Literature DB >> 14643803

Re-operation for bioprosthetic aortic structural failure - risk assessment.

W R E Jamieson1, L H Burr, R T Miyagishima, M T Janusz, G J Fradet, H Ling, S V Lichtenstein.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The predominant complication of bioprostheses is structural valve deterioration and the consequences of re-operation. Prosthesis choice for aortic valve replacement surgery (bioprostheses and mechanical prostheses), is influenced by valve-related complications (mortality and morbidity) of the prosthesis type chosen. The purpose of the study is to determine the mortality and risk assessment of that mortality for aortic bioprosthetic failure.
METHODS: From 1975 to 1999, 3356 patients received a heterograft bioprosthesis in 3530 operations. The procedures were performed with concomitant coronary artery bypass (CAB) in 1388 procedures and without in 2142 procedures. Three hundred twenty-two re-operations for structural valve deterioration were performed in 312 patients with 22 fatalities (6.8%). Of the 322 re-replacements, 36 had CAB and 286 had isolated replacement; the mortality was 8.3% (3) and 6.6% (19), respectively. Eleven predictive factors inclusive of age, concomitant CAB, urgency status, New York Heart Association (NYHA) at Re-op and year of Re-op (year periods) were considered.
RESULTS: The mortality for 1979-1986 was 6.1% (2/33); 1987-1992, 7.7% (8/104); and 1993-2000, 6.5% (12/185) (pNS). The mortality by urgency status for elective/urgent was 6.4% (19/299); and emergent, 13.0% (3/23) (pNS). The mortality for NYHA I/II was 2.0% (1/50), III 4.2% (8/191) and IV 16.0% (13/81) (P=0.00063), for gender was male 4.6% and female 13.3% (P=0.011), for age at implant 'No' (no re-operation) 51.6+/-12.2 years and 'Yes' (yes re-operation) 59.9+/-7.3 years (P=0.00004), for age at explant 'No' 62.6+/-12.7 years and 'Yes' 70.6+/-6.5 years (P=0.00001), and for age at explant <60 years 0.0% (0/110), 60-70 years 8.5% (10/117) and >70 years 12.6% (12/95) (P=0.0011). The predictive risk factor assessment by multivariate regression analysis revealed only NYHA III Odds Ratio 1.7 and IV 7.8 P=0.0082. For the period 1993-2000 of re-operations only gender was significant; age at implant, age at explant, CAB pre-Re-op, CAB concomitant with Re-op, urgency at Re-op, ejection fraction, valve lesion and NYHA at Re-op were not significant.
CONCLUSIONS: Bioprosthetic aortic re-operative mortality can be lowered by re-operation in low rather than medium to severe NYHA functional class. The routine evaluation of patients can achieve earlier low risk re-operative surgery.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14643803     DOI: 10.1016/s1010-7940(03)00566-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Cardiothorac Surg        ISSN: 1010-7940            Impact factor:   4.191


  15 in total

1.  Self-expandable transcatheter aortic valve implantation for aortic stenosis after mitral valve surgery.

Authors:  Giuseppe Bruschi; Federico De Marco; Alberto Barosi; Paola Colombo; Luca Botta; Sandra Nonini; Luigi Martinelli; Silvio Klugmann
Journal:  Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg       Date:  2013-03-28

Review 2.  Valve-in-valve implantations: is this the new standard for degenerated bioprostheses? Review of the literature.

Authors:  Krys Milburn; Vinayak Bapat; Martyn Thomas
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2014-01-21       Impact factor: 5.460

3.  Five-year epidemiological survey of valvular heart disease: changes in morbidity, etiological spectrum and management in a cardiovascular center of Southern China.

Authors:  Fang-Zhou Liu; Yu-Mei Xue; Hong-Tao Liao; Xian-Zhang Zhan; Hui-Ming Guo; Huan-Lei Huang; Xian-Hong Fang; Wei Wei; Fang Rao; Hai Deng; Yang Liu; Wei-Dong Lin; Shu-Lin Wu
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 2.895

4.  Choice of prosthetic heart valve in a developing country.

Authors:  Shiv Kumar Choudhary; Sachin Talwar; Balram Airan
Journal:  Heart Asia       Date:  2016-04-28

5.  Outcomes of reoperative aortic valve replacement after previous sternotomy.

Authors:  Damien J LaPar; Zequan Yang; George J Stukenborg; Benjamin B Peeler; John A Kern; Irving L Kron; Gorav Ailawadi
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2009-12-16       Impact factor: 5.209

6.  Long term outcomes of aortic root replacement: 18 years' experience.

Authors:  Ji Hyun Bang; Yu-Mi Im; Joon Bum Kim; Suk Jung Choo; Cheol Hyun Chung; Jae Won Lee; Sung-Ho Jung
Journal:  Korean J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2013-04-09

7.  Pregnancy outcome and follow-up cardiac outcome in women with aortic valve replacement.

Authors:  Snehalata Basude; Johanna Trinder; Massimo Caputo; Stephanie L Curtis
Journal:  Obstet Med       Date:  2014-01-15

8.  Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in a patient with previous mitral valve replacement.

Authors:  Sung Woo Moon; Young-Guk Ko; Geu-Ru Hong; Sak Lee; Byung-Chul Chang; Jae-Kwang Shim; Young-Ran Kwak; Myeong-Ki Hong
Journal:  Korean Circ J       Date:  2014-09-25       Impact factor: 3.243

9.  Effects of Transapical Transcatheter Mitral Valve Implantation.

Authors:  Ming-Chon Hsiung; Wei-Hsian Yin; Yung-Tsai Lee; Tien-Ping Tsao; Kuo-Chen Lee; Kuan-Chih Huang; Pei-En Chen; Wei-Hsuan Chiang; Tao-Hsin Tung; Jeng Wei
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2021-06-11

10.  Previous Sternotomy as a Risk Factor in Minimally Invasive Mitral Valve Surgery.

Authors:  Jan-Philipp Minol; Payam Akhyari; Udo Boeken; Alexander Albert; Philipp Rellecke; Vanessa Dimitrova; Stephan Urs Sixt; Hiroyuki Kamiya; Artur Lichtenberg
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2018-02-09
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.