Aortic valve infection. Risk factors for death and recurrent endocarditis after aortic valve replacement.

Patients (n = 195) undergoing aortic valve replacement (n = 209) for native or prosthetic valve endocarditis were studied to determine risk factors for death and recurrent endocarditis and also to determine the valve type least likely to be associated with recurrent endocarditis. Ten-year survival was 60%, the highest risk of dying occurring within the first 3 postoperative months. Risk factors for death in this early phase included increased urea concentration, higher New York Heart Association functional class, prosthetic valve endocarditis, infection status (lower in patients with healed endocarditis), longer duration of cardiopulmonary bypass, and nonuse of an allograft valve. In the late phase (beyond 3 months), risk factors included age at operation and Staphylococcus aureus infection (only in New York Heart Association functional class V). Ten years after aortic valve replacement, 79% of valves were free of recurrent endocarditis. The highest risk of recurrence was in the first 4 months. Longer duration of cardiopulmonary bypass was a weak risk factor for recurrent endocarditis in the early phase, and in the late phase risk factors were S. aureus infection (only in New York Heart Association functional classes III, IV, and V) and the use of now discontinued biologic valves. Allograft aortic valve replacement was shown to be associated with a low and constant risk of recurrent endocarditis, whereas other valve types were associated with a high early risk. The allograft valve should be the preferred replacement device for aortic root infection.     

Aortic root replacement with cryopreserved allograft for prosthetic valve endocarditis

BACKGROUND Our strategy has been to treat aortic prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE) with radical debridement of infected tissue and aortic root replacement with a cryopreserved aortic allograft. This study examines the effectiveness of this strategy on hospital mortality and morbidity, recurrent endocarditis, and survival. METHODS: From 1988 through 2000, 103 patients with aortic PVE underwent root replacement with a cryopreserved aortic allograft. Abscesses were present in 78%, and aortoventricular discontinuity was present in 40%. Thirty-two patients had at least one previous operation for endocarditis. In 23 patients with a history of native valve endocarditis, the allograft was implanted after one episode (17 patients), two episodes (5 patients), or three episodes of PVE (1 patient). In the 80 patients without a history of native valve endocarditis, the allograft was placed after one previous aortic valve replacement (57 patients), two (19), or three (4) previous aortic valve replacements. Among the 92 patients with positive cultures, 52 had staphylococcal organisms, 20 had streptococcal, 6 had fungal, 4 had gram-negative, and 6 had enterococcal organisms. Mean follow-up was 4.3 +/- 2.9 years. RESULTS: Hospital mortality was 3.9%. Permanent pacemakers were required in 31 patients. Survival at 1 year, 2 years, 5 years, and 10 years was 90%, 86%, 73%, and 56%, respectively, with a risk of 5.3% per year after 6 months. Four patients underwent reoperation for recurrent PVE of the allograft (95% freedom from recurrent PVE at > or = 2 years). Risk of recurrent PVE peaked at 9 months and then declined to a low level by 18 months. CONCLUSIONS: A strategy of radical debridement and aortic root replacement with a cryopreserved aortic allograft for aortic PVE is safe, effective, and recommended.     

