Annals of thoracic surgery short reports · 2024
The Ross Procedure in Active Infective Endocarditis: A Comparison With Conventional Prostheses.
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.
Kehara Hiromu, Kashem Mohammed, Zhao Huaqing, Iturra Sebastian A, Mokashi Suyog A, Raman Ravishankar, Yanagida Roh, Krishan Kewal, Shigemura Norihisa, Toyoda Yoshiya
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The Ross procedure can be an ideal option in infective endocarditis (IE) due to greater resistance to infection. However, limited literature has highlighted the comparison with conventional prostheses in this setting.
METHODS: Between February 2013 and September 2022, 25 patients (median age, 50 years) underwent a Ross procedure for IE (Ross group). The results were compared with those after other aortic valve procedures (aortic valve replacement and aortic root replacement) for IE (n = 37, other group.
RESULTS: The patients in the Ross group included more intravenous drug users and had more prosthetic valve endocarditis and annular abscess formation compared with the other group. Although cardiopulmonary bypass time and aortic cross-clamp time were significantly longer (P < .001 and P = .003, respectively) and the blood requirements were significantly higher (P = .001) in the Ross group, most postoperative short-term outcomes were equivalent between the 2 groups. During follow-up, 1 patient (4%) required reoperation in the Ross group, whereas 6 patients (16%) required reoperation in the other group. Freedom from composite events was significantly better in the Ross group (P = .04). Multivariable analysis found the Ross procedure, compared with other procedures, was a significant independent protective factor for composite end points (P = .03).
CONCLUSIONS: For IE, despite surgical complexity, the Ross procedure yielded short-term outcomes similar to other procedures. In the midterm, the Ross procedure provides a lower reoperation rate, resulting in significantly fewer composite events. The Ross procedure appears to be a better option for patients with IE, but long-term follow-up is necessary.
METHODS: Between February 2013 and September 2022, 25 patients (median age, 50 years) underwent a Ross procedure for IE (Ross group). The results were compared with those after other aortic valve procedures (aortic valve replacement and aortic root replacement) for IE (n = 37, other group.
RESULTS: The patients in the Ross group included more intravenous drug users and had more prosthetic valve endocarditis and annular abscess formation compared with the other group. Although cardiopulmonary bypass time and aortic cross-clamp time were significantly longer (P < .001 and P = .003, respectively) and the blood requirements were significantly higher (P = .001) in the Ross group, most postoperative short-term outcomes were equivalent between the 2 groups. During follow-up, 1 patient (4%) required reoperation in the Ross group, whereas 6 patients (16%) required reoperation in the other group. Freedom from composite events was significantly better in the Ross group (P = .04). Multivariable analysis found the Ross procedure, compared with other procedures, was a significant independent protective factor for composite end points (P = .03).
CONCLUSIONS: For IE, despite surgical complexity, the Ross procedure yielded short-term outcomes similar to other procedures. In the midterm, the Ross procedure provides a lower reoperation rate, resulting in significantly fewer composite events. The Ross procedure appears to be a better option for patients with IE, but long-term follow-up is necessary.