Aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis after previous coronary artery bypass grafting: could early reoperation be prevented?

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: The study aim was to examine, retrospectively, the risk of accelerated progression of aortic stenosis (AS) and outcome after aortic valve replacement (AVR) in patients who had undergone previous coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. METHODS: Between 1994 and 2004, 81 patients with mild-to-moderate AS at the time of CABG underwent subsequent AVR. The mean EuroScore was 10.8 +/- 1.8. The population was divided into three subgroups according to the time interval between AVR and CABG: group A, < 5 years (n = 23); group B, 5-10 years (n = 34); and group C, > 10 years (n = 24). RESULTS: Mean age at the time of CABG was 70 +/- 5, 64 +/- 6 and 58 +/- 5 years in groups A, B, and C, respectively. The peak transvalvular gradient was < or = 30 mmHg in 65 patients (80.2%), and 30-50 mmHg in 16 (19.7%). Operative mortality after AVR was 16% in the overall population (30%, 11.7%, and 8.6% in groups A, B, and C, respectively). The mean time interval between CABG and AVR was 8.9 +/- 5.2 years. By multivariate analysis, a peak transvalvular gradient > or = 30 mmHg (p = 0.003), moderate calcifications with moderately-to-severely limited valve motion (p = 0.05), and left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) (p = 0.005) were independent predictors of AVR within five years of CABG surgery. Systemic vascular atherosclerotic disease was a predictor of rapid disease progression by univariate analysis, and a predictor of operative mortality by multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: Because of the high mortality associated with repeat operations within five years, AVR should be considered at the time of CABG in patients aged < or = 75 years, with a peak transvalvular gradient > 30 mmHg, moderately prominent calcifications with moderately to severely limited valve motion, and LVH.     

Management of mild to moderate aortic stenosis at the time of coronary artery bypass grafting

An increasing number of patients are referred for coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) with the presence of mild to moderate aortic stenosis (AS). It is well accepted that patients with severe AS and coronary artery disease (CAD) should undergo combined aortic valve replacement (AVR) and CABG, which carries an operative mortality of approximately 5-7%. For patients with CAD and mild AS, controversy persists regarding concomitant AVR during CABG. It has been shown that AS progresses at a rate of 5-10 mmHg per year, and the valve area decreases by about 0.1 cm2 per year. The progression of AS is more rapid in elderly patients, in the presence of CAD, and in patients with a calcific degenerative etiology. In contrast, patients with congenital bicuspid valves or rheumatic pathology demonstrate slower progression of disease. Despite these observations, it is difficult to predict reliably the progression of disease for an individual. Thus, an attempt should be made to identify patients who are likely to progress rapidly from mild to severe AS and who would therefore benefit from AVR/CABG. Our approach regarding the decision to perform an AVR/CABG is based on aortic valve gradient and area. If the gradient is >25 mmHg, AVR should be considered. If the gradient is <10 mmHg, then only CABG is performed. Severities of leaflet calcification and leaflet mobility are factors that should be taken into account when deciding to perform concomitant AVR/CABG for intermediate gradient (10-25 mmHg). Additional important variables include the etiology of aortic valve disease, the rate of progression of AS, the patient's life expectancy, and general condition. For patients with mild AS who are undergoing CABG, a tailored approach involving intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography and valve inspection is the most appropriate surgical option.     

Should coronary artery bypass graft surgery patients with mild or moderate aortic stenosis undergo concomitant aortic valve replacement? A decision analysis approach to the surgical dilemma