Redo aortic root replacement: experience with 31 patients

BACKGROUND: Aortic root re-replacement is being performed with increased frequency. Limited information is available regarding the surgical approaches and clinical outcomes of this reoperation. METHODS: Between May 1980 and May 1999, 31 patients (mean age, 45 +/- 15 years) underwent redo composite replacement of the aortic valve and ascending aorta. Indications for reoperation were prosthetic valve endocarditis in 12 patients (39%), failed biological valve in 17 (55%), and false aneurysm in 2 (6%). At reoperation, mechanical valves were implanted in 24 patients and biologic valves in 7. All patients with endocarditis had annular abscess and required reconstruction of the left ventricular outflow tract before implantation of a new valved conduit. Mechanical valves were used in 24 patients, aortic homograft in 4, and bioprosthetic valves in 3. The coronary button technique was used to reimplant the coronary arteries whenever possible. Extension of one or both coronary arteries with a short segment of saphenous vein or a synthetic graft was used in 16 patients (52%). The aortic arch was replaced in 7 patients (23%). RESULTS: There was one operative death (3%) because of rupture of an abdominal aortic aneurysm. The mean follow-up was 47 +/- 46 months and was 100% complete. There were five late deaths (16%), three of which were cardiac related. The actuarial survival was 71% +/- 12% at 5 years. Three patients experienced recurrent prosthetic valve endocarditis 4 months to 8 years after operation. The 8-year freedom from endocarditis for patients operated on for endocarditis was 82% +/- 11% compared with 100% for those operated on for other reasons (p = 0.1). At the last follow-up, 21 of 25 survivors (84%) were in New York Heart Association functional classes I or II, and 4 were in class III. CONCLUSIONS: Redo aortic root replacement can be performed with good early and late results. Patients operated on for prosthetic root endocarditis may have an increased risk of recurrent late endocarditis.     

Double valve endocarditis

Background. There are little data concerning surgical outcomes in patients with native valve endocarditis affecting both the aortic and mitral valves.

Methods. From 1977 to 1998, 54 patients had simultaneous aortic and mitral valve grafting for native valve endocarditis. In 78%, mitral valve involvement was limited to the anterior leaflet, suggesting a jet lesion from the aortic valve. Surgical strategies included 31 valve repairs and valve replacement with mechanical (34), bioprosthetic (34), or allograft (9) prostheses. Three hundred twenty-five patient-years of follow-up were available for analysis (mean 6.0 ± 4.8 years).

Results. There were no hospital deaths. Ten-year survival was 73%. Ten-year freedom from recurrent endocarditis was 84%, with risk peaking at 3 months, followed by a constant risk of 1.3%/yr. Choice of valvar procedure did not influence mortality or reinfection risk.

Conclusions. The most common pattern of double valve infection was a jet lesion on the anterior mitral leaflet. Surgical treatment has late survival and freedom from reinfection similar to those of patients with single heart valve infection.     

Replacement of the aortic root for acute prosthetic valve endocarditis: prosthetic composite versus aortic allograft root replacement

OBJECTIVE: Aortic root replacement for prosthetic aortic valve endocarditis with accompanying destruction of the aortic root is a well-established surgical intervention. However, there is still no consensus whether prosthetic material or allogeneic material should be used. Here we report on our experience with prosthetic composite and aortic allograft root replacement in such patients during a 10-year interval. METHODS: From 1991 through 2001, 29 patients with prosthetic aortic valve endocarditis combined with aortic root destruction underwent reoperation at our institution. Sixteen patients received aortic root replacement with a cryopreserved aortic root allograft (group A) and 13 with a prosthetic composite graft (group B). The interval between the initial operation and reoperation was 29 months (range, 5-168 months) in group A and 55 months (range, 7-248 months) in group B. RESULTS: Hospital mortality was 18.5% (n = 5 patients, 3 in group A and 2 in group B). Median follow-up was 21 months (range, 1-48 months) for group A and 34 months (range, 1-152 months) for group B (P >.2). Survival at 1 and 5 years was 81% +/- 10% and 81% +/- 10% in group A and 85% +/- 10% and 85% +/- 10% in group B, respectively. No patient underwent reoperation for recurrent prosthetic aortic valve endocarditis. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that excellent long-term results can be achieved regardless of the material used for aortic root replacement in patients with prosthetic aortic valve endocarditis.     

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.     

