ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Pulmonary hypertension (PHT) has been considered a risk factor for mortality in cardiac surgery. Among mitral valve surgery (MVS) patients, we sought to determine if severe PHT increases mortality risk and if patients who undergo concomitant tricuspid valve surgery (TVS) incur additional risk. METHODS: Preoperative PHT was assessed in 1571 patients undergoing MVS, from 2004 to 2013. Patients were stratified into PHT groups as follows (mm Hg): none (<35); moderate (35-49); severe (50-79); and extreme (≥80). Propensity-score matching resulted in a total of 430 patients, by PHT groups, and 384 patients, by TVS groups. RESULTS: Patients with severe PHT had higher mortality, both 30-day (4% PHT vs 1% no PHT, P < .02) and late (defined as survival at 5 years): 75.5% severe versus 91.9% no PHT (P < .001). In propensity-score-matched groups, severe PHT was not a risk factor for 30-day (3% each, P = 1.0) or late mortality (86.2% severe vs 87.1% no PHT; P = .87). TVS did not increase 30-day (4.7% TVS vs 4.2% no TVS, P = .8) or late mortality (78.7% TVS vs 75.3% no TVS, P = .90). Late survival was lower in extreme PHT (75.4% vs no PHT 91.5%, P = .007), and a trend was found in 30-day mortality (11% extreme vs 3% no PHT, P = .16). CONCLUSIONS: Mortality in MVS is unaffected by severe PHT or the addition of TVS, yet extreme PHT remains a risk factor. Severe PHT (50-79 mm Hg) should not preclude surgery; concomitant TVS does not increase mortality.
Subject(s)
Hospital Mortality/trends , Hypertension, Pulmonary/epidemiology , Mitral Valve Insufficiency/epidemiology , Mitral Valve Insufficiency/surgery , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cause of Death , Cohort Studies , Comorbidity , Databases, Factual , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Hypertension, Pulmonary/diagnosis , Intraoperative Care/methods , Kaplan-Meier Estimate , Male , Middle Aged , Propensity Score , Proportional Hazards Models , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Severity of Illness Index , Statistics, Nonparametric , Survival Analysis , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Paravalvular regurgitation is a known complication after transcatheter and sutureless aortic valve replacement. Paravalvular regurgitation also may develop in patients undergoing percutaneous mitral valve replacement. There are few studies on contemporary surgical valve replacement for comparison. We sought to determine the contemporary occurrence of paravalvular regurgitation after conventional surgical valve replacement. METHODS: We performed a single-center retrospective database review involving 1774 patients who underwent valve replacement surgery from April 2004 to December 2012: aortic in 1244, mitral in 386, and combined aortic and mitral in 144. Follow-up echocardiography was performed in 73% of patients. Patients with endocarditis were analyzed separately from noninfectious paravalvular leaks. Statistical comparisons were performed to determine differences in paravalvular regurgitation incidence and survival. RESULTS: During follow-up, 1+ or greater (mild or more) paravalvular regurgitation occurred in 2.2% of aortic cases and 2.9% of mitral cases. There was 2+ or greater (moderate or more) paravalvular regurgitation in 0.9% of aortic and 2.2% of mitral cases (P = .10). After excluding endocarditis, late noninfectious regurgitation 2+ or greater was detected in 0.5% of aortic and 0.4% of mitral cases (P = .93); there were no reoperations or percutaneous closures for noninfectious paravalvular regurgitation. CONCLUSIONS: In an academic medical center, the overall rate of paravalvular regurgitation is low, and late clinically significant noninfectious paravalvular regurgitation is rare. The benchmark for paravalvular regurgitation after conventional valve replacement is high and should be considered when evaluating patients for transcatheter or sutureless valve replacement.
Subject(s)
Aortic Valve Insufficiency/etiology , Aortic Valve/surgery , Benchmarking , Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation/adverse effects , Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation/methods , Mitral Valve Insufficiency/etiology , Mitral Valve/surgery , Aged , Female , Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation/standards , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: A hemiarch reconstruction, using deep hypothermic circulatory arrest, is the conventional approach for proximal aortic arch reconstruction, but it carries risks of neurologic events and coagulopathy. The addition of a hemiarch reconstruction to an aortic root replacement may prevent future aortic arch pathology. Outcomes of this approach at a tertiary care institution were examined to determine whether the addition of a hemiarch reconstruction to an aortic root replacement conferred any additional risk. METHODS: A total of 384 patients underwent an aortic root replacement between April 2004 and June 2012. Of them, 177 (46%) had hemiarch replacement. Propensity score matching yielded 133 pairs of patients receiving hemiarch and non-hemiarch. RESULTS: Sinus segment diameter was similar between groups; ascending aortic diameter was greater in the hemiarch group (median 50 vs 44 mm; P < .001). The hemiarch group had longer perfusion (median 186 vs 120.5 minutes; P < .001) and crossclamp times (median 140 vs 104 minutes; P < .001); median circulatory arrest was 13 minutes. There was no difference, hemiarch versus no hemiarch, in 30-day mortality (3.0% vs 1.5%; P = .41), stroke (2.3% vs 4.5%; P = .31), reoperation for bleeding (11% vs 10%; P = .84), or overall survival (5-year 88.0% [95% confidence interval, 81.9-94.0] vs 91.4% [95% confidence interval, 85.8-96.9], P = .24). CONCLUSIONS: In this series, aortic root replacement ± hemiarch reconstruction had low mortality. Addition of hemiarch replacement extended perfusion times but not at the expense of safety. Hemiarch reconstruction should be performed when the aortic root aneurysm extends into the distal ascending aorta.