OBJECTIVES: This study utilizes Markov decision analysis to assess the relative benefits of prophylactic aortic valve replacement (AVR) at the time of coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG). Multiple sensitivity analyses were also performed to determine the variables that most profoundly affect outcome. BACKGROUND: The decision to perform CABG or concomitant CABG and AVR (CABG/AVR) in asymptomatic patients who need CABG surgery but have mild to moderate aortic stenosis (AS) is not clear-cut. METHODS: We performed Markov decision analysis comparing long-term, quality-adjusted life outcomes of patients with mild to moderate AS undergoing CABG versus CABG/AVR. Age-specific morbidity and mortality risks with CABG, CABG/AVR, and AVR after a prior CABG were based on the Society of Thoracic Surgeons national database (n = 1,344,100). Probabilities of progression to symptomatic AS, valve-related morbidity, and age-adjusted mortality rates were obtained from available published reports. RESULTS: For average AS progression, the decision to replace the aortic valve at the time of elective CABG should be based on patient age and severity of AS measured by echocardiography. For patients under age 70 years, an AVR for mild AS is preferred if the peak valve gradient is >25 to 30 mm Hg. For older patients, the threshold increases by 1 to 2 mm Hg/year, so that an 85-year-old patient undergoing CABG should have AVR only if the gradient exceeds 50 mm Hg. The AS progression rate also influences outcomes. With slow progression (<3 mm Hg/year), CABG is favored for all patients with AS gradients <50 mm Hg; with rapid progression (>10 mm Hg/year), CABG/AVR is favored except for patients >80 years old with a valve gradient <25 mm Hg. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a decision aid for treating patients with mild to moderate AS requiring CABG surgery. Predictors of AS progression in individual patients need to be better defined.     

Aortic valve repair versus replacement in bicuspid aortic valve disease

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: The study aim was to compare the results of aortic valve repair and replacement with biological valves in adult patients with aortic insufficiency (AI) caused by congenital bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) METHODS: Forty-four patients who had aortic valve repair were matched for age and left ventricular function to 44 patients who had aortic valve replacement (AVR) with biological valves. Patients were followed annually using echocardiography. The mean follow up was 2.6 +/- 2.1 years for the repair group, and 3.5 +/- 2.1 years for the replacement group. Follow up was complete. RESULTS: There was no operative or late death in either group. Early postoperative echocardiography showed trace or no AI in 35 patients and mild AI in nine who had repair, and trace or no AI in 38 patients and mild AI in five who had AVR. The mean peak systolic gradient was 16.2 +/- 7.6 mmHg for repair and 13.2 +/- 7.2 mmHg for AVR. Four patients who had valve repair and two who had AVR, needed repeat aortic valve surgery because of progressive AI or endocarditis. Freedom from reoperation at five years was 91 +/- 5% for repair and 94 +/- 6% for replacement (p = 0.2), while freedom from moderate or severe AI at five years was 79 +/- 8% for repair and 94 +/- 6% for replacement (p = 0.024). The peak systolic gradient at follow up was 11.7 +/- 6.8 mmHg after repair and 13.3 +/- 9.6 mmHg after AVR (p = 0.4). There were no thromboembolic complications in either group. CONCLUSION: Repair of BAV is feasible in certain patients with AI, but the hemodynamics and clinical outcomes do not appear to be superior to AVR with biological valves during the first five years of follow up.     

Mid-term pattern of survival, hemodynamic performance and rate of complications after medtronic freestyle versus homograft full aortic root replacement: results from a prospective randomized trial

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: The full homograft root replacement has been regarded as the 'gold standard' for aortic valve replacement (AVR). Xenograft full root AVR may offer similar theoretical advantages, but no prospective randomized trials to compare the two valve substitutes have been reported to date. METHODS: A total of 147 patients (mean age 66.2 years; range: 40-82 years) was randomized to undergo either Medtronic Freestyle (group F; n = 80) or homograft (group H; n = 67) root AVR. Coronary artery bypass grafting was associated with root AVR in 55 patients (37.4%). Follow up included routine clinical and echocardiographic assessments. RESULTS: Overall, there were seven early deaths (4.8%). The early mortality rate for isolated root AVR was 2.1% in group F (1/47) and 2.2% in group H (1/45) (p = NS). There were four late deaths in group F, and two in group H. Actuarial survival was 83+/-5% and 84+/-4% (p = NS) at five years, in groups F and H, respectively. No patient required reoperation on the aortic valve. Overall, there were eight thromboembolic events and six anticoagulant-related bleeding events; these were equally divided between the two groups. After a median follow up of 45 months, most patients in both groups were in NYHA class I, and the mean trans-aortic gradient was 6+/-1 mmHg in group F and 5+/-2 mmHg in group H (p = NS). Mild aortic regurgitation was recorded in 1/26 patients (4%) of group F, and in 1/16 (6%) of group H. CONCLUSION: The Medtronic Freestyle porcine xenograft appears to be a good alternative to homografts for full aortic root replacement, at least in the mid term.     

Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement through a transverse sternotomy: a word of caution

OBJECTIVES: To compare aortic valve replacement (AVR) using a minimally invasive approach through a transverse sternotomy with the established approach of median sternotomy. DESIGN: Retrospective, case-control study. PATIENTS: Fourteen high risk patients (median age 78, Parsonnet score of 18%) who underwent AVR performed through a minimally invasive transverse sternotomy were compared with a historical group of patients matched for age, sex, and Parsonnet score who underwent AVR performed through a median sternotomy by the same surgeon. OUTCOME MEASURES: Cross clamp time, total bypass time, intensive care stay, postoperative in-hospital stay, morbidity, and mortality. RESULTS: There were two deaths in the minimally invasive group and none in the control group (NS). The cross clamp and total bypass times were longer in the minimally invasive group (67 and 92 minutes v 46 and 66 minutes, p < 0.001). There was a higher incidence of re-exploration for bleeding (14% v 0%) and paravalvar leaks (21% v 0%) in the minimally invasive group but these differences were not significant. The minimally invasive group had a longer postoperative in-hospital stay (p = 0.025). The incidence of mortality or major morbidity was 43% (six of 14) in the minimally invasive group and 7% (one of 14) in the matched pairs (p = 0.013). CONCLUSIONS: AVR can be performed through a transverse sternotomy but the operation takes longer and there is an unacceptably high incidence of morbidity and mortality.     

Effect of coronary bypass and valve structure on outcome in isolated valve replacement for aortic stenosis

Reports differ regarding the effect of concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients who undergo aortic valve replacement (AVR) for aortic stenosis (AS), and no reports have described the effect of aortic valve structure in patients who undergo AVR for AS. A total of 871 patients aged 24 to 94 years (mean 70) whose AVR for AS was their first cardiac operation, with or without first concomitant CABG, were included. Patients who underwent mitral valve procedures were excluded. In comparison with the 443 patients (51%) who did not undergo CABG, the 428 (49%) who underwent concomitant CABG were significantly older, were more often male, had lower transvalvular peak systolic pressure gradients and larger valve areas, had lower frequencies of congenitally malformed aortic valves, had lighter valves by weight, had higher frequencies of systemic hypertension, and had longer stays in the hospital after AVR. Early and late (to 10 years) mortality were similar by propensity-adjusted analysis in patients who did and did not undergo concomitant CABG. Congenitally unicuspid or bicuspid valves occurred in approximately 90% of those aged 21 to 50, in nearly 70% in those aged 51 to 70 years, and in just over 30% in those aged 71 to 95 years. Unadjusted and adjusted survival was significantly higher in patients with unicuspid or bicuspid valves compared to those with tricuspid valves. In conclusion, although concomitant CABG had no effect on the adjusted probability of survival, the type of aortic valve (unicuspid or bicuspid vs tricuspid) significantly affected the unadjusted and adjusted probability of survival.     

Safety of percutaneous coronary intervention alone in symptomatic patients with moderate and severe valvular aortic stenosis and coexisting coronary artery disease: analysis of results in 56 patients

Whether percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) alone is safe in patients with moderate or severe aortic stenosis (AS) and coexisting coronary artery disease (CAD), and whether aortic valve replacement (AVR) can be deferred in patients with moderate AS by undergoing PCI alone is not known. We conducted a retrospective study of surgically inoperable patients with AS who underwent PCI (moderate AS, n = 28; and severe AS, n = 28) and compared to those with AVR (n = 55). The clinical characteristics, procedural complications, in-hospital and long-term clinical outcomes of PCI were compared. Baseline and procedural characteristics were similar except that lower age, hypertension, and renal impairment were seen in the AVR group. In-hospital complications were comparable among the 3 groups. Six-month and 1-year rates of myocardial infarction (MI), non-Q-wave MI, death and out-of-hospital death were similar between AVR and moderate AS patients (p = NS) and significantly high (p < 0.04) in patients with severe AS. On multivariate analysis, severe AS was the only significant predictor of 6-month and 1-year mortality. Our study suggests that PCI is safe in patients with moderate AS and coexisting CAD but is associated with poor outcomes in patients with severe AS.     