Acute endocarditis treated with radical debridement and implantation of mechanical or stented bioprosthetic devices

BACKGROUND: Operation for active infective endocarditis carries high mortality and morbidity rates, especially when the annulus is involved. Overall the literature favors the use of autograft and homograft valves because of better resistance to infection. In our clinic during the last 5 years we used an aggressive surgical approach to infective endocarditis in combination with implantation of mechanical or stented bioprosthetic devices. METHODS: From 1994 to 1999, 50 adults with aortic and/or mitral valve endocarditis underwent valve replacement. The median age of the 36 men and 14 women was 58 years (range, 17 to 78 years). All patients had active endocarditis at the time of operation. Native valve endocarditis was present in 48 patients and prosthetic valve endocarditis was present in 2 patients. The aortic valve was affected in 24 patients, the mitral valve in 21 patients, and both the aortic and mitral valves in 5 patients. Two of the patients with mitral endocarditis also had infection of the tricuspid valve. Annular destruction was present in 24 patients (48%). The patients were treated with radical excision of all infected tissue. The annular defects were closed, if possible, with direct sutures. Otherwise, a reconstruction was performed. Follow-up was 100% complete with a median follow-up period of 45 months (range, 6 to 66 months). RESULTS: The procedures were performed without lethal bleeding complications. Early mortality was 12% and the actuarial survival at follow-up was 80%. In none of the patients who died was death related to the prosthetic valve or recurrence of the endocarditis. Only 1 patient (2%) developed recurrence of the infective endocarditis and was reoperated with a Ross procedure. Three and a half years later the patient developed severe valve insufficiency of the autograft and was operated again with implantation of a mechanical device. CONCLUSIONS: Native and prosthetic valve endocarditis can be treated successfully with aggressive surgical debridement and implantation of mechanical or stented bioprosthetic devices with a low risk of recurrent endocarditis.     

Treatment of endocarditis with valve replacement: the question of tissue versus mechanical prosthesis

BACKGROUND: It remains unknown whether there is any important clinical advantage to the use of either a bioprosthetic or mechanical valve for patients with native or prosthetic valve endocarditis. METHODS: Between 1964 and 1995, 306 patients underwent valve replacement for left-sided native (209 patients) or prosthetic (97 patients) valve endocarditis. Mechanical valves were implanted in 65 patients, bioprostheses in 221 patients, and homografts in 20 patients. RESULTS: Operative mortality was 18+/-2% and was independent of replacement valve type (p > 0.74). Long-term survival was superior for patients with native valve endocarditis (44+/-5% at 20 years) compared with those with prosthetic valve endocarditis (16+/-7% at 20 years) (p < 0.003). Survival was independent of valve type (p > 0.27). The long-term freedom from reoperation for patients who received a biologic valve who were younger than 60 years of age was low (51+/-5% at 10 years, 19+/-6% at 15 years). For patients older than 60 years, however, freedom from reoperation with a biological valve (84+/-7% at 15 years) was similar to that for all patients with mechanical valves (74+/-9% at 15 years) (p > 0.64). CONCLUSIONS: Mechanical valves are most suitable for younger patients with native valve endocarditis; however, tissue valves are acceptable for patients greater than 60 years of age with native or prosthetic valve infections and for selected younger patients with prosthetic valve infections because of their limited life expectancy.     

Allograft Aortic Root Replacement in Prosthetic Aortic Valve Endocarditis: A Review of 32 Patients

Background. This study was conducted to evaluate allograft aortic root replacement in the setting of complicated prosthetic valve endocarditis with extensive annular destruction.

Methods. From January 1990 through March 1996, 32 patients diagnosed with complicated prosthetic valve endocarditis underwent allograft root replacement. Mean age was 58.3 ± 13.2 years; 23 patients were men. Mean preoperative New York Heart Association functional class was 3.4. Staphylococcus epidermidis (50%) and Enterococcus faecalis (19%) were the predominant causative microorganisms. Annular abscesses were found in 26 patients (81%), aortic-mitral discontinuity in 14 patients (43%), and left ventricular-aortic discontinuity in 11 patients (34%). A cryopreserved allograft was used in 31 patients (97%) and a fresh antibiotic-treated allograft was used in 1 patient (3%). Mean aortic cross-clamp time was 150 ± 29 minutes. Mean duration of the postoperative antibiotic treatment was 38.5 ± 11.8 days.

Results. There were three operative deaths (9.4%); causes of death were multiorgan failure in 2 patients (6.2%) and low cardiac output in 1 patient (3.2%). Six patients (18%) had complete heart block (4 patients already before the operation), 3 patients (9.4%) had temporary respiratory insufficiency, and 1 patient (3.2%) needed temporary hemodialysis. Mean follow-up was 37.4 ± 22.4 months. Two late deaths occurred: 1 patient had recurrent endocarditis, leading to a false aneurysm, and died at reoperation; another patient died of lung cancer. Actuarial 5-year survival was 87.3% (70% confidence interval, 76.8% to 97.8%); actuarial 5-year freedom from recurrent endocarditis was 96.5% (70% confidence interval, 90.0% to 100%)

Conclusions. Allograft aortic root replacement is a valuable technique in the complex setting of prosthetic valve endocarditis with involvement of the periannular region. Mortality and morbidity are low.     

Surgical treatment of paravalvular abscess: long-term results.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the outcomes of surgery for active infective endocarditis with paravalvular abscess. METHODS: Paravalvular abscess was defined as infective necrosis of the valve annulus that required patch reconstruction before implanting a new valve. Of 383 patients with active infective endocarditis who underwent surgical treatment, 135 (35%) had paravalvular abscess. Patients' mean age was 51+/-16 years and 68% were men. The infected valve was native in 69 patients and prosthetic in 66. The abscess involved the aortic annulus in 73 patients, the mitral annulus in 27, the aortic and mitral annuluses in 33, and the aortic and tricuspid and/or pulmonary annuluses in 2. Surgery consisted of radical resection of the abscess, reconstruction of the annulus with patches and valve replacement. Mean follow-up was 6.2+/-5.2 years and complete. RESULTS: There were 21 (15.5%) operative deaths. Preoperative shock and abscess in the aortic and mitral annuluses were independent predictors of operative death. There were 34 (25%) late deaths. Survival at 15 years was 43+/-6% for all patients, 50+/-8% for native valve endocarditis and 35+/-9% for prosthetic (p=0.41). Age by increments of 5 years and recurrent endocarditis were independent predictors of late death. There were 16 episodes of recurrent endocarditis in 15 patients, and the freedom from recurrent endocarditis was 82+/-4% at 15 years. Fifteen reoperations were performed in 14 patients. Freedom from reoperation was 72+/-9% at 15 years. CONCLUSIONS: Surgery for active endocarditis with paravalvular abscess was associated with high operative mortality, particularly in patients in shock and abscess of both mitral and aortic annuluses. Long-term survival was adversely affected by age and recurrent bouts of endocarditis.     

Medium-term results of aortic valve replacement with cryopreserved homograft valves: importance of a domestic homograft valve bank

There are advantages to using aortic homografts as aortic valve replacements (AVR), particularly in patients with complex infective endocarditis. To determine the importance of a domestic homograft valve bank, our 23 surgical cases of homograft-AVR were reviewed. Since 2000, the Tissue Bank of the National Cardiovascular Center has supplied 23 aortic homograft valves for the treatment of complex aortic valve endocarditis. Fourteen of 23 patients had prosthetic valve endocarditis and 20 patients had an aortic annular abscess. The early mortality rate was 17% (4 patients), in all of whom prosthetic valve replacement had been performed previously. No recurrent endocarditis and no recurrent aortic regurgitation were noted at medium-term follow-up. An aortic homograft valve is the conduit of choice in cases of infective endocarditis and the importance of a domestic homograft valve bank should be recognized.     

