Literature DB >> 29190355

Trends in practice and outcomes from 2011 to 2015 for surgical aortic valve replacement: an update from the German Aortic Valve Registry on 42 776 patients.

Buntaro Fujita1, Stephan Ensminger1, Timm Bauer2, Helge Möllmann3, Andreas Beckmann4, Raffi Bekeredjian5, Sabine Bleiziffer6, Elke Schäfer7, Christian W Hamm8, Friedrich W Mohr9, Hugo A Katus5, Wolfgang Harringer10, Thomas Walther11, Christian Frerker12.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Surgical aortic valve replacement (sAVR) is coming under close scrutiny with the recent upswing in the use of less invasive approaches. The aim of this analysis was to identify current trends in patient selection, procedural characteristics and outcomes after sAVR in Germany.
METHODS: We analysed data from 42 776 patients included in the German Aortic Valve Registry who underwent sAVR with and without coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) between 2011 and 2015. Baseline, procedural and short-term outcome parameters were analysed.
RESULTS: Of all registered patients, 26 618 (62.2%) underwent isolated sAVR and 16 158 (37.8%) sAVR + CABG. The median age was 72 years, and the median Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality (STS PROM) was 2.3%. From 2011 to 2015, there was a decline in STS PROM (2.4-2.2%, P < 0.001) and a decline in risk factors, such as pulmonary hypertension (9.1-3.2%, P < 0.001), occlusive arterial disease (19.6-17.7%, P = 0.003), mitral regurgitation ≥2° (10.6-7.6%, P < 0.001) and New York Heart Association Class III/IV (65.3-59.2%, P < 0.001). In-hospital mortality was 2.3%, 1.3% had disabling stroke, 0.4% residual aortic regurgitation ≥2°, and the incidence of new-onset pacemaker/implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation was 3.9%. There was an increase in the use of biological valves in patients <65 years (50.1-65.7%, P < 0.001), and the proportion of rapid deployment valves increased significantly (1.5-8.4%, P < 0.001) over the investigated time period.
CONCLUSIONS: Both isolated sAVR as well as sAVR + CABG resulted in excellent in-hospital outcomes based on >42 000 patients treated between 2011 and 2015. The implementation of alternative treatment strategies has resulted in palpable changes in patient and device selection.
© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29190355     DOI: 10.1093/ejcts/ezx408

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


  15 in total

Review 1.  [Hybrid operating theater].

Authors:  T Fuchs-Buder; N Settembre; D Schmartz
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 1.041

Review 2.  The Use of Biological Heart Valves.

Authors:  Sami Kueri; Fabian A Kari; Rafael Ayala Fuentes; Hans-Hinrich Sievers; Friedhelm Beyersdorf; Wolfgang Bothe
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2019-06-21       Impact factor: 5.594

3.  Left Ventricular Hypertrophy Does Not Affect 1-Year Clinical Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

Authors:  Anubodh S Varshney; Pratik Manandhar; Sreekanth Vemulapalli; Ajay J Kirtane; Verghese Mathew; Binita Shah; Angela Lowenstern; Andrzej S Kosinski; Tsuyoshi Kaneko; Vinod H Thourani; Deepak L Bhatt
Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2019-02-25       Impact factor: 11.195

4.  Conduction disorders after aortic valve replacement: what is the real impact of sutureless and rapid deployment valves?

Authors:  Paolo Berretta; Luca Montecchiani; Fabio Vagnarelli; Mariano Cefarelli; Jacopo Alfonsi; Carlo Zingaro; Filippo Capestro; Michele D Pierri; Alessandro D'alfonso; Marco Di Eusanio
Journal:  Ann Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2020-09

5.  Incidence and impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch following transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

Authors:  Hatim Seoudy; Nathalie Güßefeld; Johanne Frank; Sandra Freitag-Wolf; Georg Lutter; Matthias Eden; Ashraf Yusuf Rangrez; Christian Kuhn; Norbert Frey; Derk Frank
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2018-11-19       Impact factor: 5.460

6.  [Safety of biological valves for aortic valve replacement: A systematic review and meta-analysis].

Authors:  B Q Zeng; S Q Yu; Y Chen; W Zhai; B Liu; S Y Zhan; F Sun
Journal:  Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban       Date:  2020-06-18

Review 7.  Imaging of Valvular Heart Disease in Heart Failure.

Authors:  Tomaz Podlesnikar; Victoria Delgado; Jeroen J Bax
Journal:  Card Fail Rev       Date:  2018-08

8.  Impact of type 2 diabetes mellitus in the utilization and in-hospital outcomes of surgical aortic valve replacement in Spain (2001-2015).

Authors:  Ana López-de-Andrés; Napoleon Perez-Farinos; Javier de Miguel-Díez; Valentín Hernández-Barrera; Manuel Méndez-Bailón; José M de Miguel-Yanes; Rodrigo Jiménez-García
Journal:  Cardiovasc Diabetol       Date:  2018-10-16       Impact factor: 9.951

9.  National Trends in Utilization and In-Hospital Outcomes of Surgical Aortic Valve Replacements in Spain, 2001-2015.

Authors:  Rodrigo Jiménez-García; Napoleón Perez-Farinos; Javier de Miguel-Díez; Valentín Hernández-Barrera; Manuel Méndez-Bailón; Isabel Jimenez-Trujillo; José M de Miguel-Yanes; Ana López-de-Andrés
Journal:  Braz J Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2020-02-01

10.  Minimally invasive access type related to outcomes of sutureless and rapid deployment valves.

Authors:  Martin Andreas; Paolo Berretta; Marco Solinas; Giuseppe Santarpino; Utz Kappert; Antonio Fiore; Mattia Glauber; Martin Misfeld; Carlo Savini; Elisa Mikus; Emmanuel Villa; Kevin Phan; Theodor Fischlein; Bart Meuris; Gianluca Martinelli; Kevin Teoh; Carmelo Mignosa; Malakh Shrestha; Thierry P Carrel; Tristan Yan; Guenther Laufer; Marco Di Eusanio
Journal:  Eur J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2020-11-01       Impact factor: 4.191

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.