Management of asymptomatic aortic stenosis in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting.

This study compared the outcomes of combined coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG)/aortic valve replacement (AVR) and CABG alone in patients with moderate aortic stenosis and determined the possible indications for AVR at the time of CABG. Between December 1988 and January 2001, in Tenri Hospital, 41 patients with aortic stenosis underwent CABG: 26 patients underwent the combined procedure and 15 patients underwent CABG alone. The patients who underwent CABG alone were separated them into 2 groups on the basis of the results of annual echocardiography: the rapid progression group, defined by an increase of deltaP by >/=10 mmHg/year, and the slow progression group. Of the 15 patients who underwent CABG alone, the probability of survival at the end of the study in 2001 was 92% at 5 years and 74% at 10 years, and the respective event-free rates were 65% and 50%. Patients less than 70 years old and who were in the rapid progression group had a greater risk for re-operation. The study suggests that patients younger than 70 years old with risk factors for rapid progression should undergo CABG/AVR, and conversely, those older than 70 years old without the risk factors can undergo CABG only.     

Comparison of cardiovascular risk and lipid profiles in patients undergoing aortic valve surgery versus those undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: Hyperlipidemia is a risk factor for the progression of coronary artery disease, and possibly also valvular aortic stenosis. Thus, patients with aortic stenosis, coronary disease (or both) might be expected to have more abnormal lipid profiles than those without these two conditions. METHODS: The lipid profiles of patient subsets undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR) with or without concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), as well as those undergoing isolated CABG, between 1987 and 1997 were analyzed retrospectively. Four surgical groups were identified: AVR for aortic regurgitation (n = 370); AVR for predominant aortic stenosis (n = 1,072); AVR for aortic stenosis (AS) with CABG (n = 914); and isolated CABG (n = 11,156). The complete fasting lipid profiles of patients were collected, analyzed by group, and compared. RESULTS: Analysis by Spearman's correlation showed that total cholesterol levels, triglycerides and low-density lipoproteins (LDL-C) were modestly, yet significantly, increased in each successive group, while high-density lipoproteins were decreased. AS patients undergoing isolated AVR had significantly higher total cholesterol (215 versus 201 mg/dl; p <0.0001), triglycerides (125 versus 104 mg/dl; p <0.0001) and LDL-C (139 versus 132 mg/dl; p = 0.003) than those undergoing AVR for aortic regurgitation. Total cholesterol >200 mg/dl was significantly associated with AS, even after adjusting for differences in age, sex, diabetes mellitus and hypertension, with an odds ratio of 1.5 (95% confidence interval, 1.2-2.0; p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Progressively abnormal lipid profiles are associated with AS and coronary disease in patients undergoing AVR. This evidence helps to extend the link between dyslipidemia and AS in a large consecutive series of patients.     

Aortic valve replacement for patients with mild to moderate aortic stenosis undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery

Aortic valve replacement (AVR) is not normally recommended in asymptomatic patients, even if aortic stenosis is severe. However, as the population ages, an increasing number of patients with mild or moderate aortic stenosis will require coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). In these cases, risk of "prophylactic" AVR needs to be weighed against risks of subsequent worsening of the mildly or moderately diseased aortic valve. If unoperated, aortic stenosis will worsen at an average of 6-8 mmHg per year (-0.1 cm2/year valve area), and one-quarter of such patients will require late AVR with a high operative mortality (14-24%). If AVR is performed at the time of CABG, operative risk is increased only slightly (from 1-3% to 2-6%), as are late mortality (1-2% per year) and morbidity (1-2% per year), mainly from hemorrhagic complications. Intrinsic gradients of most prosthetic valves are sufficiently low that even patients with low aortic valve gradients are likely to derive hemodynamic benefit from AVR. Thus, if there is a measurable (>20-25 mmHg) gradient across the aortic valve in a patient who requires CABG, the patient is at considerable risk for developing symptomatic aortic stenosis prior to reaching the end of expected benefit from CABG; in this case AVR should be considered. It may be reasonable in patients with very mild gradients (<25 mmHg) to defer aortic valve surgery; however, it should be noted that aortic stenosis progression is generally more rapid when the initial gradient is small.     

