define the relative role of the different operative modifications.     

Ventricular assist device in patients with prosthetic heart valves

Ventricular assist device (VAD) support inpatients with a prosthetic heart valve had previously been considered a relative contraindication due to an increased risk of thromboembolic complications. We report our clinical experience of VAD implantation in patients with prosthetic heart valves, including both mechanical and bioprosthetic valves. The clinical records of 133 consecutive patients who underwent VAD implantation at a single institution from January 2002 through June 2009 were retrospectively reviewed. Six of these patients had a prosthetic valve in place at the time of device implantation. Patient demographics,operative characteristics, and postoperative complications were reviewed.Of the six patients,four were male.The mean age was 57.8 years (range 35–66 years). The various prosthetic cardiac valves included a mechanical aortic valve (n = 2), a bioprosthetic aortic valve (n = 3), and a mechanical mitral valve (n = 1).The indications for VAD support included bridge to transplantation (n = 2), bridge to recovery (n = 1), and postcardiotomy ventricular failure(n = 3). Three patients underwent left ventricular assist device placement and three received a right ventricular assist device. Postoperatively, standard anticoagulation management began with a heparin infusion (if possible)followed by oral anticoagulation.The 30-day mortality was50% (3/6). The mean duration of support among survivors was 194.3 days (range 7–369 days) compared with 16.0 days(range 4–29 days) for nonsurvivors. Of the three survivors,two were successfully bridged to heart transplantation and one recovered native ventricular function.Among the three nonsurvivors,acute renal failure developed in each case, and two developed heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. This study suggests that VAD placement in patients with a prosthethic heart valve, either mechanical or bioprosthetic,appears to be a reasonable option.     

Nineteen-millimeter prosthetic aortic valves allow normalization of left ventricular mass in elderly women

BACKGROUND: Implantation of small aortic valve prostheses has been reported to be associated with impaired left ventricular (LV) mass regression and incomplete resolution of symptoms although these data have been generated largely with male patients. Therefore we sought to determine the clinical and hemodynamic outcomes of female patients who received a 19-mm aortic valve. METHODS: Between May 1995 and December 2000, 38 female patients (average age 73 years, range 42 to 89) underwent isolated aortic valve replacement (AVR; n = 22) or AVR plus coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG; n = 16) with a 19-mm aortic prosthesis. The average New York Heart Association (NYHA) class was 3.08 and of the 26 patients who had angina, 47.2% were in CCS class III or IV. Clinical and echocardiographic follow-up was done an average of 33.4 months (8 to 72) after surgery. RESULTS: Operative mortality was 10.5%. Overall survival at an average of 33 months was 71.1%. The average NYHA class was 1.52 +/- 0.34 postoperatively (p < 0.001 versus preoperative) and 95% had no anginal symptoms or were in Canadian Cardiovascular Society class I. The LV mass index showed significant regression (114 +/- 11 g/m2 to 89 +/- 9 g/m2, p = 0.001) despite an effective orifice area index (EOAI) of 0.64 +/- 0.09 cm2/m2. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a very small EOAI, elderly female patients with 19-mm prosthetic aortic valves can experience a satisfactory improvement in symptoms and normalization of LV mass. This finding suggests that small prosthetic aortic valves continue to have an application in contemporary cardiac surgical practice. The current perception of patient-prosthesis mismatch may need to be reconsidered for select populations.     

Repeat heart valve surgery: risk factors for operative mortality.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing repeat heart valve operations are a diverse population. We assessed risk factors for operative mortality in patients undergoing a first heart valve reoperation. METHODS: A retrospective review of hospital records was performed for 671 patients who underwent first repeat heart valve operations between 1969 and 1998. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed. RESULTS: Operative mortality was 8.6%. Mortality fell each decade to 4.8% in the most recent period (adjusted chi(2) for linear trend P <.0005). Mortality increased from 3.0% for reoperation for a failed repair or reoperation at a new valve site to 10.6% for prosthetic valve dysfunction or periprosthetic leak and to 29.4% for endocarditis or valve thrombosis. Concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting was associated with a mortality of 15.4% compared with 8.2% when it was not required. Mortality for aortic valve replacement was 6.4%, mitral valve replacement 7.4%, aortic and mitral valve replacement 11.5%, tricuspid valve replacement 25.6%, periprosthetic leak repair 9.1%, and isolated valve repair 2.2%. Among 336 patients requiring replacement of prosthetic valves, mortality was 26.1% for replacement of a mechanical valve compared with 8.6% for replacement of a tissue valve (P <.0005). Multivariable analyses identified year of reoperation, age, coronary artery bypass grafting, indication, and replacement of a mechanical valve rather than a tissue valve as significant explanatory variables for operative mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Heart valve reoperations can be performed with an acceptable operative mortality. However, we have identified several categories of patients in whom reoperation carries an increased risk.     