Reoperative cryopreserved root and ascending aorta replacement for acute aortic prosthetic valve endocarditis

BACKGROUND: Prosthetic aortic valve endocarditis (PVE) is an important complication of aortic valve replacement (AVR) and is a particularly difficult situation after an operation combining AVR with ascending aortic replacement. METHODS: From 1988 through 2000, 27 patients with aortic valve PVE after previous ascending aortic replacement (aortic root replacement in 13, aortic valve replacement with a supracoronary graft in 14) underwent reoperation for aortic root replacement with a cryopreserved aortic allograft and prolonged intravenous antibiotic therapy. All patients were considered to have active PVE (25 with positive cultures); root abscess formation was present in 89% and aortoventricular discontinuity in 41%. RESULTS: One patient (3.7%) died in-hospital, and permanent pacemakers were required in 10 patients (37%). Mean postoperative follow-up interval was 3.9 +/- 3.0 years, and survival at 1, 2, 5, and 7.5 years was 92%, 88%, 70%, and 56%, respectively. One patient underwent reoperation for recurrent PVE 8 months after operation. CONCLUSIONS: Radical debridement of infected prosthetic material and tissue, and allograft aortic root and ascending aorta replacement, combined with intravenous antibiotic therapy, appears to achieve a low hospital mortality and a high degree of freedom from recurrent infection for patients with PVE after AVR and ascending aortic replacement.     

Advantage of autograft and homograft valve replacement for complex aortic valve endocarditis

Background. There are advantages to using homografts and autografts as aortic valve replacements, particularly in patients with infective endocarditis. To better define these advantages, we reviewed our 13-year experience with the surgical management of infective endocarditis involving the aortic valve and root.

Methods. From 1986 through 1998, 81 adults with aortic valve endocarditis underwent valve replacement (AVR). The mean age of the 65 men and 16 women was 44 ± 14 years. Sixty-three (78%) patients had active endocarditis at the time of operation. Non-native valve endocarditis was present in 29 (36%) patients, in 9 of whom the infection was a recurrence. Aortic valve replacements were performed with 46 homografts (homo-AVR), 25 autografts (Ross-AVR), and 10 prosthetic valves (prosth-AVR). Among Ross-AVR and homo-AVR patients, 11 required mitral valve replacement or repair (homo-Ross DVR). Follow-up was 90% complete within 2 years of the end of the study with a mean of 3.7 ± 3.4 years.

Results. Early mortality was 16% (13 of 81 patients). This was 12% (3 of 25 patients) for Ross-AVR, 17% (8 of 46 patients) for homo-AVR, and 20% (2 of 10 patients) for prosth-AVR. Overall late mortality was 10% (7 of 68 patients) with a valve-related late mortality of 7% (5 of 68 patients). Actuarial survival at 5 years was 88% ± 9% in Ross-AVR, 69% ± 11% in homo-AVR, and 29% ± 22% in prosth-AVR (p = 0.03). Endocarditis recurred in 12.5% (1 of 8 patients) with prosth-AVR and 3% (2 of 60 patients) in homo-Ross AVR.

Conclusions. Valve replacement in the presence of native and prosthetic endocarditis remains a formidable challenge. Autografts and homografts are the preferred replacement aortic valves for these patients even if concomitant mitral valve replacement is required, and risk of valve-related death or recurrent endocarditis is low at medium-term follow-up.     

Replacing the ascending aorta and aortic valve for acute prosthetic valve endocarditis: is using prosthetic material contraindicated?

