• J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. · Jul 2014

    Comparative Study Observational Study

    Aortic valve replacement after previous heart surgery in high-risk patients: transapical aortic valve implantation versus conventional aortic valve replacement-a risk-adjusted and propensity score-based analysis.

    • Maximilian Scherner, Navid Madershahian, Kathrin Kuhr, Stephan Rosenkranz, Elisabeth Stöger, Parwis Rahmanian, YeongHoon Choi, Ingo Slottosch, Jens Wippermann, Justus Strauch, and Thorsten Wahlers.
    • Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University Hospital of Cologne, Cologne, Germany. Electronic address: maximilian.scherner@uk-koeln.de.
    • J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg.. 2014 Jul 1;148(1):90-7.

    ObjectiveCardiac reoperations have been associated with increased morbidity and mortality compared with first-time surgery. We analyzed our experience with reoperative aortic valve replacement (redo-AVR) and compared these results with those from patients who had undergone transapical aortic valve implantation (TA-AVI) as a second heart operation.MethodsIn the present retrospective observational comparative study, we analyzed the outcome of 136 patients with previous cardiac surgery who had undergone conventional redo-AVR (n = 59; since 2006) or TA-AVI (n = 77; since 2008) with respect to the 30-day outcomes (Valve Academic Research Consortium criteria), 1- and 3-year survival, and the risk factors for both approaches after previous heart surgery.ResultsNeither group differed significantly in their risk profile, leading to similar Society of Thoracic Surgeon score and EuroSCORE. The 30-day mortality was 3.39% (n = 2) in the redo-AVR group and 7.8% (n = 6) in the redo TA-AVI group (P = .465). The overall combined safety endpoint at 30 days was significantly lower for the TA-AVI patients (18.1% vs 33.9% in redo-AVR; P = .036). The unadjusted and adjusted 1-year survival showed no difference between the 2 groups. The unadjusted 3-year survival revealed a 2.1-fold greater mortality risk after TA-AVI (P = .055). Adjustment by multivariate Cox regression analysis (hazard ratio, 1.427; 95% confidence interval, 0.635-3.209; P = .389) and propensity score (hazard ratio, 1.571; 95% confidence interval, 0.575-4.291; P = .378) led to a >50% risk reduction, resulting in similar 3-year survival in the 2 groups.ConclusionsRedo-AVR can be performed with acceptable results in high-risk patients and still serves as the reference standard. Reoperative valve surgery by TA-AVI is feasible and results in comparable short- and mid-term survival.Copyright © 2014 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…