Immediate and long-term results of valve replacement for native and prosthetic valve endocarditis

BACKGROUND: The objective of the present study was to compare current results of prosthetic valve replacement following acute infective native valve endocarditis (NVE) with that of prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE). Prosthetic valve replacement is often necessary for acute infective endocarditis. Although valve repair and homografts have been associated with excellent outcome, homograft availability and the importance of valvular destruction often dictate prosthetic valve replacement in patients with acute bacterial endocarditis. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the experience with prosthetic valve replacement following acute NVE and PVE between 1988 and 1998 was performed at the Montreal Heart Institute. RESULTS: Seventy-seven patients (57 men and 20 women, mean age 48 +/- 16 years) with acute infective endocarditis underwent valve replacement. Fifty patients had NVE and 27 had PVE. Four patients (8%) with NVE died within 30 days of operation and there were no hospital deaths in patients with PVE. Survival at 1, 5, and 7 years averaged 80% +/- 6%, 76% +/- 6%, and 76% +/- 6% for NVE and 70% +/- 9%, 59% +/- 10%, and 55% +/- 10% for PVE, respectively (p = 0.15). Reoperation-free survival at 1, 5, and 7 years averaged 80% +/- 6%, 76% +/- 6%, and 76% +/- 6% for NVE and 45% +/- 10%, 40% +/- 10%, and 36% +/- 9% for PVE (p = 0.003). Five-year survival for NVE averaged 75% +/- 9% following aortic valve replacement and 79% +/- 9% following mitral valve replacement. Five-year survival for PVE averaged 66% +/- 12% following aortic valve replacement and 43% +/- 19% following mitral valve replacement (p = 0.75). Nine patients underwent reoperation during follow-up: indications were prosthesis infection in 4 patients (3 mitral, 1 aortic), dehiscence of mitral prosthesis in 3, and dehiscence of aortic prosthesis in 2. CONCLUSIONS: Prosthetic valve replacement for NVE resulted in good long-term patient survival with a minimal risk of reoperation compared with patients who underwent valve replacement for PVE. In patients with PVE, those who needed reoperation had recurrent endocarditis or noninfectious periprosthetic dehiscence.     

Preexisting mitral valve prosthesis in patients undergoing left ventricular assist device implantation

Experience with patients undergoing left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation with preexisting mitral valve prostheses is limited. Patients with mechanical heart valves might have an increased risk of thromboembolism; in patients with biologic valves, there might be a risk of structural deterioration of the leaflets. Out of 597 patients supported with a LVAD system between 2000 and 2009, 18 patients had mitral valve surgery prior to implantation. We excluded all patients below 18 years of age, those with postcardiotomy failure, and patients who had had mitral valve reconstruction. Only 1% of the studied patient population (n= 6) had mitral valve replacement. The mitral valve implantation has been performed 7.4 ± 9.4 years prior to LVAD insertion. None of the valves (one biologic, five mechanical) were exchanged or explanted. LVAD implantation was done either with left lateral thoracotomy (n= 5) or with midline resternotomy (n= 1). Temporary right ventricular assist device support was necessary in one case (16.6%); 30-day mortality was 16.6% (n= 1). Median support time was 14 ± 15 months. Two patients received heart transplantation after 6 and 26 months on the device; four patients died on mechanical circulatory support after 1, 2, 5, and 40 months. No valve or pump thrombosis or other clinically relevant thromboembolic events were observed. Only a small number of patients (1%) had a preexisting mitral valve prosthesis prior to LVAD implantation. No severe adverse events were observed when the prosthesis was left in place. Attention should be paid to the anticoagulation regime.     

Durability of combined aortic and mitral valve repair

BACKGROUND: This study was undertaken to determine the durability of combined aortic and mitral valve repair. METHODS: From 1979 through 1999, 158 patients underwent simultaneous aortic and mitral valve repair. Multivariable, multi-phase hazard function analysis was used to determine risk factors for the outcomes of death and reoperation. RESULTS: Hospital mortality was 3%. Survival after operation was 97%, 93%, 82%, and 62% after 30 days and 1, 5, and 10 years, respectively. Risk factors for late death included aortic stenosis (p = 0.0001), older age (p = 0.002), and abnormal left ventricular function (p = 0.007). Thirty-six patients required reoperation for valvular dysfunction, and freedom from reoperation was 94%, 82%, and 65% after 1, 5, and 10 years, respectively. Risk factors for reoperation included severe aortic regurgitation (p = 0.004), aortic cusp shaving (p = 0.05), mitral valve chordal transfer (p = 0.004), and bovine pericardial annuloplasty (p = 0.002). Five-year freedoms from endocarditis, thromboembolism, and hemorrhage were 97%, 98%, and 99%, respectively, with freedom from any of these valve-related morbidities of 99%, 95%, and 94% after 1, 5, and 10 years, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Double valve repair is associated with acceptable late survival and excellent freedom from valve-related morbidity, but limited durability. Therefore, double valve repair should be reserved for patients who cannot be anticoagulated, and should be used with caution in patients with aortic stenosis, rheumatic valve disease, or anterior mitral leaflet pathology.     

