Determinants of survival and valve failure after mitral valve replacement

A prospective evaluation of 333 consecutive patients undergoing isolated mitral valve replacement between 1982 and 1985 was performed to identify the predictors of survival and valve failure. Follow-up between 2 and 6 years postoperatively (mean, 32 +/- 17 months) was 98% complete. Four prostheses were inserted to permit a prospective evaluation of alternative valves: Bj?rk-Shiley mechanical (n = 118), Ionescu-Shiley pericardial (n = 146), Carpentier-Edwards porcine (n = 38), and Hancock pericardial (n = 31). Hospital mortality was 6%, and actuarial survival at 5 years was 74% +/- 5%. Multivariate Cox regression analysis identified advancing age (less than 40 years, 88% +/- 7%; greater than 70 years, 50% +/- 14%) and poor left ventricular function (ejection fraction less than 0.20, 62% +/- 17%; ejection fraction greater than 0.60, 80% +/- 7%) as independent predictors of postoperative survival. Freedom from structural valve dysfunction, prosthetic valve endocarditis, reoperation, and valve-related mortality and morbidity were 86% +/- 4%, 91% +/- 4%, 81% +/- 4%, and 72% +/- 5%, respectively, at 5 years. The actuarial incidence of valve failure was inordinately high with the Hancock pericardial valve (p less than 0.05). Freedom from thromboembolic events (78% +/- 8% at 5 years) was significantly lower in patients with poor ventricular function (ejection fraction (less than 0.20, 54% +/- 20%; ejection fraction greater than 0.60, 73% +/- 11%; p less than 0.05). Survival after mitral valve replacement was determined by age and left ventricular function. Premature failure of the Hancock pericardial valve resulted in an unacceptable rate of valve-related complications.     

In-hospital outcomes of patients undergoing concomitant aortic and mitral valve replacement in Germany

 Open in a separate windowOBJECTIVESTo evaluate in-hospital outcomes of concomitant mitral valve replacement (MVR) in patients undergoing conventional aortic valve replacement due to aortic stenosis in a nationwide cohort.METHODSAdministrative data from all patients with aortic stenosis undergoing conventional aortic and concomitant MVR (reason for MVR not specified) between 2017 and 2018 in Germany were analysed.RESULTSA total of 2597 patients with a preoperative logistic EuroScore of 9.81 (standard deviation: 8.56) were identified. In-hospital mortality was 6.8%. An in-hospital stroke occurred in 3.4%, acute kidney injury in 16.3%, prolonged mechanical ventilation of more than 48 h in 16.3%, postoperative delirium in 15.8% and postoperative pacemaker implantation in 7.6% of the patients. Mean hospital stay was 16.5 (standard deviation: 12.1) days. Age [odds ratio (OR): 1.03; P = 0.019], New York Heart Association class III or IV (OR: 1.63; P = 0.012), previous cardiac surgery (OR: 2.85, P = 0.002), peripheral vascular disease (OR: 2.01, P = 0.031), pulmonary hypertension (OR: 1.63, P = 0.042) and impaired renal function (glomerular filtration rate <15, OR: 3.58, P = 0.001; glomerular filtration rate <30, OR: 2.51, P = 0.037) were identified as independent predictors for in-hospital mortality.CONCLUSIONSIn this nationwide analysis, concomitant aortic and MVR was associated with acceptable in-hospital mortality, morbidity and length of in-hospital stay. The regression analyses may help to identify high-risk patients and further optimize treatment strategies.     

Hemolytic anemia due to aortic valve regurgitation after mitral valve replacement

A 50-year-old woman was admitted to our hospital because of heart failure (NYHA III) due to mitral valve regurgitation (MR) with pulmonary hypertension (PH) and tricuspid valve regurgitation (TR). She had a history of chronic renal failure undergoing dialysis (peritoneal dialysis, homodialysis) since 1996. Cardiac catheterization and ultrasonic cardiography showed severe MR (Sellers III), severe TR and PH (mean pressure 33 mmHg). So we performed mitral valve replacement and tricuspid annuloplasty (DeVega). Frequent blood transfusion was needed because severe hemolytic anemia appeared after operation. Ultrasonic cardiography demonstrated moderate aortic valve regurgitation (AR) with no paravalvular prosthetic leakage. We diagnosed hemolytic anemia due to AR. We performed aortic valve replacement. Hemolytic anemia improved soon after second operation. We investigated the mechanical process of the AR. She had a very short subaortic curtain (5.9 mm) compared with the average (8.7 +/- 2.1 mm: mean +/- SD) of cardiac patients. We think that we must be very careful with suture to short subaortic curtain. In addition measurement of subaortic curtain before operation is very useful.     

