Literature DB >> 35099560

Low-Risk Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in the Era of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.

Milos M Jovanovic1, Slobodan V Micovic1, Miodrag S Peric1, Igor S Zivkovic1, Stasa D Krasic2, Ognjen S Milicevic3, Stefan P Stankovic1, Petar M Vukovic1.   

Abstract

Open surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) is a viable alternative to transcatheter implantation in low-risk patients. In this light, we evaluated the safety and effectiveness of SAVR performed through conventional and less invasive surgical approaches in a high-volume center. We retrospectively reviewed the records of 395 consecutive patients who underwent open SAVR from January 2019 through December 2019 in our center. We evaluated and compared the operative results and postoperative major adverse outcomes of 3 surgical approaches: full median sternotomy (n=267), upper ministernotomy (ministernotomy) (n=106), and right anterior thoracotomy (minithoracotomy) (n=22). Overall, the 30-day all-cause mortality rate was 0.8% (3 patients). Stroke occurred in 8 patients (2%), disabling stroke in 4 patients (1%), myocardial infarction in 1 (0.2%), and surgical site infection in 13 (3.2%). There was no difference in 30-day mortality rate or incidence of postoperative major adverse events among the 3 surgical groups. Stroke and surgical site infection occurred more frequently, but not significantly so, in the full-sternotomy group. The mean hospital stay was longer after full sternotomy (9.1 ± 5.5 d) than after ministernotomy (7.5 ± 2.9 d) or minithoracotomy (7.4 ± 1.9 d) (P=0.012). Our findings suggest that open SAVR performed in a high-volume center is associated with a low early mortality rate and that less invasive approaches result in faster postoperative recovery and shorter hospital stays.
© 2022 by the Texas Heart® Institute, Houston.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Aortic valve stenosis/surgery; heart valve prosthesis implantation; minimally invasive surgical procedures; sternotomy; sutureless surgical procedures; thoracotomy; transcatheter aortic valve replacement; treatment outcome

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35099560      PMCID: PMC8884280          DOI: 10.14503/THIJ-20-7435

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Tex Heart Inst J        ISSN: 0730-2347


  14 in total

1.  Aortic valve reconstruction using self-developed aortic valve plasty system in aortic valve disease.

Authors:  Shigeyuki Ozaki; Isamu Kawase; Hiromasa Yamashita; Shin Uchida; Yukinari Nozawa; Takayoshi Matsuyama; Mikio Takatoh; So Hagiwara
Journal:  Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg       Date:  2011-01-27

Review 2.  Minimally invasive aortic valve surgery: state of the art and future directions.

Authors:  Mattia Glauber; Matteo Ferrarini; Antonio Miceli
Journal:  Ann Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2015-01

3.  The role of ministernotomy in aortic valve surgery-A prospective randomized study.

Authors:  Petar M Vukovic; Predrag Milojevic; Ivan Stojanovic; Slobodan Micovic; Igor Zivkovic; Miodrag Peric; Miroslav Milicic; Petar Milacic; Milan Milojevic; Milovan Bojic
Journal:  J Card Surg       Date:  2019-04-24       Impact factor: 1.620

4.  Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement with a Self-Expanding Valve in Low-Risk Patients.

Authors:  Jeffrey J Popma; G Michael Deeb; Steven J Yakubov; Mubashir Mumtaz; Hemal Gada; Daniel O'Hair; Tanvir Bajwa; John C Heiser; William Merhi; Neal S Kleiman; Judah Askew; Paul Sorajja; Joshua Rovin; Stanley J Chetcuti; David H Adams; Paul S Teirstein; George L Zorn; John K Forrest; Didier Tchétché; Jon Resar; Antony Walton; Nicolo Piazza; Basel Ramlawi; Newell Robinson; George Petrossian; Thomas G Gleason; Jae K Oh; Michael J Boulware; Hongyan Qiao; Andrew S Mugglin; Michael J Reardon
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2019-03-16       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  2017 ESC/EACTS Guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease.

Authors:  Helmut Baumgartner; Volkmar Falk; Jeroen J Bax; Michele De Bonis; Christian Hamm; Per Johan Holm; Bernard Iung; Patrizio Lancellotti; Emmanuel Lansac; Daniel Rodriguez Muñoz; Raphael Rosenhek; Johan Sjögren; Pilar Tornos Mas; Alec Vahanian; Thomas Walther; Olaf Wendler; Stephan Windecker; Jose Luis Zamorano
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2017-09-21       Impact factor: 29.983

6.  Midterm outcomes after aortic valve neocuspidization with glutaraldehyde-treated autologous pericardium.

Authors:  Shigeyuki Ozaki; Isamu Kawase; Hiromasa Yamashita; Shin Uchida; Mikio Takatoh; Nagaki Kiyohara
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2018-02-15       Impact factor: 5.209

Review 7.  Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement: how does this perform in high-risk patients?

Authors:  Jan D Schmitto; Friedrich W Mohr; Lawrence H Cohn
Journal:  Curr Opin Cardiol       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 2.161

Review 8.  Minimal access versus conventional aortic valve replacement: a meta-analysis of propensity-matched studies.

Authors:  Sharaf-Eldin Shehada; Yacine Elhmidi; Fanar Mourad; Daniel Wendt; Mohamed El Gabry; Jaroslav Benedik; Matthias Thielmann; Heinz Jakob
Journal:  Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg       Date:  2017-10-01

9.  Full sternotomy and minimal access approaches for surgical aortic valve replacement: a multicentre propensity-matched study.

Authors:  Domenico Paparella; Pietro Giorgio Malvindi; Giuseppe Santarpino; Marco Moscarelli; Piero Guida; Khalil Fattouch; Vito Margari; Luigi Martinelli; Alberto Albertini; Giuseppe Speziale
Journal:  Eur J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2020-04-01       Impact factor: 4.191

10.  Right anterior mini-thoracotomy vs. conventional sternotomy for aortic valve replacement: a propensity-matched comparison.

Authors:  Mauro Del Giglio; Elisa Mikus; Roberto Nerla; Antonio Micari; Simone Calvi; Alberto Tripodi; Gianluca Campo; Elisa Maietti; Fausto Castriota; Alberto Cremonesi
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 2.895

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.