Manuel Caceres1, Yicheng Ma2, J Scott Rankin3, Paramita Saha-Chaudhuri2, Brian R Englum2, James S Gammie4, Rakesh M Suri5, Vinod H Thourani6, Fardad Esmailian7, Lawrence S Czer7, John D Puskas6, Lars G Svensson8. 1. Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Cedars Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA Department of Cardiac Surgery, Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Memphis, TN, USA. 2. Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC, USA. 3. Department of Cardiac Surgery, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA jsrankinmd@cs.com. 4. Division of Cardiac Surgery, University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD, USA. 5. Division of Cardiovascular Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. 6. Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA. 7. Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Cedars Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 8. Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Aortic root surgery is transitioning to aortic valve sparing (AVS), but little is known about the relative early outcomes of AVS versus composite graft-valve replacement (CVR). This study assessed mortality differences for AVS versus CVR to guide future practice decisions. METHODS: From January 2000 to June 2011, 31 747 patients had aortic root replacement with AVS (n = 3585; 11%) or CVR (n = 28 162; 89%). The cohort of Overall patients was divided into two subgroups: high-risk patients (n = 20 356; 6% AVS) having age >75 years, endocarditis, aortic stenosis, dialysis, multiple valves, reoperation or emergency/salvage status, and the remaining low-risk patients (n = 11 388; 21% AVS). Using logistic regression analysis, outcomes were presented as unadjusted operative mortality (UOM), risk-adjusted operative mortality (AOM) and adjusted odds ratio (AOR) for mortality. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics for the Overall group (AVS versus CVR) were: mean age (52 vs 57 years), endocarditis (1 vs 11%), aortic stenosis (4 vs 36%), dialysis (1 vs 2%), multiple valves (7 vs 10%), reoperation (6 vs 17%) and emergency status (14 vs 12%) (all P < 0.0001). In high- and low-risk groups, baseline differences narrowed, and lower mortality was generally observed with AVS: (AVS versus CVR) UOM group Overall (4.5 vs 8.9%)*, group High-risk (10.5 vs 11.7%), group Low-risk (1.4 vs 3.1%)*; AOM group Overall (6.2 vs 8.6%), group High-risk (10.1 vs 11.7%), group Low-risk (2.2 vs 2.8%); AOR group Overall (0.59)*, group High-risk (0.62)*, group Low-risk (0.69). *P < 0.05. CONCLUSIONS: Relative risk-adjusted mortality seemed comparable with AVS versus CVR in low- and high-risk subgroups. These data support judicious expansion of aortic valve repair in patients having aortic root replacement.
OBJECTIVES: Aortic root surgery is transitioning to aortic valve sparing (AVS), but little is known about the relative early outcomes of AVS versus composite graft-valve replacement (CVR). This study assessed mortality differences for AVS versus CVR to guide future practice decisions. METHODS: From January 2000 to June 2011, 31 747 patients had aortic root replacement with AVS (n = 3585; 11%) or CVR (n = 28 162; 89%). The cohort of Overall patients was divided into two subgroups: high-risk patients (n = 20 356; 6% AVS) having age >75 years, endocarditis, aortic stenosis, dialysis, multiple valves, reoperation or emergency/salvage status, and the remaining low-risk patients (n = 11 388; 21% AVS). Using logistic regression analysis, outcomes were presented as unadjusted operative mortality (UOM), risk-adjusted operative mortality (AOM) and adjusted odds ratio (AOR) for mortality. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics for the Overall group (AVS versus CVR) were: mean age (52 vs 57 years), endocarditis (1 vs 11%), aortic stenosis (4 vs 36%), dialysis (1 vs 2%), multiple valves (7 vs 10%), reoperation (6 vs 17%) and emergency status (14 vs 12%) (all P < 0.0001). In high- and low-risk groups, baseline differences narrowed, and lower mortality was generally observed with AVS: (AVS versus CVR) UOM group Overall (4.5 vs 8.9%)*, group High-risk (10.5 vs 11.7%), group Low-risk (1.4 vs 3.1%)*; AOM group Overall (6.2 vs 8.6%), group High-risk (10.1 vs 11.7%), group Low-risk (2.2 vs 2.8%); AOR group Overall (0.59)*, group High-risk (0.62)*, group Low-risk (0.69). *P < 0.05. CONCLUSIONS: Relative risk-adjusted mortality seemed comparable with AVS versus CVR in low- and high-risk subgroups. These data support judicious expansion of aortic valve repair in patients having aortic root replacement.
Authors: K Hammermeister; G K Sethi; W G Henderson; F L Grover; C Oprian; S H Rahimtoola Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2000-10 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: David M Shahian; Sean M O'Brien; Giovanni Filardo; Victor A Ferraris; Constance K Haan; Jeffrey B Rich; Sharon-Lise T Normand; Elizabeth R DeLong; Cynthia M Shewan; Rachel S Dokholyan; Eric D Peterson; Fred H Edwards; Richard P Anderson Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2009-07 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Tirone E David; Christopher M Feindel; Gary D Webb; Jack M Colman; Susan Armstrong; Manjula Maganti Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2006-07-10 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Lars G Svensson; Lillian H Batizy; Eugene H Blackstone; A Marc Gillinov; Michael C Moon; Richard S D'Agostino; Edward M Nadolny; William J Stewart; Brian P Griffin; Donald F Hammer; Richard Grimm; Bruce W Lytle Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2011-06-17 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Catalin Constantin Badiu; Walter Eichinger; Sabine Bleiziffer; Grit Hermes; Ina Hettich; Markus Krane; Robert Bauernschmitt; Rüdiger Lange Journal: Eur J Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2010-04-18 Impact factor: 4.191
Authors: J Matthew Brennan; Fred H Edwards; Yue Zhao; Sean O'Brien; Michael E Booth; Rachel S Dokholyan; Pamela S Douglas; Eric D Peterson Journal: Circulation Date: 2013-03-28 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Sreekumar Subramanian; Sergey Leontyev; Michael A Borger; Constanze Trommer; Martin Misfeld; Friedrich W Mohr Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2012-06-28 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Nishant D Patel; Eric S Weiss; Diane E Alejo; Lois U Nwakanma; Jason A Williams; Harry C Dietz; Philip J Spevak; Vincent L Gott; Luca A Vricella; Duke E Cameron Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2008-06 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Marc W Gerdisch; T Brett Reece; Dominic Emerson; Richard S Downey; Geoffrey B Blossom; Arun Singhal; Joshua N Baker; Theodor J M Fischlein; Vinay Badhwar Journal: JTCVS Tech Date: 2022-06-09
Authors: Alexander J Fletcher; Maaz B J Syed; Timothy J Aitman; David E Newby; Niki L Walker Journal: Circulation Date: 2020-05-11 Impact factor: 29.690