Long-term clinical results after combined aortic and mitral valve replacement

The results after 282 consecutive double (aortic & mitral) valve replacements (DVR) are compared with our previously reported experience after mitral (MVR, n = 810) and aortic valve replacement (AVR, n = 1753). All but one patient received Bj?rk-Shiley valves. The follow-up which closed on August 1, 1985 was 99.3% and covered 16,869 patient-years (mean 6.3 years/patient). Autopsies were performed in 74% of all fatalities. Early mortality rates were identical in the three patient groups, and late mortality did not differ between MVR and DVR patients. The fraction of valve-related mortality was similar in all groups. Anticoagulant-related bleeding was equally common in all patient groups. The incidences of thromboembolism, reoperation and valve failure did not differ between MVR and DVR patients, but were significantly higher than among AVR patients. With the exception of a slightly increased incidence of prosthetic valve endocarditis, the results after DVR equal those after MVR. In cases with severe mitral valve disease but borderline aortic valve disease, primary DVR is clearly justified and eliminates the need for, and risks of, a secondary AVR.     

Subannular perforation after long-lasting aortic valve replacement mimicking mitral insufficiency

We report a rare case of a patient diagnosed with mitral insufficiency grade III 12 years after mechanical aortic valve replacement. Transesophageal echocardiography described an eccentric mitral regurgitation-type systolic jet with color flow evidence of communication between left ventricle and atrium. Surgical intervention showed a circular defect in the mitral-aortic intervalvular fibrosa area, after removal of the mechanical valve, located beneath the noncoronary sinus causing the echocardiography-detected mitral insufficiency. A pericardial patch was trimmed to the appropriate size, and the defect was closed. The aortic valve was replaced by a stented pericardial bioprosthesis.     

Long-term survival after single aortic or mitral valve replacement with the present model of Smeloff-Cutter valves

Two hundred fourteen survivors of single aortic (AVR) or mitral valve replacement (MVR) were evaluated. The present model of the Smeloff-Cutter prosthesis was used in these patients, and the series was started in September, 1966, following the last structural change in the valve. Clinical follow-up ended in September, 1976. Bleeding, thromboembolism, and peristent left ventricular dysfunction were the major complications. Thromboembolism occurred at a rate of 0.13 percent per month of patient follow-up. Late deaths occurred in 19.2 percent of patients, half of these within the first year. Acturarial data indicated a 5 year survival rate of approximately 75 percent after both mitral and aortic replacements. Bleeding and thromboembolism were more frequent causes of death after mitral replacement. Myocardial function was of greatest importance in long-term survival after replacement of either valve. Variations in warfarin dosage significantly affected both bleeding and thromboembolic complications.     

Surgical outcomes of mitral valve replacement with concomitant mitral annular reconstruction

Background and aim of the study

We evaluated the early and long‐term outcomes of mitral annular reconstruction (MAR) with pericardium during mitral valve replacement (MVR), and analyzed the risk factors associated with post‐operative mortality.

Methods

Between May 1997 and April 2013, 78 consecutive patients underwent MVR with MAR. The indications for MAR were treatment for annular infection in native valve endocarditis (n = 23, 29.5%) or prosthetic valve endocarditis (n = 26, 33.3%), reinforcement of damaged annulus resulting from a previous operation (n = 17, 21.8%), complete excision of extensive calcification (n = 9, 11.5%), and left ventricular or left atrial rupture (n = 3, 3.8%). Patients were classified into infective endocarditis (n = 49) and non‐endocarditis groups (n = 29). The mean follow‐up period was 59.4 ± 47.3 months.

Results

There were two operative deaths and 11 cases of late mortality in the endocarditis group and five cases in the non‐endocarditis group. Late prosthetic valve endocarditis occurred in four patients. The overall survival rate at 1 and 10 years was 94.8% and 65.1%, respectively. There was no statistical difference in the overall survival, freedom from reoperation, and freedom from endocarditis rates between the groups (P = 0.565, P = 0.635, and P = 0.449, respectively). Univariable and multivariable analyses revealed that pre‐operative left ventricular dysfunction (ejection fraction <40%) was an independent predictor of overall mortality.