Comparison of On-X and SJM HP bileaflet aortic valves

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: The study aim was to evaluate the hemodynamic function after aortic valve replacement (AVR) using the On-X valve, in comparison with St. Jude Medical (SJM) HP bileaflet valves. METHODS: Patients received either the On-X (n = 20) or SJM HP prosthesis (n = 20) for AVR. The control (SJM HP) group was computer-matched with the On-X group for age, gender, aortic stenosis as underlying disease, body surface area, NYHA functional class, left ventricular size, mass and function, transvalvular pressure gradients and cardiac index. Mean implanted valve size was 23.5 mm (three 21 mm, ten 23 mm, six 25 mm, one 27 mm) in both groups. All patients underwent postoperative, and six- and 12-month follow up echocardiography. RESULTS: The intra- and postoperative course was uneventful in all patients. There were no significant differences in cross-clamp and cardiopulmonary bypass times, intensive care unit stay, in-hospital stay and postoperative NYHA functional class. Two patients (both On-X) had paravalvular leakage postoperatively and at follow up. Five patients in the control group had additional myocardial revascularization. Transvalvular flow velocities were 2.38 +/- 0.3 versus 2.38 +/- 0.4 m/s (p = NS) postoperatively, and 2.08 +/- 0.2 versus 2.22 +/- 0.3 m/s (p = NS) at one year follow up for On-X and SJM HP valves, respectively. Maximum pressure gradients were 16.9 +/- 6.0 versus 18.5 +/- 8.0 mmHg (p = NS) postoperatively and 14.0 +/- 3.7 versus 16.5 +/- 5.7 mmHg (p = NS) at one year for the two valve types, respectively. A relatively pronounced transvalvular reflux was diagnosed for On-X valves. CONCLUSION: At one year after implantation, the On-X bileaflet prosthesis is equally suited for AVR in comparison with the 'standard' therapy (SJM HP). Exact sizing requires some experience. There were no significant differences between the two prostheses with regard to hemodynamic parameters either postoperatively or at one-year follow up. Long-term prospective randomized studies yet have to be carried out.     

Severe isolated aortic stenosis with normal left ventricular systolic function and low transvalvular gradients: pathophysiologic and prognostic insights

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: A significant proportion of patients with severe valvular aortic stenosis (AS) and preserved left ventricular (LV) systolic function have low transvalvular gradients. The study aim was to determine the mechanisms and outcome of patients with this hemodynamic profile of AS. METHODS: Among 1,679 patients who underwent transthoracic echocardiography for the evaluation of AS at the authors' institution, 215 (105 females, 110 males; mean age: 77 +/- 10 years) had isolated AS (mean aortic valve area index 0.39 +/- 0.1 cm2/m2), normal sinus rhythm and normal LV ejection fraction. The mean follow up was 23 +/- 12 months, and the end-points were mortality, aortic valve replacement (AVR), or mortality or AVR. RESULTS: Forty-seven patients had a transvalvular mean gradient (MG) <30 mmHg (MG(low)) and 168 had MG > or = 30 mmHg (MG(high)). Compared to MG(high), the MG(low) group had a higher prevalence of hypertension, lower LV end-diastolic volume index (47 +/- 9 versus 56 +/- 12 ml/m2, p <0.0001), lower LV stroke vol-ume index (37 +/- 12 versus 41 +/- 11 ml/beat, p <0.0002), a lesser severity of stenosis (aortic valve area index 0.37 +/- 0.09 versus 0.46 +/- 0.09 cm2/m2, p <0.0001) and a higher systemic vascular resistance (2163 +/- 754 versus 1879 +/- 528 dyne cm s(-5). The LV end-diastolic volume index, systemic vascular resistance and energy loss index were predictors of MG <30 mmHg (OR = 0.30, 95% CI, 0.12, 0.62; OR = 3.05, 95% CI, 1.71, 6.26; and OR = 6.76, 95% CI, 3.44,15.38, respectively). MG <30 mmHg (MGhigh) was associated with almost 50% lower referral to surgery and a two-fold increase in preoperative mortality. CONCLUSION: In severe AS with a normal LV ejection fraction, MG <30 mmHg is related to a lesser severity of stenosis, a smaller LV volume, a lower flow rate and a higher systemic vascular resistance. Compared to the MG(high) group, these patients were less frequently referred to surgery and had a higher mortality.     

