Surgical Enlargement of the Aortic Root Does Not Increase the Operative Risk of Aortic Valve Replacement

被引:68
作者
Rocha, Rodolfo V. [1 ]
Manlhiot, Cedric [1 ]
Feindel, Christopher M. [1 ]
Yau, Terrence M. [1 ]
Mueller, Brigitte [1 ]
David, Tirone E. [1 ]
Ouzounian, Maral [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Toronto, Toronto Gen Hosp, Peter Munk Cardiac Ctr, Div Cardiac Surg, Toronto, ON, Canada
关键词
aortic valve replacement; outcome; propensity score; surgery; PROSTHESIS-PATIENT MISMATCH; LONG-TERM SURVIVAL; HEMODYNAMIC PERFORMANCE; HANCOCK II; NATIONAL DATABASE; PATCH ENLARGEMENT; CLINICAL IMPACT; FOLLOW-UP; BIOPROSTHESES; IMPLANTATION;
D O I
10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.117.030525
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
BACKGROUND: Surgical aortic root enlargement (ARE) during aortic valve replacement (AVR) allows for larger prosthesis implantation and may be an important adjunct to surgical AVR in the transcatheter valvein-valve era. The incremental operative risk of adding ARE to AVR has not been established. We aimed to evaluate the early outcomes of patients undergoing AVR with or without ARE. METHODS: From January 1990 to August 2014, 7039 patients underwent AVR (AVR+ARE, n=1854; AVR, n=5185) at a single institution. Patients with aortic dissection and active endocarditis were excluded. Mean age was 65 +/- 14 years and 63% were male. Logistic regression and propensity score matching were used to adjust for unbalanced variables in group comparisons. RESULTS: Patients undergoing AVR+ARE were more likely to be female (46% versus 34%, P<0.001) and had higher rates of previous cardiac surgery (18% versus 12%, P<0.001), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (5% versus 3%, P=0.004), urgent/emergent status (6% versus 4%, P=0.01), and worse New York Heart Association status (P<0.001). Most patients received bioprosthetic valves (AVR+ARE: 73.4% versus AVR: 73.3%, P=0.98) and also underwent concomitant cardiac procedures (AVR+ARE: 68% versus AVR: 67%, P=0.31). Mean prosthesis size implanted was slightly smaller in patients requiring AVR+ARE versus AVR (23.4 +/- 2.1 versus 24.1 +/- 2.3, P<0.001). In-hospital mortality was higher after AVR+ARE (4.3% versus 3.0%, P=0.008), although when the cohort was restricted to patients undergoing isolated aortic valve replacement with or without root enlargement, mortality was not statistically different (AVR+ARE: 1.7% versus AVR: 1.1%, P=0.29). After adjustment for baseline characteristics, AVR+ARE was not associated with an increased risk of in-hospital mortality when compared with AVR (odds ratio, 1.03; 95% confidence interval, 0.75-1.41; P=0.85). Furthermore, AVR+ARE was not associated with an increased risk of postoperative adverse events. Results were similar if propensity matching was used instead of multivariable adjustments for baseline characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: In the largest analysis to date, ARE was not associated with increased risk of mortality or adverse events. Surgical ARE is a safe adjunct to AVR in the modern era.
引用
收藏
页码:1585 / +
页数:20
相关论文
共 43 条
[1]   Guidelines for reporting mortality and morbidity after cardiac valve interventions [J].
Akins, Cary W. ;
Miller, D. Craig ;
Turina, Marko I. ;
Kouchoukos, Nicholas T. ;
Blackstone, Eugene H. ;
Grunkemeier, Gary L. ;
Takkenberg, Johanna J. M. ;
David, Tirone E. ;
Butchart, Eric G. ;
Adams, David H. ;
Shahian, David M. ;
Hagl, Siegfried ;
Mayer, John E. ;
Lytle, Bruce W. .
JOURNAL OF THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY, 2008, 135 (04) :732-738
[2]  
Austin PC, 2008, STAT MED, V27, P2037, DOI 10.1002/sim.3150
[3]   Some Methods of Propensity-Score Matching had Superior Performance to Others: Results of an Empirical Investigation and Monte Carlo simulations [J].
Austin, Peter C. .
BIOMETRICAL JOURNAL, 2009, 51 (01) :171-184
[4]   Stentless aortic valves are hemodynamically superior to stented valves during mid-term follow-up: A large retrospective study [J].
Borger, MA ;
Carson, SM ;
Ivanov, J ;
Rao, V ;
Scully, HE ;
Feindel, CM ;
David, TE .
ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY, 2005, 80 (06) :2180-2185
[5]   Carpentier-Edwards Perimount Magna valve versus Medtronic Hancock II: A matched hemodynamic comparison [J].
Borger, Michael A. ;
Nette, A. Franka ;
Maganti, Manjula ;
Feindel, Christopher M. .
ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY, 2007, 83 (06) :2054-2059
[6]   Isolated aortic valve replacement in North America comprising 108,687 patients in 10 years: Changes in risks, valve types, and outcomes in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons National Database [J].
Brown, James M. ;
O'Brien, Sean M. ;
Wu, Changfu ;
Sikora, Jo Ann H. ;
Griffith, Bartley P. ;
Gammie, James S. .
JOURNAL OF THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY, 2009, 137 (01) :82-90
[7]   Routine enlargement of the small aortic root: A preventive strategy to minimize mismatch [J].
Castro, LJ ;
Arcidi, JM ;
Fisher, AL ;
Gaudiani, VA .
ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY, 2002, 74 (01) :31-36
[8]   Long-Term Clinical and Hemodynamic Performance of the Hancock II Versus the Perimount Aortic Bioprostheses [J].
Chan, Vincent ;
Kulik, Alexander ;
Tran, Anthony ;
Hendry, Paul ;
Masters, Roy ;
Mesana, Thierry G. ;
Ruel, Marc .
CIRCULATION, 2010, 122 (11) :S10-S16
[9]   Comparison of the Hemodynamic Performance of Percutaneous and Surgical Bioprostheses for the Treatment of Severe Aortic Stenosis [J].
Clavel, Marie-Annick ;
Webb, John G. ;
Pibarot, Philippe ;
Altwegg, Lukas ;
Dumont, Eric ;
Thompson, Chris ;
De Larochelliere, Robert ;
Doyle, Daniel ;
Masson, Jean-Bernard ;
Bergeron, Sebastien ;
Bertrand, Olivier F. ;
Rodes-Cabau, Josep .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY, 2009, 53 (20) :1883-1891
[10]  
Collett D, 1994, MODELLING SURVIVAL D