BACKGROUND: Double valve replacement for concomitant aortic and mitral valve disease is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. Excellent results with valve repair in isolated mitral valve lesions have been reported; therefore, whether its potential benefits would translate into better outcomes in patients with combined mitral-aortic disease was investigated. METHODS: A retrospective observational study was performed involving 341 patients who underwent aortic valve replacement with either mitral valve repair (n=42) or double valve replacement (n=299). Data were analyzed for early mortality, late valve-related complications and survival. RESULTS: The early mortality rate was 11.9% for valve repair and 11.0% for replacement (P=0.797). Survival (± SD) was 67±11% in mitral valve repair with aortic valve replacement and 81±3% in double valve replacement at five years of follow-up (P=0.187). The percentage of patients who did not experience major adverse valve-related events at five years of follow-up was 83±9% in those who underwent mitral valve repair with aortic valve replacement and 89±2% in patients who underwent double valve replacement (P=0.412). Age >70 years (HR 2.4 [95% CI 1.1 to 4.9]; P=0.023) and renal dysfunction (HR 1.9 [95% CI 1.2 to 3.7]; P=0.01) were independent predictors of decreased survival. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with double valve disease, both mitral valve repair and replacement provided comparable early outcomes. There were no significant differences in valve-related reoperations, anticoagulation-related complications or prosthetic valve endocarditis. Patient-related factors appear to be the major determinant of late survival, irrespective of the type of operation.
BACKGROUND: Double valve replacement for concomitant aortic and mitral valve disease is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. Excellent results with valve repair in isolated mitral valve lesions have been reported; therefore, whether its potential benefits would translate into better outcomes in patients with combined mitral-aortic disease was investigated. METHODS: A retrospective observational study was performed involving 341 patients who underwent aortic valve replacement with either mitral valve repair (n=42) or double valve replacement (n=299). Data were analyzed for early mortality, late valve-related complications and survival. RESULTS: The early mortality rate was 11.9% for valve repair and 11.0% for replacement (P=0.797). Survival (± SD) was 67±11% in mitral valve repair with aortic valve replacement and 81±3% in double valve replacement at five years of follow-up (P=0.187). The percentage of patients who did not experience major adverse valve-related events at five years of follow-up was 83±9% in those who underwent mitral valve repair with aortic valve replacement and 89±2% in patients who underwent double valve replacement (P=0.412). Age >70 years (HR 2.4 [95% CI 1.1 to 4.9]; P=0.023) and renal dysfunction (HR 1.9 [95% CI 1.2 to 3.7]; P=0.01) were independent predictors of decreased survival. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with double valve disease, both mitral valve repair and replacement provided comparable early outcomes. There were no significant differences in valve-related reoperations, anticoagulation-related complications or prosthetic valve endocarditis. Patient-related factors appear to be the major determinant of late survival, irrespective of the type of operation.
Authors: Roberto M Lang; Michelle Bierig; Richard B Devereux; Frank A Flachskampf; Elyse Foster; Patricia A Pellikka; Michael H Picard; Mary J Roman; James Seward; Jack S Shanewise; Scott D Solomon; Kirk T Spencer; Martin St John Sutton; William J Stewart Journal: J Am Soc Echocardiogr Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 5.251
Authors: Cary W Akins; D Craig Miller; Marko I Turina; Nicholas T Kouchoukos; Eugene H Blackstone; Gary L Grunkemeier; Johanna J M Takkenberg; Tirone E David; Eric G Butchart; David H Adams; David M Shahian; Siegfried Hagl; John E Mayer; Bruce W Lytle Journal: Eur J Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2008-03-04 Impact factor: 4.191
Authors: David B Badesch; Hunter C Champion; Miguel Angel Gomez Sanchez; Marius M Hoeper; James E Loyd; Alessandra Manes; Michael McGoon; Robert Naeije; Horst Olschewski; Ronald J Oudiz; Adam Torbicki Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2009-06-30 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: A Marc Gillinov; Eugene H Blackstone; Delos M Cosgrove; Jennifer White; Paul Kerr; Antonino Marullo; Patrick M McCarthy; Bruce W Lytle Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2003-06 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: E M Baudet; V Puel; J T McBride; J P Grimaud; F Roques; F Clerc; X Roques; N Laborde Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 1995-05 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Regina Maria de Aquino Xavier; Vitor Manuel Pereira Azevedo; Paulo Henrique Godoy; Arn Migowski; Antonio Luiz Pinho Ribeiro; Rogério Brant Martins Chaves; Marcelo Goulart Correia; Carolina de Aquino Xavier; Lucas de Aquino Hashimoto; Clara Weksler; Nelson Albuquerque Souza E Silva Journal: BMC Cardiovasc Disord Date: 2017-12-28 Impact factor: 2.298