Are initial valve operations in octogenarians still high-risk in the current era?

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: The average age of cardiac patients continues to increase. As more octogenarians undergo surgery during the current era, the outcome of valve surgery was investigated to determine the operative risk in these patients. METHODS: Among 350 patients aged > or = 80 years who had initial surgery between 1998 and 2006, a total of 188 (105 females, 83 males) underwent valve surgery. A prospective analysis was conducted of the collected data. RESULTS: The median age of patients was 82 years (IQR: 81-84 years), and over half of them presented with severe symptoms (NYHA class III/IV; n = 96), controlled heart failure (n = 108), hypertension (n = 101) and coronary artery disease (n = 108). Concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) was performed in 89 cases (47%). Perioperative hemodynamic support with inotropes was common (47%). Hospital death after isolated aortic valve replacement (AVR) (n = 89) and mitral valve replacement (MVR) (n = 10) occurred in four patients (4.5%, median additive EuroSCORE 9.0%) and one patient (10%, median additive EuroSCORE 9.8%), respectively. Concomitant CABG led to a doubling of the operative mortality which, for AVR, declined from 5.4% to 3.8% during the latter half of the study period. The median length of stay was 24 h (IQR 21-44 h) in the intensive care unit, and 10 days (IQR 7-14 days) postoperatively. The risk factors for operative mortality were urgent/emergent surgery (HR 3.27, 95% CI 1.12-9.58, p = 0.03), preoperative gastrointestinal disease (HR 3.15, 95% CI 1.12-8.9, p = 0.03), left ventricular ejection fraction <0.30 (HR 4.37, 95% CI 1.29-14.82, p = 0.02), and ischemic time (HR 1.04, 95% CI 1.004-1.07, p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Elective isolated AVR can be performed with modest operative risk in octogenarians with good left ventricular systolic function. Additional procedures impose long ischemic times and increase the operative risk, as does MVR. Strategies to minimize the complexity and extent of surgery should benefit these patients.     

Valve structure and survival in quinquagenarians having aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis (+/-aortic regurgitation) with versus without coronary artery bypass grafting at a single US medical center (1993 to 2005)

The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of simultaneous coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and the influence of valve structure on both early and late survival in quinquagenarians having aortic valve replacement (AVR) for aortic stenosis (AS) (with or without aortic regurgitation). We analyzed survival and valve structure in 120 quinquagenarians having AVR for AS from 1993 through 2005 at Baylor University Medical Center, including 44 (37%) with and 76 (63%) without simultaneous CABG. Of the 120 patients, 2 (2%) died within 30 days of operation and none from 31 to 60 days postoperatively. Fifteen other patients (13%) died from >60 days to up to 13 years postoperatively. The unadjusted survival analysis showed that late survival was significantly better in the unicuspid/bicuspid valve structure group than in the tricuspid valve structure group (log-rank test p = 0.001), but that it was not affected by gender (male vs female), preoperative severity of the AS (transvalvular peak pressure gradient >50 vs < or =50 mm Hg), or by performance of CABG. The aortic valve was congenitally unicuspid in 18 patients (15%), congenitally bicuspid in 84 (70%), and 3-cuspid in 18 (15%). In conclusion, aortic valve structure affected the unadjusted late survival in quinquagenarians undergoing AVR for AS, but concomitant CABG, gender, and transvalvular peak systolic gradient had no effect.     

