The Journal of heart valve disease · 2012
Aortic cross-clamp time, new prostheses, and outcome in aortic valve replacement.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Ranucci Marco, Frigiola Alessandro, Menicanti Lorenzo, Castelvecchio Serenella, de Vincentiis Carlo, Pistuddi Valeria
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: A number of sutureless bioprosthetic aortic valves have been recently introduced in clinical practice, their main advantage being a reduction in the aortic cross-clamp time (AXCT). The study aim was to investigate if AXCT was a determinant of cardiovascular morbidity in patients undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR) to treat aortic valve stenosis, and to identify any subset of patients who might benefit from a reduction in AXCT.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted of 979 consecutive patients with aortic valve stenosis who underwent surgical AVR. The AXCT was analyzed as an independent predictor of severe cardiovascular morbidity, defined as the presence of a low cardiac output, stroke, acute kidney injury, or operative mortality. Subgroups of patients who benefited more from a reduction in AXCT were investigated.
RESULTS: The AXCT was an independent predictor of severe cardiovascular morbidity, with an increased risk of 1.4% per 1 min increase. Patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction < or = 40%, and also diabetic patients, showed the most relevant clinical benefits induced by a reduction in AXCT.
CONCLUSION: In selected patient populations at high risk of systolic dysfunction, the use of sutureless aortic valve bioprostheses may be considered. However, the routine use of such bioprostheses should be pondered within a cost-benefit analysis.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted of 979 consecutive patients with aortic valve stenosis who underwent surgical AVR. The AXCT was analyzed as an independent predictor of severe cardiovascular morbidity, defined as the presence of a low cardiac output, stroke, acute kidney injury, or operative mortality. Subgroups of patients who benefited more from a reduction in AXCT were investigated.
RESULTS: The AXCT was an independent predictor of severe cardiovascular morbidity, with an increased risk of 1.4% per 1 min increase. Patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction < or = 40%, and also diabetic patients, showed the most relevant clinical benefits induced by a reduction in AXCT.
CONCLUSION: In selected patient populations at high risk of systolic dysfunction, the use of sutureless aortic valve bioprostheses may be considered. However, the routine use of such bioprostheses should be pondered within a cost-benefit analysis.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AgedAged, 80 and overAortaAortic ValveAortic Valve StenosisBioprosthesisConstrictionFemaleHeart Valve ProsthesisHeart Valve Prosthesis ImplantationHumansLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisOdds RatioProsthesis DesignRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsStroke VolumeSuture TechniquesTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeVentricular Function, Left