Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Surgical options for aortic root replacement in destructive endocarditis
Szczechowicz, Marcin; Weymann, Alexander; Mkalaluh, Sabreen; Mashhour, Ahmed; Zhigalov, Konstantin; Easo, Jerry.
  • Szczechowicz, Marcin; Oldenburg University Hospital. Department of Cardiac Surgery. Oldenburg. DE
  • Weymann, Alexander; Oldenburg University Hospital. Department of Cardiac Surgery. Oldenburg. DE
  • Mkalaluh, Sabreen; Oldenburg University Hospital. Department of Cardiac Surgery. Oldenburg. DE
  • Mashhour, Ahmed; Oldenburg University Hospital. Department of Cardiac Surgery. Oldenburg. DE
  • Zhigalov, Konstantin; Oldenburg University Hospital. Department of Cardiac Surgery. Oldenburg. DE
  • Easo, Jerry; Oldenburg University Hospital. Department of Cardiac Surgery. Oldenburg. DE
Rev. bras. cir. cardiovasc ; 35(3): 265-273, May-June 2020. tab, graf
Article in English | LILACS, SES-SP | ID: biblio-1137265
ABSTRACT
Abstract

Objective:

To analyze patients' preoperative characteristics, surgical data, postoperative courses, and short- and long-term outcomes after implantation of different full-root prostheses for destructive aortic valve endocarditis.

Methods:

Between 1999 and 2018, 80 patients underwent aortic root replacement due to infective endocarditis in our institution. We analyzed the abovementioned data with standard statistical methods.

Results:

The Freestyle stentless porcine prostheses were implanted in 53 (66.25%) patients, biological valve conduits in 13 (16.25%), aortic root homografts in nine (11.25%), and mechanical valve conduits in five (6.25%). There were no significant preoperative differences between the groups. The incidence of postoperative complications and intensive care unit length of stay did not differ significantly between the groups. The 30-day mortality rate was low among Freestyle patients (n=8, 15.1%) and high in the mechanical conduit cohort (n=3, 60%), though with borderline statistical significance (P=0.055). The best mean survival rates were observed after homograft (13.7 years) and stentless prosthesis (8.1 years) implantation, followed by biological (2.8 years) and mechanical (1.4 years) conduits (P=0.014). The incidence of reoperations was low in the mechanical conduit group (0) and stentless bioroot group (n=1, 1.9%), but two (15.4%) patients with biological conduits and three (33.3%) patients with homografts required reoperations in the investigated follow-up period (P=0.005).

Conclusion:

In patients with the destructive form of aortic valve endocarditis, homografts and stentless porcine xenografts offer better survival rates than stented valve conduits; however, the reoperation rate among patients who received homograft valves is high.
Subject(s)


Full text: Available Index: LILACS (Americas) Main subject: Bioprosthesis / Heart Valve Prosthesis / Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation / Endocarditis Type of study: Observational study / Prognostic study / Risk factors Limits: Animals / Female / Humans / Male Language: English Journal: Rev. bras. cir. cardiovasc Year: 2020 Type: Article Institution/Affiliation country: Oldenburg University Hospital/DE

Similar

MEDLINE

...
LILACS

LIS


Full text: Available Index: LILACS (Americas) Main subject: Bioprosthesis / Heart Valve Prosthesis / Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation / Endocarditis Type of study: Observational study / Prognostic study / Risk factors Limits: Animals / Female / Humans / Male Language: English Journal: Rev. bras. cir. cardiovasc Year: 2020 Type: Article Institution/Affiliation country: Oldenburg University Hospital/DE