Conclusions

The early and long‐term results of MAR with pericardium during MVR are acceptable in both endocarditis and non‐endocarditis patients.     

Effect of aortic cross-clamp time on late survival after isolated aortic valve replacement

Open in a separate window OBJECTIVESLonger aortic cross-clamp (ACC) time is associated with decreased early survival after cardiac surgery. Because maximum follow-up in previous studies on this subject is confined to 28 months, it is unknown whether this adverse effect is sustained far beyond this term. We aimed to determine whether longer ACC time was independently associated with decreased late survival after isolated aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis during 25 years of follow-up.METHODSIn this retrospective cohort study, multivariable analysis was performed to identify possible independent predictors of decreased late survival, including ACC and cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time, in a cohort of 456 consecutive patients with severe aortic stenosis, who had undergone isolated aortic valve replacement between 1990 and 1993.RESULTSMean follow-up was 25.3 ± 2.7 years. Median (interquartile range) and mean ACC times were normal: 63.0 (20.0) and 64.2 ± 16.1 min, respectively. Age, operative risk scores and New York Heart Association class were similar in patients with ACC time above, versus those with ACC time below the median. Longer ACC time was independently associated with decreased late survival: hazards ratio (HR) 1.01 per minute increase of ACC time (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.00–1.02; P = 0.012). Longer CPB time was not associated with decreased late survival (HR 1.00 per minute increase of CPB time [95% CI 1.00–1.00; P = 0.30]).CONCLUSIONSLonger ACC time, although still within normal limits, was independently associated with decreased late survival after isolated aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis.     

Prosthesis size and long-term survival after aortic valve replacement

OBJECTIVE: This study was undertaken to quantify the relationship between prosthesis size adjusted for patient size (prosthesis-patient size) and long-term survival after aortic valve replacement. METHODS: Data from nine representative sources on 13,258 aortic valve replacements provided 69,780 patient-years of follow-up (mean 5.3 +/- 4.7 years), with reliable survival estimates to 15 years. Prostheses included 5757 stented porcine xenografts, 3198 stented bovine pericardial xenografts, 3583 mechanical valves, and 720 allografts. Manufacturers' labeled prosthesis size was 19 mm or smaller in 1109 patients. Expressions of prosthesis-patient size assessed were indexed internal prosthesis orifice area (in centimeters squared per square meter of body surface area) and standardized internal prosthesis orifice size (Z, the number of SDs from mean normal native aortic valve size). Multivariable hazard domain analysis with balancing score and risk factor adjustment quantified the association of prosthesis-patient size with survival. RESULTS: Prosthesis-patient size down to at least 1.1 cm(2)/m(2) or -3 Z did not adversely affect intermediate- or long-term survival (P >.2). However, 30-day mortality increased 1% to 2% when indexed orifice area fell below 1.2 cm(2)/m(2) (P =.002) or standardized orifice size fell below -2.5 Z (P =.0003). The increased early risk affected fewer than 1% of patients receiving bioprostheses but about 25% of those receiving mechanical devices. CONCLUSIONS: Aortic prosthesis-patient size down to 1.1 cm(2)/m(2) or -3 Z did not reduce intermediate- or long-term survival after aortic valve replacement. However, patient-prosthesis size under 1.2 cm(2)/m(2) or -2.5 Z was associated with a 1% to 2% increase in 30-day mortality. Prosthesis-patient sizes this small or smaller were rarely implanted in patients receiving bioprostheses.     

Red cell survival after homograft replacement of the aortic valve

Red cell survival was studied in 21 patients following homograft replacement of the aortic valve. Autologous cells labelled with ⁵¹Cr were used. The T½ ⁵¹Cr varied between 24 and 34 days, with only one patient below the normal limit of normal variations. The absence of haemolysis was confirmed by other haematological studies, including estimation of reticulocytes, serum lactic dehydrogenase, and urinary haemosiderin. Haptoglobin levels were low in most of the patients studied. In contrast to prosthetic valves there was no haemolysis in patients with regurgitation around or through the homograft valve.     

Testing of mitral valve competence following combined mitral valve repair and aortic valve replacement

A simple, effective technique for testing the results of repair and reconstructive procedures on the mitral valve apparatus is described. This technique can be used in the operative setting of combined aortic valve replacement and mitral valve repair where other reported techniques for testing the valve apparatus are rendered unfeasible.