Is routine use of stentless aortic prostheses justified in an elderly (aged > or =75 years) population?
- PMID: 15700438
Is routine use of stentless aortic prostheses justified in an elderly (aged > or =75 years) population?
Abstract
Background and aim of the study: Stentless prostheses in the aortic position produce a superior hemodynamic profile in comparison to that with stented valves. To determine whether routine use of stentless valves in an elderly population is justified, a 10-year retrospective review was performed of a consecutive series of patients aged > or =75 years undergoing stentless aortic valve replacement (AVR).
Methods: Demographic, operative and mortality data were obtained retrospectively. Survivors were interviewed by telephone according to a defined protocol. Univariate and multivariate analysis was used to identify independent predictors of 30-day and overall medium-term mortality. Definitions and analyses were in accordance with joint STS/AATS guidelines.
Results: A total of 103 patients (57 males, 46 females; mean age 79.8 years; range: 75-91 years) underwent AVR with a either a Toronto stentless porcine valve (size range: 21-29 mm; n = 74) or an aortic homograft (n = 29). Twenty-eight patients (27%) had either urgent/emergency surgery, 12 (11%) underwent redo surgery, and in 54 cases (52%), the preoperative left ventricular function was significantly impaired (ejection fraction <50%). Forty patients (39%) also underwent concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting. The mean cross-clamp and cardiopulmonary bypass times were 105+/-22 min and 144+/-47 min, respectively. The overall 30-day mortality was 11.6% (n = 12). The 30-day mortality for all elective cases was 5.3%, but for isolated elective AVR was only 2.5%. Using a multivariate model, the only independent predictor of 30-day mortality and medium-term overall mortality was increasing age. The mean follow up period was 3.6 years (range: 0.1-9.3 years), and the Kaplan-Meier actuarial five-year survival was 52%. At follow up, 92% of patients were in NYHA functional classes I and II.
Conclusion: Stentless AVR in elderly patients is associated with excellent functional and survival outcome in the medium term. Furthermore, in elective cases, age alone should not be a deterrent to the routine use of stentless aortic valves.
Similar articles
-
Porcine or human stentless valves for aortic valve replacement? Results of a 10-year comparative study.J Heart Valve Dis. 2003 Jul;12(4):430-5; discussion 435. J Heart Valve Dis. 2003. PMID: 12918841
-
Aortic valve replacement with the Sorin Pericarbon Freedom stentless valve: five-year follow up.J Heart Valve Dis. 2007 Jan;16(1):42-8. J Heart Valve Dis. 2007. PMID: 17315382
-
Re-do aortic valve replacement: does a previous homograft influence the operative outcome?J Heart Valve Dis. 2004 Nov;13(6):904-12; discussion 912-3. J Heart Valve Dis. 2004. PMID: 15597580
-
[The best of valvular heart disease in 2006].Arch Mal Coeur Vaiss. 2007 Jan;100 Spec No 1:19-28. Arch Mal Coeur Vaiss. 2007. PMID: 17405561 Review. French.
-
Which patients benefit from stentless aortic valve replacement?Ann Thorac Surg. 2009 Dec;88(6):2061-8. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2009.06.060. Ann Thorac Surg. 2009. PMID: 19932303 Review.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Medical
Research Materials