BACKGROUND: The use of prosthetic material (rather than a homograft) for ascending aorta/aortic valve replacement (Bentall procedure) in cases of acute prosthetic valve endocarditis is controversial. We report favorable results using this technique almost exclusively (a homograft was used in only 3 patients with hematological problems) during a 12-year interval. METHODS: Twenty-eight patients (55 +/- 14 years; 22 male) underwent a Bentall procedure for acute prosthetic valve endocarditis between 1988 and 2000. Twenty-five patients had undergone previous aortic valve replacement (1 with concomitant mitral valve replacement, 4 with coronary artery bypass grafting), and 3 had had a previous Bentall operation. The median interval between initial surgery and reoperation was 13 months (range, 1 to 106). Sixty-eight percent of operations were urgent or emergencies. Ninety-three percent of patients had significant aortic regurgitation; complete annuloaortic dehiscence occurred in 71%, and in 57%, an abscess was found. Causative organisms were identified in 25 of 28 patients: Staphylococcus epidermidis (9), Staphylococcus aureus (7), Streptococcus viridans (6), Pseudomonas (2), and Legionella (1). RESULTS: Twenty-three patients had mechanical and 5 had biological valves implanted during the Bentall procedure. Hypothermic circulatory arrest was used in 64%. Hospital mortality was 11%: there was one intraoperative death, and two before discharge (one cardiac, one sepsis). Eighty-nine percent survived without stroke. During follow-up (median, 44.5 months; complete in 92%), 1 patient died of recurrent endocarditis at 4 months. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that prosthetic root replacement may be superior to use of a homograft for acute aortic prosthetic valve endocarditis, with only a 4% incidence of recurrent endocarditis and reoperation.     

Sixteen-year experience with aortic root replacement. Results of 172 operations.

During a 16-year interval ending in October 1990, 168 patients underwent 172 aortic root replacements. Thirty patients (18%) had Marfan syndrome. Annuloaortic ectasia (81 patients) and aortic dissection (63 patients) were the principal indications for operation. Twenty-seven patients (16%) had previous operations on the ascending aorta or aortic valve. The hospital mortality rate was 5% and the duration of cardiopulmonary bypass was the only significant independent predictor of early death (p = 0.017). Major modifications in technique were made in 1981, when the inclusion/wrap technique employing a composite graft (used in the first 105 procedures) was abandoned in favor of an open technique (used in 51 procedures), and in 1988, when aortic allografts and pulmonary autografts were introduced for selected conditions (reoperations, dissection, endocarditis, isolated aortic valve disease) in 16 patients. The mean duration of follow-up was 81 months. Forty-six patients were followed for more than 10 years. The actuarial survival rate was 61% at 7 years and 48% at 12 years. No significant difference in survival rate was observed between the patients with annuloaortic ectasia and aortic dissection, or between the inclusion/wrap and open techniques. However the frequency of pseudoaneurysm formation at suture lines and the frequency of reoperations on the ascending aorta and aortic valve were less with the open technique. The actuarial freedom from thromboembolism for the 152 patients with prosthetic valves was 82% at 12 years. One early and one late death occurred among the 16 patients with allograft or autograft root replacement. Anticoagulant therapy was not used in these patients and no thromboembolic episodes occurred in the follow-up period (mean, 7 months). The satisfactory results observed with extended follow-up support the continued use of the composite graft technique as the preferred method of treatment for patients with annuloaortic ectasia, persistent aneurysms of the sinuses of Valsalva following previous operations, and for patients with ascending aortic dissection who require aortic valve replacement. The availability of aortic root allografts and the perfection of techniques for safe implantation of the autologous pulmonary root into the aortic position have broadened the indications for aortic root replacement.     

More than ten years' follow-up of the Hancock porcine bioprosthesis in Japan.