Survival after aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis with low transvalvular gradients and severe left ventricular dysfunction

OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess whether aortic valve replacement (AVR) among patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS), severe left ventricular (LV) dysfunction and a low transvalvular gradient (TVG) is associated with improved survival. BACKGROUND: The optimal management of patients with severe AS with severe LV dysfunction and a low TVG remains controversial. METHODS: Between 1990 and 1998, we evaluated 68 patients who underwent AVR at our institution (AVR group) and 89 patients who did not undergo AVR (control group), with an aortic valve area < or = 0.75 cm(2), LV ejection fraction < or = 35% and mean gradient < or = 30 mm Hg. Using propensity analysis, survival was compared between a cohort of 39 patients in the AVR group and 56 patients in the control group. RESULTS: Despite well-matched baseline characteristics among propensity-matched patients, the one- and four-year survival rates were markedly improved in patients in the AVR group (82% and 78%), as compared with patients in the control group (41% and 15%; p < 0.0001). By multivariable analysis, the main predictor of improved survival was AVR (adjusted risk ratio 0.19, 95% confidence interval 0.09 to 0.39; p < 0.0001). The only other predictors of mortality were age and the serum creatinine level. CONCLUSIONS: Among select patients with severe AS, severe LV dysfunction and a low TVG, AVR was associated with significantly improved survival.     

Valve structure and survival in octogenarians having aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis (+/- aortic regurgitation) with versus without coronary artery bypass grafting at a single US medical center (1993 to 2005)

The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of simultaneous coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and valve structure on both early and late survival in octogenarians having aortic valve replacement (AVR) for aortic stenosis (AS) (with or without aortic regurgitation). Although a number of reports are available in octogenarians having AVR for AS, none have described aortic valve structure. Most have limited numbers of patients and few have described late results. We analyzed survival and valve structure in 196 octogenarians having AVR for AS from 1993 to 2005 at Baylor University Medical Center, including 118 (60%) with and 78 (40%) without simultaneous CABG. Sixty-day mortality, which was identical to 30-day mortality, was similar (10% and 11%) in the groups with and without simultaneous CABG. Unadjusted analysis of late survival (up to 13 year follow-up) was not affected by gender (male vs female), aortic valve structure (bicuspid vs tricuspid) or preoperative severity of the AS (transvalvular peak pressure gradient > 50 vs < or =50 mm Hg), or by performance of CABG. Of the 196 patients, 54 (28%) had a congenitally bicuspid aortic valve, and 142 (72%) had a tricuspid aortic valve. In conclusion, gender, valve structure, preoperative severity of the AS, or performance of simultaneous CABG did not effect survival in octogenarians having AVR for AS.     

Risk factors for prolonged mechanical ventilation following surgery for acute type a aortic dissection

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to identify predictors of prolonged mechanical ventilation (PMV) following surgery for acute type A aortic dissection (AAAD) and to assess the influence of this complication on clinical outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 243 patients underwent emergency surgery for AAAD in the period of 1997-2006. Ten patients died within 48 h after surgery. The remaining 233 patients were divided into 2 groups according to the duration of mechanical ventilation; less than 48 h (group A: n=149) or 48 h or longer (group B; n=84). Multivariate analysis was used to identify predictors of PMV. Short and late outcomes were compared between groups. Multivariate analysis showed that shock (systolic BP <90 mmHg; p=0.007), postoperative renal dysfunction (creatinine >2.0 mg/dl; p=0.016), coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) (p=0.017), and limb ischemia (p=0.044) were independent predictors of PMV. There was no significant difference in in-hospital mortality (group A, 2.7% vs group B, 3.6%) or 5-year survival (group A, 85.9% vs group B, 76.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Shock, limb ischemia, CABG, and postoperative renal dysfunction increase the risk for PMV. Knowing the predictors of PMV should help optimize postoperative management of these patients.     

