Hellenic journal of cardiology : HJC = Hellenike kardiologike epitheorese · 2011
Aortic valve replacement in octogenarians: outcome and predictors of complications.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Litmathe Jens, Feindt Peter, Kurt Muhamed, Gams Emmeran, Boeken Udo
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: We aimed to evaluate the outcome in octogenarians after aortic valve replacement (AVR) and to determine the perioperative parameters that were predictive of a complicated postoperative course.
METHODS: The study population included 304 patients (65% male) aged 82.7 ± 3.5 years who underwent AVR alone (63%), in combination with coronary artery bypass grafting (28%) or with other procedures (9%), between 1998 and 1/2008. Most patients suffered from combined valve disease.
RESULTS: Mechanical valves were implanted in 50% of the patients. The in-hospital mortality was 5.8%. The stay in the intensive care unit was 2.3 ± 0.5 days and in hospital 15.3 ± 2.6 days. After multivariate analysis we were able to identify some predictors for in-hospital mortality, such as preoperative cardiogenic shock (p<0.02), ejection fraction <0.3 (p<0.03), diameter of prosthesis <21 mm (p<0.05), and redo surgery. The most important predictors for postoperative complications after AVR were preoperative renal failure, additional surgical procedures (i.e. coronary artery bypass, mitral valve) and prolonged aortic crossclamping (all p<0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: The outcome after AVR in octogenarians is satisfactory; the operative risk is acceptable and might even be reduced with an individual approach to perioperative management in high-risk patients.
METHODS: The study population included 304 patients (65% male) aged 82.7 ± 3.5 years who underwent AVR alone (63%), in combination with coronary artery bypass grafting (28%) or with other procedures (9%), between 1998 and 1/2008. Most patients suffered from combined valve disease.
RESULTS: Mechanical valves were implanted in 50% of the patients. The in-hospital mortality was 5.8%. The stay in the intensive care unit was 2.3 ± 0.5 days and in hospital 15.3 ± 2.6 days. After multivariate analysis we were able to identify some predictors for in-hospital mortality, such as preoperative cardiogenic shock (p<0.02), ejection fraction <0.3 (p<0.03), diameter of prosthesis <21 mm (p<0.05), and redo surgery. The most important predictors for postoperative complications after AVR were preoperative renal failure, additional surgical procedures (i.e. coronary artery bypass, mitral valve) and prolonged aortic crossclamping (all p<0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: The outcome after AVR in octogenarians is satisfactory; the operative risk is acceptable and might even be reduced with an individual approach to perioperative management in high-risk patients.