Literature DB >> 18805253

Is the European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation model valid for estimating the operative risk of patients considered for percutaneous aortic valve replacement?

Morgan L Brown1, Hartzell V Schaff, Maurice E Sarano, Zhuo Li, Thoralf M Sundt, Joseph A Dearani, Charles J Mullany, Thomas A Orszulak.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation has been used to define a particularly high-risk group of patients for aortic valve replacement in whom alternative procedures, such as stent-mounted percutaneous valve procedures, may be appropriate. Our objective was to assess the validity of this risk assessment at a large-volume, tertiary cardiac surgical center.
METHODS: From January 1, 2000, to December 30, 2006, a total of 1177 patients underwent isolated aortic valve replacement at the Mayo Clinic. Patient and operative demographics were recorded in a prospective database. Early mortality (< or = 30 days) was obtained. Additive and logistic European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluations were calculated for each patient.
RESULTS: The mean patient age was 68.0 years (+/-14.7 years) at the time of surgery, and 36.8% were female. Variables used in the calculation of the European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation included chronic lung disease (15% of our cohort), extracardiac arteriopathy (13.8%), neurologic dysfunction (0.2%), previous cardiac surgery (23.2%), renal failure (6.5%), active endocarditis (3.1%), recent myocardial infarction (1.1%), unstable angina (0.1%), and severe pulmonary hypertension (6.5%). The ejection fraction was severely reduced (< or = 30%) in 4.9% of patients and moderately reduced (< or = 50%) in 12.7% of patients. One percent of patients were in a critical state, and operation was performed urgently in 3.4% of patients. Although mean mortality estimates were 6.9% +/- 3.4% (additive European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation) and 10.9% +/- 12.7% (logistic European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation), actual overall operative mortality in our patients was 2.5%. Additive and logistic European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluations overestimated operative mortality in low, intermediate, and high-risk subgroups by up to 17.8%.
CONCLUSIONS: The European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation should not be used to determine the operability of patients for isolated aortic valve replacement. Elevated European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluations alone do not appropriately define a population for use of a percutaneous aortic valve.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18805253     DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2007.10.091

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg        ISSN: 0022-5223            Impact factor:   5.209


  11 in total

1.  External validation of modified EuroSCORE.

Authors:  Fausto Biancari; Jari Laurikka; Jan-Ola Wistbacka; Juha Nissinen; Matti Tarkka
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 3.352

2.  Long-term outcomes of isolated aortic valve replacement and concomitant AVR and coronary artery bypass grafting.

Authors:  G A de Waard; E K Jansen; M de Mulder; A B A Vonk; V A Umans
Journal:  Neth Heart J       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 2.380

Review 3.  Clinical studies assessing transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Authors:  Shaheena Raheem; Jeffrey J Popma
Journal:  Methodist Debakey Cardiovasc J       Date:  2012 Apr-Jun

4.  Percutaneous aortic valve implantation: the anesthesiologist perspective.

Authors:  R D Covello; G Landoni; I Michev; E Bignami; L Ruggeri; F Maisano; M Montorfano; O Alfieri; A Colombo; A Zangrillo
Journal:  HSR Proc Intensive Care Cardiovasc Anesth       Date:  2009

Review 5.  Risk scores for predicting outcomes in valvular heart disease: how useful?

Authors:  Michael J Mack
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 2.931

6.  ESC Working Group on Valvular Heart Disease Position Paper: assessing the risk of interventions in patients with valvular heart disease.

Authors:  Raphael Rosenhek; Bernard Iung; Pilar Tornos; Manuel J Antunes; Bernard D Prendergast; Catherine M Otto; Arie Pieter Kappetein; Janina Stepinska; Jens J Kaden; Christoph K Naber; Esmeray Acartürk; Christa Gohlke-Bärwolf
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2011-03-15       Impact factor: 29.983

Review 7.  Risk assessment methods for cardiac surgery and intervention.

Authors:  Nassir M Thalji; Rakesh M Suri; Kevin L Greason; Hartzell V Schaff
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2014-09-23       Impact factor: 32.419

Review 8.  Safety of percutaneous aortic valve insertion. A systematic review.

Authors:  Hans Van Brabandt; Mattias Neyt
Journal:  BMC Cardiovasc Disord       Date:  2009-09-01       Impact factor: 2.298

9.  EuroScore 2 for identification of patients for transapical aortic valve replacement--a single center retrospective in 206 patients.

Authors:  Andreas Goetzenich; Imke Deppe; Heike Schnöring; George L Gafencu; Dumitrita-Alina Gafencu; Hülya Yildirim; Lachmandath Tewarie; Jan Spillner; Ajay Moza
Journal:  J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2012-09-21       Impact factor: 1.637

10.  The European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation (EuroSCORE) is not appropriate for withholding surgery in high-risk patients with aortic stenosis: a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Dimitri Kalavrouziotis; Debbie Li; Karen J Buth; Jean-Francois Légaré
Journal:  J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2009-07-14       Impact factor: 1.637

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.