Annulus root enlargement during redo aortic valve replacement: Perioperative results and hemodynamic impact.
Aortic Valve
/ diagnostic imaging
Aortic Valve Stenosis
/ diagnostic imaging
Case-Control Studies
Heart Valve Prosthesis
Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation
/ adverse effects
Hemodynamics
Humans
Postoperative Complications
/ epidemiology
Prosthesis Design
Retrospective Studies
Stroke Volume
Treatment Outcome
Ventricular Function, Left
cardiovascular research
valve repair/replacement
Journal
Journal of cardiac surgery
ISSN: 1540-8191
Titre abrégé: J Card Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8908809
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Sep 2020
Sep 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
29
7
2020
medline:
15
5
2021
entrez:
29
7
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Redo aortic valve replacement (AVR) might present an increased risk for predicted patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM). Aortic root enlargement (ARE) procedures can decrease PPM and improve hemodynamic parameters. It is crucial to evaluate the safety of ARE in the context of redo AVR to allow better patient selection. This is a matched case-control study of 125 patients who underwent a redo AVR between 1991 and 2016, 21 patients had a concomitant ARE procedure. Patients were matched for age, gender, presence of coronary artery disease, renal clearance, left ventricular ejection fraction, and body mass index. The primary outcome was the occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Secondary outcomes were postoperative impact of the ARE procedures on echocardiographic measurements and survival. Preoperatively, indexed aortic valve area (0.49 vs 0.66 cm For patients undergoing redo AVR, ARE is not associated with higher perioperative mortality and morbidity when compared with patients undergoing AVR without ARE. The fear of perioperative complications potentially associated with ARE should not be a prohibiting factor in symptomatic redo patients with small aortic annulus and predicted PPM.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2158-2164Informations de copyright
© 2020 Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Références
D'Agostino RS, Jacobs JP, Badhwar V, et al. The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database: 2018 update on outcomes and quality. Ann Thorac Surg. 2018;105(1):15-23.
Head SJ, Çelik M, Kappetein AP. Mechanical versus bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement. Eur Heart J. 2017;38(28):2183-2191.
Mathers CD, Stevens GA, Boerma T, White RA, Tobias MI. Causes of international increases in older age life expectancy. Lancet. 2015;385(9967):540-548.
Mohty-Echahidi D, Malouf JF, Girard SE, et al. Impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch on long-term survival in patients with small St. Jude Medical Mechanical Prostheses in the aortic position. Circulation. 2006;113(3):420-426.
Walther T. Patient prosthesis mismatch affects short- and long-term outcomes after aortic valve replacement. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2006;30(1):15-19.
Bleiziffer S, Eichinger WB, Hettich I, et al. Impact of patient-prosthesis mismatch on exercise capacity in patients after bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement. Heart. 2008;94(5):637-641.
Flameng W, Herregods M-C, Vercalsteren M, Herijgers P, Bogaerts K, Meuris B. Prosthesis-patient mismatch predicts structural valve degeneration in bioprosthetic heart valves. Circulation. 2010;121(19):2123-2129.
Head SJ, Mokhles MM, Osnabrugge RLJ, et al. The impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch on long-term survival after aortic valve replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 34 observational studies comprising 27 186 patients with 133 141 patient-years. Eur Heart J. 2012;33(12):1518-1529.
Pibarot P, Dumesnil JG. Prosthesis-patient mismatch: definition, clinical impact, and prevention. Heart. 2006;92(8):1022-1029.
Rao V, Jamieson WRE, Ivanov J, Armstrong S, David TE. Prosthesis-patient mismatch affects survival after aortic valve replacement. Circulation. 2000;102(suppl 3):III5-9-III9.
Coutinho GF, Correia PM, Paupério G, de Oliveira F, Antunes MJ. Aortic root enlargement does not increase the surgical risk and short-term patient outcome? Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2011;40(2):441-447.
Rocha RV, Manlhiot C, Feindel CM, et al. Surgical enlargement of the aortic root does not increase the operative risk of aortic valve replacement. Circulation. 2017;137(15):1585-1594.
Helmy M, Kasem OA, Abdelhay S. Posterior approach aortic root enlargement in redo aortic valve prosthetic replacement; risk factors. J Egypt Soc Cardio-Thoracic Surg. 2011;19(3-4):194-200.
Sacco RL, Kasner SE, Broderick JP, et al. An updated definition of stroke for the 21st century: a statement for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke. 2013;44(7):2064-2089.
Thygesen K, Alpert JS, Jaffe AS, Simoons ML, Chaitman BR, White HD. Third universal definition of myocardial infarction. Circulation. 2012;126(16):2020-2035.
Bonderman D, Graf A, Kammerlander AA, et al. Factors determining patient-prosthesis mismatch after aortic valve replacement - a prospective cohort study. PLoS One. 2013;8(12):e81940.
Kanter KR, Kirshbom PM, Kogon BE. Redo aortic valve replacement in children. Ann Thorac Surg. 2006;82(5):1594-1597.
Peterson MD, Borger MA, Feindel CM, David TE. Aortic annular enlargement during aortic valve replacement: improving results with time. Ann Thorac Surg. 2007;83(6):2044-2049.
Castro LJ, Arcidi JM, Fisher AL, Gaudiani VA. Routine enlargement of the small aortic root: a preventive strategy to minimize mismatch. Ann Thorac Surg. 2002;74(1):31-36.
Pibarot P, Dumesnil JG. Hemodynamic and clinical impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch in the aortic valve position and its prevention. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000;36(4):1131-1141.
Dvir D, Webb J, Brecker S, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement for degenerative bioprosthetic surgical valves: results from the global valve-in-valve registry. Circulation. 2012;126(19):2335-2344.
Webb JG, Wood DA, Ye J, et al. Transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation for failed bioprosthetic heart valves. Circulation. 2010;121(16):1848-1857.
Simonato M, Pibarot P, Dvir D. CRT-800.02 Severe predicted patient-prosthesis mismatch as a predictor of long term mortality after aortic valve-in-valve: insights from the valve-in-valve International Data Registry (vivid). JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2017;10(3 Suppl):S61-S62.
Faerber G, Schleger S, Diab M, et al. Valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the new playground for prosthesis-patient mismatch. J Interv Cardiol. 2014;27(3):287-292.
Herrmann HC, Daneshvar SA, Fonarow GC, et al. Prosthesis-patient mismatch in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement. From the STS/ACC TVT Registry. 2018;72(22):2701-2711.
Dvir D, Webb JG, Bleiziffer S, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in failed bioprosthetic surgical valvestranscatheter aortic valves in failed bioprosthetic valvestranscatheter aortic valves in failed bioprosthetic valves. JAMA. 2014;312(2):162-170.
Silaschi M, Wendler O, Castro L, et al. Failing aortic tissue valves in patients at high surgical risk: comparison of outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve-in-valve procedures and redo surgical aortic valve replacement. Circulation. 2015;132(suppl_3):A15174-A15174.