From February 1975 through October 1981, 256 Hancock porcine bioprostheses (Johnson & Johnson Cardiovascular, King of Prussia, Pa.) (60 aortic, 169 mitral, and 27 pulmonary/tricuspid position) were implanted in 220 patients (104 male and 116 female, aged 9 to 67 years; mean 43.3) at Kyushu University Hospital in Japan. The procedures include 41 aortic valve replacements, 121 mitral valve replacements, 4 pulmonary valve replacements, 6 tricuspid valve replacements, and 48 combined valve replacements (31 aortic plus mitral, 13 mitral plus tricuspid, and 4 aortic plus mitral plus tricuspid). Hospital mortality was 6.4%. Follow-up was 98% during 8 to 14 (mean 10.5) years. Cumulative follow-up was 1836 patient-years and 2078 valve-years. At 10 years the overall actuarial survival rate, including hospital morality, was 70% +/- 3%, and freedom from valve-related mortality with sudden death was 87% +/- 3%. More than half of the current survivors required no anticoagulant therapy. Freedom from thromboembolism or anticoagulant-related hemorrhage (or both) and prosthetic valve endocarditis was common. Freedom from structural valve failure and reoperation declined more than 9 years after replacement of left-sided heart valves but not after replacement of right-sided heart valves. Sixty-seven patients underwent 68 repeat operations, and there were four deaths (5.9%). The rate of freedom from overall valve-related complications at 10 years was 62% +/- 8% for aortic valve replacement, 53% +/- 5% for mitral valve replacement, 80% +/- 13% for pulmonary/tricuspid valve replacement, and 42% +/- 9% for combined valve replacement. There was a significant difference between pulmonary/tricuspid valve replacement and combined valve replacement (p less than 0.05). The Hancock bioprosthesis is suitable for the replacement of valves in the right side of the heart but not for combined valve replacement.     

Aortic root replacement in patients with previous heart surgery

OBJECTIVE: The objective was to review the operative risk and outcomes of redo aortic root replacement. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From July 1990 to December 2001, aortic root replacement was performed in 165 patients who had at least one previous cardiac operation. Their mean age was 49 +/- 16 years and 78% were men. Twenty-eight patients had a previous aortic root replacement. The principal indication for surgery was prosthetic aortic valve dysfunction. All the patients had a dilated, calcified, ruptured, or some other abnormality of the aortic root. The follow-up was complete and extended from 0 to 12.5 years, mean of 3.8 years. RESULTS: There were 12 operative (7%) and 20 late deaths (12%). The survival at 8 years was 68%+/- 6%. The principal cause of death was cardiovascular related. Age at increments of 5 years (risk ratio: 1.2; CI: 95%; 1.1 to 1.4) and preoperative New York Heart Association functional class IV (risk ratio: 2.2; CI: 95%: 1.1 to 4.7) were the only two independent predictors of death. Two patients had a stroke and died; two patients developed three episodes of prosthetic valve endocarditis and died. Three patients were reoperated on because of endocarditis in one, bioprosthetic valve failure in one, and dehiscence of a prosthetic mitral valve in one. The freedom from reoperation at 8 years was 93%+/- 5%. CONCLUSIONS: Redo aortic root replacement can be done with low operative mortality in elective patients and the risk increases in those who need emergent surgery and are older. The long-term results are satisfactory and similar to those for patients who have aortic root replacement for the first time.     

Allograft aortic root replacement in complex prosthetic endocarditis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate perioperative and long-term results of complex prosthetic valve endocarditis treated by allograft aortic root replacement. METHODS: From April 1988 through February 2006, 41 patients diagnosed as prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE) complicated by root abscess and/or periprosthetic leak, underwent fresh allograft valve replacement by root replacement. There were 37 males (89.7%) and the mean age was 51.5+/-13.7 years. The NYHA functional class was 3.0+/-0.1. Thirty-seven patients (90%) had a mechanical prosthesis and in 10 (25.6%) the PVE was recent (< 3 months). Ten patients (24.4%) underwent emergency valve replacement and four (9.8%) presented with chronic renal failure. The patients were followed for a mean of 54.3 (2-166) months and the end-points were death of the patient or allograft failure. RESULTS: There were two hospital deaths (4.8%), both in patients with perioperative low cardiac output. Nine patients had transient acute renal failure (22.0%) but none required dialysis. Three patients (7.3%) needed pacemaker for complete A-V block. Eight patients (19.5%) died late; two died of cardiac reasons, four of non-cardiac reasons (stroke-one; acute colecystitis-two; traffic accident-two) and two of unknown cause. Two patients needed reoperation due to allograft failure at 61 and 82 months. In no case was there evidence of recurrence of endocarditis during the follow-up. The 10-year survival was 79%. CONCLUSIONS: Allograft aortic root replacement in prosthetic endocarditis complicated by abscess and/or periprosthetic leakage carries low morbidity and mortality and, in this series, no recurrence of infection. In our experience, these results are superior to those obtained with other valvular substitutes.     