Management of Prosthetic Valves during Ventricular Assist Device Implantation

Abstract Background: An increasing number of patients requiring ventricular assist devices (VAD) have had previous valvular corrections, including valve repair and valve replacement with mechanical or bioprosthetic valves. The operative and peri‐operative management of these patients has been varied. Methods: A retrospective study of VADs between January 1994 and June 2008 revealed 10 patients with previous prosthetic valves requiring management during and after VAD placement. Three patients were supported postcardiotomy after valve surgery. Two patients were supported due to cardiogenic shock postoperatively. Four patients were supported as a bridge to transplantation. One patient was supported as a destination therapy (DT). Results: The mitral, valve was left untreated during VAD implantation regardless of valve repair or replacement. For aortic valves, the mechanical aortic valve was replaced with tissue valve in two patients and left untreated in one case. One patient had tricuspid valve repair previously and was left untouched. All patients with prosthetic valves in aortic, mitral and tricuspid position during VAD support received anticoagulation therapy. There were four deaths, and four went on to transplantation. One patient was weaned from VAD and discharged from the hospital. One patient received HeartMate I as DT. The most common causes of death were multisystem organ failure (MSOF) and sepsis. One patient had a thromboembolic event. Conclusions: The survival rate of 60% is encouraging when compared to overall survival rates. The most common cause of death was MSOF. Patients with prosthetic valves may be safely managed during VAD support. (J Card Surg 2010;25:601‐605)     

Surgical management of multivalvular heart disease

Background This study of patients with multivalvular lesions was undertaken to assess optimal surgical management and identify risk factors for prognosis. Methods Five hundred and twenty one patients underwent valve repair or replacement surgery between January’90 and December’98. Mean age was 30.19±12.2 years and 342 were males. All patients had dyspnoea on exertion, 467 (89.6%) were in New York Heart Association (NYHA) Class III and 47 (9.0%) were in Class IV. Congestive Heart Failure in 67 (12.3%) and prior cardiac procedure in 66 (12.2%) were other risk factors. The valves affected were mitral and aortic in 483 (Group 1), mitral and tricuspid in 43 (Group II) and mitral, aortic and tricuspid in 40 (Group III) patients. Surgical procedures included, several different combinations using repair or replacement with prosthetic or biological substitutes. Results Operative mortality was 9.8% (51 patients). Follow up (1 to 108 months, mean 45 months) was 94% complete. Late mortality occurred in 48 patients (10.4%). Causes included, left ventricular dysfunction (n=21), valve thrombosis (n=10) and, endocarditis (n=8). Freedom from late events was 50.7±8.5% at 9 years. At their last visit 40 patients were in Class IV, 18 were in Class III, 59 in Class II and the remaining in Class I (NYHA). Conclusions Important predictors of early mortality were NYHA Class IV, congestive heart failure, tricuspid valve disease and prior cardiac surgery. Left ventricular dysfunction was an important determinant of late outcome.     

Aortic valve replacement in patients with impaired ventricular function

BACKGROUND: Patients with reduced ventricular function undergoing aortic valve replacement have increased operative risks, but the impact of valvular pathophysiology and other risk factors has not been clearly defined. METHODS: From June 1992 through June 2002, 1,402 consecutive patients underwent isolated aortic valve surgery with or without coronary artery bypass grafting; of these patients, 416 had an ejection fraction less than 40% and are the subject of this report. These patients (mean age, 68.6) had severe stenosis (62.5%), severe regurgitation (30.3%), or mixed disease (7.2%). Aortic valve replacement plus coronary artery bypass grafting was performed in 48.4% of patients, and 27% had previous cardiac surgery. Follow-up included echocardiography and survival analysis. RESULTS: Hospital mortality was 10.1% (42 of 416), with no difference between aortic stenosis (9.6%) and regurgitation (11.1%). Multivariate analysis revealed that age (p = 0.002) and renal disease (odds ratio = 4.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.9 to 9.3; p = 0.001) were independently associated predictors of mortality. Valvular pathophysiology had no impact on mortality. Peripheral vascular disease, multivessel coronary disease, and renal disease were associated risks for any postoperative complication. Peripheral vascular disease (odds ratio = 12.3, p = 0.02), history of cerebrovascular disease (odds ratio = 4.8, p = 0.038), and diabetes (odds ratio = 2.7, p = 0.04) were associated risks for stroke. The ejection fraction was more than 40% in 52% of the patients who had postoperative echocardiography (mean follow-up, 6 months). Actuarial survival revealed no difference between pathophysiologic groups. CONCLUSIONS: Aortic valve surgery in patients with impaired ventricular function carries an acceptable operative risk that can be stratified by age and comorbidities. The type of valvular pathophysiology does not significantly affect mortality.