Risk of reoperation for structural failure of aortic and mitral tissue valves

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: The study aim was to assess the risk of reoperation for patients with a failing stented tissue valve. METHODS: Between 1980 and 1999, 259 patients (118 males, 141 females; mean age 60.1+/-15.4 years) underwent redo valve replacement to replace a failing stented tissue valve. Of these patients, 94 (36.3%) underwent redo aortic valve replacement (AVR), 105 (40.5%) redo mitral valve replacement (MVR), and 60 (23.2%) redo aortic and mitral valve replacement (DVR). Twenty patients (7.7%) had previous coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG); further CABG were performed in 32 cases (12.4%). Preoperatively, 216 patients (83.3%) were in NYHA functional class III or IV. RESULTS: The early mortality was (6.5%; n = 17), including three patients who had AVR, five DVR, and nine MVR. A higher preoperative NHYA status (p <0.0004) and emergency surgery (p <0.0001) were significantly associated with an increased risk of operative death (univariate analysis). Age at surgery (p = 0.45), previous CABG (p = 0.45), position of the valve replaced (p = 0.2), type of implant (p = 0.06) and presence of coronary artery disease (p = 0.51) were not associated with a significant risk of operative mortality. Including those patients who died, 88 (34.0%) experienced a peri- or postoperative complication, seven of which (2.7%) were permanent. CONCLUSION: A failing tissue valve can be replaced, with acceptable operative mortality and morbidity. The choice of valve is a balance of its advantages and disadvantages, and these must be discussed with the patient. It appears, however, that the trend towards reducing the age at which tissue valve implantation is performed may be justified.     

Cardiac surgery in octogenarians: a six-year follow-up with a multidimensional intervention]

BACKGROUND: Elderly subjects frequently experience a decline in function following hospitalization and surgery. Specific changes in the provision of acute hospital care can improve the ability of acutely ill older patients to perform activities of daily living at the time of discharge and the quality of life. The aim of this study was to investigate outcomes of older (age > or =80 years) cardiac surgery patients managed with multicomponent intervention. METHODS: Between 1998 and 2004, we studied records of 193 octogenarian patients who underwent cardiac surgery and were treated with a multicomponent intervention that included: specially designed environment, patient-centered care, planning for patient discharge at home, and an interdisciplinary approach that incorporates in- and out-of-hospital health professionals. RESULTS: Mean follow-up was 26.4 months and 100% complete. Mean age of patients was 82.3 +/- 2 years. Eighty-nine patients had myocardial revascularization (CABG), 40 aortic valve replacement (AVR), 34 AVR + CABG, 8 mitral valve replacement (MVR), 11 MVR + CABG and 11 other interventions. Rates of hospital death, major complications and prolonged stay (> 14 days) were as follows: CABG 4 (4.4%), 3 (3.3%), 6 (6.4%); AVR 1 (2.5%), 3 (7.5%), 2 (5%); AVR + CABG 1 (2.9%), 2 (5.8%), 4 (11.7%); MVR 0 (0%), 0 (0%), 1 (12.5%); MVR + CABG 2 (18.1%), 2 (18.1%), 3 (27.2%). Multivariate predictors of hospital deaths were NYHA class, cardiopulmonary bypass and cross-clamping time, urgent procedure and ischemic mitral valve procedures. The actuarial 6-year survival was as follows: CABG 91%,AVR 92.5%, AVR + CABG 88.2%, MVR + CABG 81.8%. Total survival rate, free from rehospitalization and redo surgery, was 89.7, 69.8 and 99% respectively. Multivariate predictors of late death were urgent procedure and ischemic mitral valve procedures. At follow-up NYHA classification had improved a median of two classes. Global patients' satisfaction was excellent in 76.7% of survivors; 95.7% were autonomous, 40.5% live at home, 64% had a light-moderate physical activity, and 70% of patients had good social relationships and quality of life. Medical therapy was reduced in 29.3% and level of anxiety improved in 76%. CONCLUSIONS: An interdisciplinary approach and multicomponent intervention with an appropriate postoperative care, provides beneficial effects on outcome in geriatric cardiac surgery patients.