Allografts for aortic valve or root replacement: insights from an 18-year single-center prospective follow-up study.

OBJECTIVE: Whether allografts are the biological valve of choice for AVR in non-elderly patients remains a topic of debate. In this light we analyzed our ongoing prospective allograft AVR cohort and compared allograft durability with other biological aortic valve substitutes. METHODS: Between April 1987 and October 2005, 336 patients underwent 346 allograft AVRs (95 subcoronary, 251 root replacement). Patient and perioperative characteristics, cumulative survival, freedom from reoperation, and valve-related events were analyzed. Using microsimulation, for adult patients, age-matched actual freedom from allograft reoperation was compared to porcine and pericardial bioprostheses. RESULTS: Mean age was 45 years (range 1 month to 83 years); 72% were males. Etiology was mainly endocarditis 32% (active 22%), congenital 31%, degenerative 9%, and aneurysm/dissection 12%. Twenty-seven percent underwent prior cardiac surgery. Hospital mortality was 5.5% (N=19). During follow-up (mean 7.4 years, maximum 18.5 years, 98% complete), 54 patients died; there were 57 valve-related reoperations (3 early technical, 11 non-structural, 39 structural valve deterioration (SVD), 4 endocarditis), 5 cerebrovascular accidents, 1 fatal bleeding, 8 endocarditis. Twelve-year cumulative survival was 71% (SE 3), freedom from reoperation for SVD 77% (SE 4); younger patient age was associated with increased SVD rates. Actual risk of allograft reoperation was comparable to porcine and pericardial bioprostheses in a simulated age-matched population. CONCLUSIONS: The use of allografts for AVR is associated with low occurrence rates of most valve-related events, but over time the risk of SVD increases, comparable to stented xenografts. It remains in our institute the preferred valve substitute only for patients with active aortic root endocarditis and for patients in whom anticoagulation should be avoided.     

Long-term survival after aortic valve replacement for native active infective endocarditis

Background: The objective of this study was to analyse the impact of acute surgery for native aortic valve endocarditis and its influence on the long-term prognosis after surgery. Methods: A total of 161 patients underwent aortic valve replacement for native active aortic valve endocarditis (NAAVE) during a 29-year period, from 1967 to 1995 (age range: 10 to 72 years; mean 48 ± 12). The main indication for surgery was progressive congestive heart failure (76%). Other indications were unbeatable sepsis (27%), peripheral or central emboli (12%) and, from 1978, echocardiographic evidence of friable, pedunculated vegetations (3%). Streptococcal and staphylococcal infections predominated. Concomitant procedures were performed in 27% of the patients, including mitral and tricuspid valve surgery and coronary bypass procedures. Results: Operative mortality was 8% in the majority of cases caused by heart failure or multiorgan failure. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified NYHA class IV to be an independent predictor for postoperative death. Long-term survival for discharged patients was 75% at 10 years and 58% at 15 years, with a mortality rate of 3.6%/patient/year. Cox regression analysis identified the year of operation, trivalvular endocarditis and staphylococcal infection as independent predictors of survival. At 10 and 15 years after aortic valve replacement, 91% and 84% of the patients, respectively, were free of recurrent endocarditis. The presence of an abscess cavity at first operation was found to be predictive of recurrent endocarditis. Conclusions: Valve replacement for NAAVE offers a good chance for a cure and satisfactory long-term survival. Improvements in pre- and per-op-rative management of the very ill patient, and the use of allograft valves are likely to further improve long-term results. Finally, the presence of staphylococcal endocarditis requires long-term postoperative antibiotic therapy.