• Eur J Cardiothorac Surg · Feb 2015

    Multicenter Study

    Mid-term results of aortic valve surgery in redo scenarios in the current practice: results from the multicentre European RECORD (REdo Cardiac Operation Research Database) initiative†.

    • Francesco Onorati, Fausto Biancari, Marisa De Feo, Giovanni Mariscalco, Antonio Messina, Giuseppe Santarpino, Francesco Santini, Cesare Beghi, Giannantonio Nappi, Giovanni Troise, Theodor Fischlein, Giancarlo Passerone, Juni Heikkinen, and Giuseppe Faggian.
    • Division of Cardiac Surgery, University of Verona Medical School, Verona, Italy frankono@libero.it.
    • Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2015 Feb 1; 47 (2): 269-80; discussion 280.

    ObjectivesAlthough commonly reported as single-centre experiences, redo aortic valve replacement (RAVR) has overall acceptable results. Nevertheless, trans-catheter aortic valve replacement has recently questioned the efficacy of RAVR.MethodsEarly-to-mid-term results and determinants of mortality in 711 cases of RAVR from seven European institutions were assessed in the entire population and in selected high-risk subgroups [elderly >75 years, urgent/emergent procedures, preoperative New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional Class IV and endocarditis].ResultsHospital mortality was 5.1%, major re-entry cardiovascular complications (MRCVCs) 4.9%, low cardiac output syndrome (LCOS) 15.3%, stroke 6.6%, acute respiratory failure (ARF) 10.6%, acute renal insufficiency (ARI) 19.3% and need for continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) 7.2%, transfusions 66.9% and for permanent pacemaker (PMK) 12.7%. Mid-term survival, freedom from acute heart failure (AHF), reinterventions, stroke and thrombo-embolisms were 77.2 ± 2.7, 84.4 ± 2.6, 97.2 ± 0.8, 97.2 ± 0.9 and 96.3 ± 1.2%, respectively; 87.5% of patients were in NYHA functional Class I-II. Preoperative left ventricular ejection fraction of <30% [odds ratio (OR) 8.7, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.1-35.6], MRCVCs (OR 20.9, 95% CI 5.6-78.3), cardiopulmonary bypass time (OR 1.1, 95% CI 1.0-1.1), perioperative LCOS (OR 17.2, 95% CI 5.1-57.4) and ARI (OR 5.1, 95% CI 1.5-18.1) predicted hospital death. Endocarditis (OR 7.5, 95% CI 2.9-19.1), preoperative NYHA functional Class IV (OR 4.7, 95% CI 1.0-24.0), combined RAVR + mitral surgery (OR 5.1, 95% CI 1.5-17.3) and AHF at follow-up (OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.3-6.0) predicted late death at the Cox proportional hazard regression model. Elderly >75 years had similar hospital mortality (P = 0.06) and major morbidity, except for a higher need for PMK (P = 0.03), as well as comparable mid-term survival (P = 0.89), freedom from AHF (P = 0.81), reinterventions (P = 0.63), stroke (P = 0.21) and thrombo-embolisms (P = 0.09). Urgent/emergent indication resulted in higher hospital death, LCOS, transfusions, MRCVCs, intra-aortic balloon pumping (IABP), stroke, prolonged (>48 h) ventilation, pneumonia, ARI, CRRT, lower mid-term survival and freedom from AHF (P ≤ 0.03). Preoperative NYHA functional Class IV correlated with higher LCOS, IABP, prolonged ventilation, pneumonia, ARF, ARI, CRRT and MRCVCs and lower mid-term survival, freedom from AHF, reinterventions and stroke (P ≤ 0.02). Endocarditis demonstrated higher hospital mortality, MRCVCs, LCOS, IABP, stroke, ARF, prolonged intubation, pneumonia, ARI, CRRT, transfusions and PMK and lower mid-term survival and freedom from AHF and reinterventions (P ≤ 0.04).ConclusionsRAVR achieves overall satisfactory results. Baseline risk factors and perioperative complications strongly affect outcomes and mandate improvements in perioperative management. New emerging strategies might be considered in selected high-risk cases.© The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. 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…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.