Yama Haqzad1, Mahmoud Loubani2, Mubarak Chaudhry2, Priyadharshanan Ariyaratnam2, Norman Briffa3. 1. Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Castle Hill Hospital, Cottingham, UK yama.haqzad@hey.nhs.uk. 2. Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Castle Hill Hospital, Cottingham, UK. 3. Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Northern General Hospital, Sheffield, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Studies suggest that the use of semicontinuous suture (SC) technique increases the risk of redo valve surgery after aortic valve replacement (AVR). The objective of this study was to identify 30-day mortality, rate of redo operation and long-term outcomes after AVR using either a semicontinuous suture or interrupted suture (IS) technique. METHODS: A total of 1617 patients from 2 cardiothoracic centres, undergoing isolated AVR between April 2005 and August 2013 were included. AVR was performed using SC technique in 765 patients and IS technique in 852 patients. Data were collected prospectively and follow-up was obtained to date for all patients. We compared 30-day mortality, rate of redo operation and long-term mortality in SC and IS groups. One-to-one propensity-matching analysis was performed using IBM SPSS version 22 to evaluate outcomes. RESULTS: Four hundred and eleven patients in the SC group were matched to 411 patients in the IS group (total of 822 patients) using propensity-score matching. The baseline characteristics were similar between SC and IS groups after matching. There were no statistically significant differences in 30-day mortality (3.9 vs 2.7%; P = 0.328), long-term mortality at 9-year follow-up (14.4 vs 15.3%; log-rank = 0.524) or rate of redo surgery (2.9 vs 2.0%; P = 0.320) between SC and IS, respectively. However, shorter cross-clamp time (51.9 ± 15.2 vs 60.9 ± 17.6 min; P < 0.001), bypass time (71.3 ± 23.0 vs 81.3 ± 37.8 min; P < 0.001) and the use of larger valve sizes (23.4 ± 2.1 vs 21.9 ± 2.2 mm; P < 0.001) were observed in SC patients compared with IS patients. Multivariate analysis did not show the suture technique as a significant determinant of redo valve surgery. CONCLUSIONS: This multicentre study demonstrates that neither mortality nor the risk of redo surgery was influenced by the choice of implantation technique using semicontinuous vs interrupted suture techniques. The SC technique allowed shorter operations and larger size valves to be utilized.
OBJECTIVES: Studies suggest that the use of semicontinuous suture (SC) technique increases the risk of redo valve surgery after aortic valve replacement (AVR). The objective of this study was to identify 30-day mortality, rate of redo operation and long-term outcomes after AVR using either a semicontinuous suture or interrupted suture (IS) technique. METHODS: A total of 1617 patients from 2 cardiothoracic centres, undergoing isolated AVR between April 2005 and August 2013 were included. AVR was performed using SC technique in 765 patients and IS technique in 852 patients. Data were collected prospectively and follow-up was obtained to date for all patients. We compared 30-day mortality, rate of redo operation and long-term mortality in SC and IS groups. One-to-one propensity-matching analysis was performed using IBM SPSS version 22 to evaluate outcomes. RESULTS: Four hundred and eleven patients in the SC group were matched to 411 patients in the IS group (total of 822 patients) using propensity-score matching. The baseline characteristics were similar between SC and IS groups after matching. There were no statistically significant differences in 30-day mortality (3.9 vs 2.7%; P = 0.328), long-term mortality at 9-year follow-up (14.4 vs 15.3%; log-rank = 0.524) or rate of redo surgery (2.9 vs 2.0%; P = 0.320) between SC and IS, respectively. However, shorter cross-clamp time (51.9 ± 15.2 vs 60.9 ± 17.6 min; P < 0.001), bypass time (71.3 ± 23.0 vs 81.3 ± 37.8 min; P < 0.001) and the use of larger valve sizes (23.4 ± 2.1 vs 21.9 ± 2.2 mm; P < 0.001) were observed in SC patients compared with IS patients. Multivariate analysis did not show the suture technique as a significant determinant of redo valve surgery. CONCLUSIONS: This multicentre study demonstrates that neither mortality nor the risk of redo surgery was influenced by the choice of implantation technique using semicontinuous vs interrupted suture techniques. The SC technique allowed shorter operations and larger size valves to be utilized.
Authors: Lars Englberger; Hartzell V Schaff; W R Eric Jamieson; Elizabeth D Kennard; Kyung A Im; Richard Holubkov; Thierry P Carrel Journal: Eur J Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2005-11-07 Impact factor: 4.191
Authors: J R González-Juanatey; J M García-Acuña; M Vega Fernandez; A Amaro Cendón; V Castelo Fuentes; J B García-Bengoechea; M G de la Peña Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 1996-08 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Marc Ruel; Hussam Al-Faleh; Alexander Kulik; Kwan L Chan; Thierry G Mesana; Ian G Burwash Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2006-05 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Alec Vahanian; Ottavio Alfieri; Felicita Andreotti; Manuel J Antunes; Gonzalo Barón-Esquivias; Helmut Baumgartner; Michael Andrew Borger; Thierry P Carrel; Michele De Bonis; Arturo Evangelista; Volkmar Falk; Bernard Lung; Patrizio Lancellotti; Luc Pierard; Susanna Price; Hans-Joachim Schäfers; Gerhard Schuler; Janina Stepinska; Karl Swedberg; Johanna Takkenberg; Ulrich Otto Von Oppell; Stephan Windecker; Jose Luis Zamorano; Marian Zembala Journal: Eur J Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2012-08-25 Impact factor: 4.191