Aortic Root Enlargement Is Safe and Reduces the Incidence of Patient-Prosthesis Mismatch: A Meta-analysis of Early and Late Outcomes

被引:39
|
作者
Yu, Wanqing [1 ]
Tam, Derrick Y. [1 ,2 ]
Rocha, Rodolfo V. [3 ]
Makhdoum, Ahmad [1 ]
Ouzounian, Maral [3 ]
Fremes, Stephen E. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Toronto, Sunnybrook Hlth Sci Ctr, Schulich Heart Ctr, Div Cardiac Surg,Dept Surg, Toronto, ON, Canada
[2] Univ Toronto, Inst Hlth Policy Management & Evaluat, Toronto, ON, Canada
[3] Univ Toronto, Univ Hlth Network, Peter Munk Cardiac Ctr, Div Cardiac Surg,Dept Surg, Toronto, ON, Canada
关键词
VALVE-REPLACEMENT; TRANSCATHETER; STENOSIS; TERM; IMPLANTATION; STENTLESS; SURVIVAL; RISK; ERA;
D O I
10.1016/j.cjca.2019.02.004
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: Aortic root enlargement (ARE) may be an important adjunct to aortic valve replacement (AVR) to prevent patient-prosthesis mismatch and facilitate future valve-in-valve transcatheter AVR (TAVR). However, the early safety and late benefits of adding surgical ARE to AVR remain controversial. Methods: MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched from 1946 to 2018 for articles comparing patients undergoing AVR+ARE with those undergoing AVR alone. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed to compare early and late clinical outcomes. Results: A total of 2570 AVR+ARE and 5,991 AVR patients were included from 9 observational studies. There was no difference in early mortality (relative risk [RR] 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.94-1.54; P = 0.13). Both cardiopulmonary bypass (mean difference [MD] 20 minutes; 95% CI, 15-25; P < 0.01) and aortic cross-clamp time (MD 14 minutes; 95% CI, 11-17, P < 0.01) were higher following AVR+ARE. There was no difference in the risk of permanent pacemaker implantation (RR 1.02; 95% CI, 0.83-1.25; P = 0.86), reoperation for bleeding (RR 1.05; 95% CI, 0.84-1.32; P = 0.64), or stroke (RR 0.93; 95% CI, 0.68-1.27; P = 0.65). The risk of moderate (indexed effective orifice area [iEOA] < 0.85 cm(2)/m(2)) and severe (iEOA < 0.65 cm(2)/m(2)) patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) was lower with AVR+ARE (RR 0.65; 95% CI, 0.51-0.83; P < 0.01) and RR 0.36; 95% CI, 0.16-0.82; P = 0.01, respectively). There was no difference in late mortality (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 1.05; 95% CI, 0.87-1.27; P = 0.59) at mean 7.8-year follow-up in 5 studies. Conclusions: Surgical ARE is a safe adjunct to AVR in selected patients that does not increase early adverse events and results in less patient-prosthesis mismatch. This strategy allows for a larger valve size at the time of implantation, an important consideration for potential future valve-in-valve procedures in the era of TAVR.
引用
收藏
页码:782 / 790
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Aortic Root Enlargement-Is It a Safe and Effective Approach to Prevent Patient-Prosthesis Mismatch and Is It for Everyone?
    Lazar, Harold L.
    CANADIAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY, 2019, 35 (06) : 707 - 709
  • [2] Aortic root enlargement to mitigate patient-prosthesis mismatch: do early adverse events justify reluctance?
    Haunschild, Josephina
    Scharnowski, Sven
    Mende, Meinhard
    von Aspern, Konstantin
    Misfeld, Martin
    Mohr, Friedrich-Wilhelm
    Borger, MichaelA.
    Etz, Christian D.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CARDIO-THORACIC SURGERY, 2019, 56 (02) : 335 - 342
  • [3] Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch and Aortic Root Enlargement: Indications, Techniques and Outcomes
    Fazmin, Ibrahim Talal
    Ali, Jason M.
    JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR DEVELOPMENT AND DISEASE, 2023, 10 (09)
  • [4] Predicting patient-prosthesis mismatch by aortic root evaluation before aortic valve replacement
    Maeda, Koichi
    Kuratani, Toru
    Yoshioka, Daisuke
    Pak, Kyongsun
    Shimamura, Kazuo
    Toda, Koichi
    Sawa, Yoshiki
    JOURNAL OF THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY, 2019, 158 (01) : 61 - +
  • [5] Early outcomes of patient-prosthesis mismatch following aortic valve replacement
    Aitaliyev, Serik
    Rumbinaite, Egle
    Melinyte-Ankudavice, Karolina
    Nekrosius, Rokas
    Keturakis, Vytenis
    Benetis, Rimantas
    PERFUSION-UK, 2022, 37 (07): : 692 - 699
  • [6] Benchmarking Outcomes: Reoperation for Aortic Valve Patient-Prosthesis Mismatch
    Keeling, William B.
    Beckerman, Ziv
    Wei, Jane
    Binongo, Jose
    Leshnower, Bradley G.
    Chen, Edward P.
    ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY, 2021, 111 (05) : 1472 - 1477
  • [7] Surgical versus transcatheter aortic valve replacement: Impact of patient-prosthesis mismatch on outcomes
    Alnajar, Ahmed
    Hamad, Naser
    Azhar, Muhammad Z.
    Mousa, Yaseen
    Arora, Yingyot
    Lamelas, Joseph
    JOURNAL OF CARDIAC SURGERY, 2022, 37 (12) : 5388 - 5394
  • [8] Effects of Patient-Prosthesis Mismatch on Postoperative Early Mortality in Isolated Aortic Stenosis
    Rabus, Murat B.
    Kirali, Kaan
    Kayalar, Nihan
    Mataraci, Ilker
    Yanartas, Mehmet
    Ulusoy-Bozbuga, Nilgun
    Yakut, Cevat
    JOURNAL OF HEART VALVE DISEASE, 2009, 18 (01) : 18 - 27
  • [9] The impact of patient-prosthesis mismatch on late outcomes after mitral valve replacement
    Lam, Buu-Khanh
    Chan, Vincent
    Hendry, Paul
    Ruel, Marc
    Masters, Roy
    Bedard, Pierre
    Goldstein, Bill
    Rubens, Fraser
    Mesana, Thierry
    JOURNAL OF THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY, 2007, 133 (06) : 1464 - 1472
  • [10] Patient-Prosthesis Mismatch After Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement: Analysis of the PARTNER Trials
    Thourani, Vinod H.
    Abbas, Amr E.
    Ternacle, Julien
    Hahn, Rebecca T.
    Makkar, Raj
    Kodali, Susheel K.
    George, Isaac
    Kapadia, Samir
    Svensson, Lars G.
    Szeto, Wilson Y.
    Herrmann, Howard C.
    Ailawadi, Gorav
    Leipsic, Jonathon
    Blanke, Philipp
    Webb, John
    Jaber, Wael A.
    Russo, Mark
    Malaisrie, S. Chris
    Yadav, Pradeep
    Clavel, Marie-Annick
    Khalique, Omar K.
    Weissman, Neil J.
    Douglas, Pamela
    Bax, Jeroen
    Dahou, Abdellaziz
    Xu, Ke
    Bapat, Vinayak
    Alu, Maria C.
    Leon, Martin B.
    Mack, Michael J.
    Pibarot, Philippe
    ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY, 2024, 117 (06) : 1164 - 1171