The Annals of thoracic surgery · 2002
Impact of implant technique following freestyle stentless aortic valve replacement.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание 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.
Bach David S, Cartier Paul C, Kon Neal D, Johnson Katherine G, Deeb G Michael, Doty Donald B, Freestyle Valve Study Group
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Stentless aortic bioprostheses have excellent hemodynamics and clinical outcomes. The purpose of the present study was to determine whether implant technique of the Freestyle aortic root bioprosthesis impacts clinical outcomes or hemodynamic performance.
METHODS: The long-term multicenter study of the Freestyle stentless aortic bioprosthesis includes 500 consecutive patients implanted using the subcoronary and 162 using the full root technique. Clinical outcomes and echocardiographic hemodynamics were compared through 5 years.
RESULTS: There were no differences between groups in time to death, valve-related death, or reoperation. The incidence of operative death was higher in the full root than in the subcoronary group (odds ratio 3.97, p = 0.001). Patients in the subcoronary group were more likely to have New York Heart Association functional class III or IV symptoms at 1 year (1.7% versus 0%, p = 0.04) and 5 years postoperatively (4.4% versus 0%, p = 0.02). Mean gradient was lower (p = 0.0004) and effective orifice area larger (p = 0.04) in the full root group. Left ventricular mass index decreased in both groups. The preponderance of patients in both groups had no or trivial aortic regurgitation through 5 years.
CONCLUSIONS: Full root implantation of the Freestyle stentless aortic bioprosthesis was associated with higher operative mortality, but somewhat better hemodynamics, functional class, and freedom from aortic regurgitation. Higher operative mortality argues against the empiric replacement of the ascending aorta in the absence of aortic root pathology. In appropriately selected patients, both implant techniques are viable alternatives for valve implantation.
METHODS: The long-term multicenter study of the Freestyle stentless aortic bioprosthesis includes 500 consecutive patients implanted using the subcoronary and 162 using the full root technique. Clinical outcomes and echocardiographic hemodynamics were compared through 5 years.
RESULTS: There were no differences between groups in time to death, valve-related death, or reoperation. The incidence of operative death was higher in the full root than in the subcoronary group (odds ratio 3.97, p = 0.001). Patients in the subcoronary group were more likely to have New York Heart Association functional class III or IV symptoms at 1 year (1.7% versus 0%, p = 0.04) and 5 years postoperatively (4.4% versus 0%, p = 0.02). Mean gradient was lower (p = 0.0004) and effective orifice area larger (p = 0.04) in the full root group. Left ventricular mass index decreased in both groups. The preponderance of patients in both groups had no or trivial aortic regurgitation through 5 years.
CONCLUSIONS: Full root implantation of the Freestyle stentless aortic bioprosthesis was associated with higher operative mortality, but somewhat better hemodynamics, functional class, and freedom from aortic regurgitation. Higher operative mortality argues against the empiric replacement of the ascending aorta in the absence of aortic root pathology. In appropriately selected patients, both implant techniques are viable alternatives for valve implantation.