The heart surgery forum · 2023
Aortic Valve Neocuspidization Procedure Provides Better Postoperative Outcomes When Compared to Rapid Deployement Aortic Valves.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Karabacak Kubilay, Kubat Emre, Kadan Murat, Asil Serkan, Erol Gökhan, Demirkiran Tuna, Firtina Serdar, Doğanci Suat, Ince Mehmet Emin, Bolcal Cengiz
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the early results of rapid deployment aortic valves (RD-AVR) and aortic valve neocuspidization (AVNeo) techniques.
METHODS: Between December 2019 to May 2022, 104 patients were operated on with aortic stenosis by RD-AVR (N = 52) and AVNeo (N = 52) techniques. Patients with isolated aortic valve stenosis and aortic stenosis concomittant with planned other cardiac surgeries were included.
RESULTS: The mean age of patients in the RD-AVR and AVNeo groups were 67.4 ± 7.8 vs. 62.9 ± 8.7, respectively. Aortic cross-clamp time in the RD-AVR group was 56.7 ± 23.3 minutes, while it was 104.1 ± 27.9 minutes in the AVNeo group (P < 0.001). Cardiopulmonary bypass time in the RD-AVR group and in the AVNeo group was 89.8 ± 27.6 minutes and 141.8 ± 36.7 minutes, respectively (P < 0.001). Permanent pacemaker become necessary in four patients in the RD-AVR group secondary to type 2 AV block. Paravalvular leak was observed in six patients, who underwent RD-AVR, while grade 2 central aortic regurgitation was observed in one patient in the AVNeo group. Hospital mortality was 8% in the RD-AVR group and 6% in the AVNeo group (P = 0.696).
CONCLUSIONS: AVNeo procedure is a feasible technique in all age groups of patients with successful hemodynamic results in the early postoperative period and with the advantage of not requiring anticoagulants. It also can be applied with other cardiac surgical interventions.
METHODS: Between December 2019 to May 2022, 104 patients were operated on with aortic stenosis by RD-AVR (N = 52) and AVNeo (N = 52) techniques. Patients with isolated aortic valve stenosis and aortic stenosis concomittant with planned other cardiac surgeries were included.
RESULTS: The mean age of patients in the RD-AVR and AVNeo groups were 67.4 ± 7.8 vs. 62.9 ± 8.7, respectively. Aortic cross-clamp time in the RD-AVR group was 56.7 ± 23.3 minutes, while it was 104.1 ± 27.9 minutes in the AVNeo group (P < 0.001). Cardiopulmonary bypass time in the RD-AVR group and in the AVNeo group was 89.8 ± 27.6 minutes and 141.8 ± 36.7 minutes, respectively (P < 0.001). Permanent pacemaker become necessary in four patients in the RD-AVR group secondary to type 2 AV block. Paravalvular leak was observed in six patients, who underwent RD-AVR, while grade 2 central aortic regurgitation was observed in one patient in the AVNeo group. Hospital mortality was 8% in the RD-AVR group and 6% in the AVNeo group (P = 0.696).
CONCLUSIONS: AVNeo procedure is a feasible technique in all age groups of patients with successful hemodynamic results in the early postoperative period and with the advantage of not requiring anticoagulants. It also can be applied with other cardiac surgical interventions.