Journal of cardiac surgery · 2006
Does aortic root enlargement impair the outcome of patients with small aortic root?
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.
Ardal Hasan, Toker Mehmet Erdem, Rabuş Murat Bülent, Uyar Ibrahim, Antal Arzu, Sişmanoğlu Mesut, Mansuroğlu Denyan, Kirali Kaan, Yakut Cevat
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Posterior root enlargement procedures provide the implantation of suitable-sized prosthetic valves in patients with a small aortic root to prevent a high postoperative transvalvular gradient. The aim of this study was to evaluate long-term results of the posterior root enlargement.
METHODS: Between 1985 and 2002, 124 patients underwent aortic valve replacement with a posterior root enlargement. The main indication was a small aortic valve orifice area to patient body surface area (indexed valve area < 0.85 cm2/m2). Fifty-four (44%) patients were male, and 70 (56%) were female with a mean age 39.1 +/- 14.3 years. Indications for operation were severe calcified aortic valve stenosis (37.1%), severe aortic insufficiency (25.8%), or combination (37.1%). Seventy-five (60%) patients received double-valve replacement. A pericardial patch was used in 100 patients (80.6%) and a Dacron patch was used in 24 patients.
RESULTS: Operative mortality was 6.4% (8 patients). The causes of hospital mortality were low cardiac output syndrome (LCOS) (in 6 patients), cerebrovascular events (in 1 patient) and multiple organ failure (in 1 patient). Multivariate analysis demonstrated concomitant coronary revascularization to be a significant (p = 0.03) predictor for early mortality. There were six (5.4%) late deaths. Cox proportional hazards regression analysis demonstrated LCOS (p = 0.013) and infective endocarditis (p = 0.003) to be significant predictors for late mortality. Atrioventricular block required a permanent pacemaker was observed in 4 patients (3.2%).
CONCLUSIONS: Posterior aortic root enlargement techniques can be easily applied without additional risks. Long-term survival and freedoms from valve-related complications are satisfactory.
METHODS: Between 1985 and 2002, 124 patients underwent aortic valve replacement with a posterior root enlargement. The main indication was a small aortic valve orifice area to patient body surface area (indexed valve area < 0.85 cm2/m2). Fifty-four (44%) patients were male, and 70 (56%) were female with a mean age 39.1 +/- 14.3 years. Indications for operation were severe calcified aortic valve stenosis (37.1%), severe aortic insufficiency (25.8%), or combination (37.1%). Seventy-five (60%) patients received double-valve replacement. A pericardial patch was used in 100 patients (80.6%) and a Dacron patch was used in 24 patients.
RESULTS: Operative mortality was 6.4% (8 patients). The causes of hospital mortality were low cardiac output syndrome (LCOS) (in 6 patients), cerebrovascular events (in 1 patient) and multiple organ failure (in 1 patient). Multivariate analysis demonstrated concomitant coronary revascularization to be a significant (p = 0.03) predictor for early mortality. There were six (5.4%) late deaths. Cox proportional hazards regression analysis demonstrated LCOS (p = 0.013) and infective endocarditis (p = 0.003) to be significant predictors for late mortality. Atrioventricular block required a permanent pacemaker was observed in 4 patients (3.2%).
CONCLUSIONS: Posterior aortic root enlargement techniques can be easily applied without additional risks. Long-term survival and freedoms from valve-related complications are satisfactory.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AdolescentAdultAgedAnalysis of VarianceAortic ValveAortic Valve InsufficiencyAortic Valve StenosisChildEchocardiographyFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHeart Valve Prosthesis ImplantationHospital MortalityHumansMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsProsthesis DesignReoperationSurvival RateTime FactorsTreatment Outcome