Mortality characteristics of aortic root surgery in North America
- PMID: 24639452
- PMCID: PMC4305521
- DOI: 10.1093/ejcts/ezu083
Mortality characteristics of aortic root surgery in North America
Abstract
Objectives: Aortic root surgery is transitioning to aortic valve sparing (AVS), but little is known about the relative early outcomes of AVS versus composite graft-valve replacement (CVR). This study assessed mortality differences for AVS versus CVR to guide future practice decisions.
Methods: From January 2000 to June 2011, 31 747 patients had aortic root replacement with AVS (n = 3585; 11%) or CVR (n = 28 162; 89%). The cohort of Overall patients was divided into two subgroups: high-risk patients (n = 20 356; 6% AVS) having age >75 years, endocarditis, aortic stenosis, dialysis, multiple valves, reoperation or emergency/salvage status, and the remaining low-risk patients (n = 11 388; 21% AVS). Using logistic regression analysis, outcomes were presented as unadjusted operative mortality (UOM), risk-adjusted operative mortality (AOM) and adjusted odds ratio (AOR) for mortality.
Results: Baseline characteristics for the Overall group (AVS versus CVR) were: mean age (52 vs 57 years), endocarditis (1 vs 11%), aortic stenosis (4 vs 36%), dialysis (1 vs 2%), multiple valves (7 vs 10%), reoperation (6 vs 17%) and emergency status (14 vs 12%) (all P < 0.0001). In high- and low-risk groups, baseline differences narrowed, and lower mortality was generally observed with AVS: (AVS versus CVR) UOM group Overall (4.5 vs 8.9%)*, group High-risk (10.5 vs 11.7%), group Low-risk (1.4 vs 3.1%)*; AOM group Overall (6.2 vs 8.6%), group High-risk (10.1 vs 11.7%), group Low-risk (2.2 vs 2.8%); AOR group Overall (0.59)*, group High-risk (0.62)*, group Low-risk (0.69). *P < 0.05.
Conclusions: Relative risk-adjusted mortality seemed comparable with AVS versus CVR in low- and high-risk subgroups. These data support judicious expansion of aortic valve repair in patients having aortic root replacement.
Keywords: Aortic root surgery; Aortic valve repair; Heart valve surgery.
© The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. All rights reserved.
References
-
- Bentall HH, De Bono A. A technique for complete replacement of the ascending aorta. Thorax. 1968;23:338–9. doi:10.1136/thx.23.4.338. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- Kouchoukas NT, Wareing TH, Murphy SF, Perillo JB. Sixteen-year experience with aortic root replacement: results of 172 operations. Ann Surg. 1991;214:308–20. doi:10.1097/00000658-199109000-00013. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- Caceres M, Ma Y, Rankin JS, Sara-Chaundhuri P, Gammie JS, Suri RM, et al. Evolving practice trends of aortic root surgery in North America. Ann Thorac Surg, in-press - PubMed
-
- Hammermeister K, Sethi GK, Henderson WG, Grover FL, Oprian C, Rahimtoola SH. Outcomes 15 years after valve replacement with a mechanical versus a bioprosthetic valve: final report of the Veterans Affairs randomized trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000;36:1152–8. doi:10.1016/S0735-1097(00)00834-2. - DOI - PubMed
-
- Brennan JM, Edwards FH, Zhao Y, O'Brien S, Booth ME, Dokholyan RS, et al. Long-term safety and effectiveness of mechanical versus biologic aortic valve prostheses in older patients: results from the Society of Thoracic Surgeons adult cardiac surgery national database. Circulation. 2013;127:1647–55. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.113.002003. - DOI - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical