Double-valve replacement with Medtronic-Hall or St. Jude valve

In-hospital outcomes of patients undergoing concomitant aortic and mitral valve replacement in Germany

 

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate in-hospital outcomes of concomitant mitral valve replacement (MVR) in patients undergoing conventional aortic valve replacement due to aortic stenosis in a nationwide cohort.

METHODS

Administrative data from all patients with aortic stenosis undergoing conventional aortic and concomitant MVR (reason for MVR not specified) between 2017 and 2018 in Germany were analysed.

RESULTS

A total of 2597 patients with a preoperative logistic EuroScore of 9.81 (standard deviation: 8.56) were identified. In-hospital mortality was 6.8%. An in-hospital stroke occurred in 3.4%, acute kidney injury in 16.3%, prolonged mechanical ventilation of more than 48 h in 16.3%, postoperative delirium in 15.8% and postoperative pacemaker implantation in 7.6% of the patients. Mean hospital stay was 16.5 (standard deviation: 12.1) days. Age [odds ratio (OR): 1.03; P = 0.019], New York Heart Association class III or IV (OR: 1.63; P = 0.012), previous cardiac surgery (OR: 2.85, P = 0.002), peripheral vascular disease (OR: 2.01, P = 0.031), pulmonary hypertension (OR: 1.63, P = 0.042) and impaired renal function (glomerular filtration rate <15, OR: 3.58, P = 0.001; glomerular filtration rate <30, OR: 2.51, P = 0.037) were identified as independent predictors for in-hospital mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

In this nationwide analysis, concomitant aortic and MVR was associated with acceptable in-hospital mortality, morbidity and length of in-hospital stay. The regression analyses may help to identify high-risk patients and further optimize treatment strategies.

Concomitant mitral valve surgery with aortic valve replacement: a 21-year experience with a single mechanical prosthesis

Background

Long-term survival for combined aortic and mitral valve replacement appears to be determined by the mitral valve prosthesis from our previous studies. This 21-year retrospective study assess long-term outcome and durability of aortic valve replacement (AVR) with either concomitant mitral valve replacement (MVR) or mitral valve repair (MVrep). We consider only a single mechanical prosthesis.

Methods

Three hundred and sixteen patients underwent double valve replacement (DVR) (n = 273) or AVR+MVrep (n = 43), in the period 1977 to 1997. Follow up of 100% was achieved via telephone questionnaire and review of patients' medical records. Actuarial analysis of long-term survival was determined by Kaplan-Meier method. The Cox regression model was used to evaluate potential predictors of mortality.

Results

There were seventeen cases (5.4%) of early mortality and ninety-six cases of late mortality. Fifteen-year survival was similar in both groups at 44% and 57% for DVR and AVR+MVrep respectively. There were no significant differences in valve related deaths, anticoagulation related complications, or prosthetic valve endocarditis between the groups. There were 6 cases of periprosthetic leak in the DVR group. Sex, pre-operative mitral and aortic valve pathology or previous cardiac surgery did not significantly affect outcome.

Conclusion

The mitral valve appears to be the determinant of survival following double valve surgery and survival is not significantly influenced by mitral valve repair.

Early and late results of combined mitral-aortic valve surgery

OBJECTIVE

This retrospective study was designed to assess the early morbidity and mortality as well as long-term mortality of combined aortic-mitral valve procedures at a single centre.

METHODS

Patients were identified by analysing the intensive care and perfusion databases, from 1989 to 2003, with 113 receiving aortic-mitral valve procedures. Eighty-four percent of patients received a mechanical bileaflet valve. Survival was assessed using a Kaplan-Meier method, and determinants of survival with the Cox proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

There were 57 men and 56 women, median age 59 (18-84) years. The 30-day mortality was 9% (n=10). This cohort contained a number of high risk patients, 38% were classified as New York Heart Association class IV, 33.5% had at least moderate ventricular impairment, 20% were redo procedures and 17% urgent procedures. Survival estimates at 5 and 10 years were 85% (0.76-0.90) and 65% (0.49-0.77), respectively. Multivariate pre-operative predictors of death included renal dysfunction (creatinine >200 micromol/L) and hypertension. Rheumatic aetiology was associated with improved survival.

CONCLUSION

This study shows acceptable short and long-term survival in patients undergoing combined aortic-mitral valve surgical procedures at a single centre. Renal impairment and hypertension were associated with a poorer long-term prognosis and rheumatic aetiology was associated with improved survival. Age, LVEF and NYHA class were not associated with a worse outcome. This may affect future decision making in light of an aging population.

Long-term results of mitral-aortic valve operations

OBJECTIVE

We analyzed the long-term morbidity and mortality of our experience with combined mitral-aortic surgery, as well as their determinants.

METHODS

Among 2109 consecutive patients undergoing valve operations, 200 had mitral-aortic valve procedures with at least implantation of a mechanical prosthesis: 163 of 200 (81.5%) patients had double valve replacement and 37 of 200 (18.5%) had mitral valve repair and aortic valve replacement. All mechanical valves were bileaflet prostheses. Preoperatively, 171 of 200 (85.5%) patients were in New York Heart Association class III-IV. Event-free survivals were determined by means of the Kaplan-Meier method and determinants of survivals with the Cox proportional hazards model (p < 0.05) entering 39 preoperative and perioperative factors. Follow-up was complete for 96% of the patients (192/200).

RESULTS

Overall survivals at 5, 10, and 15 years were 88.5% +/- 0.55%, 73.5% +/- 4%, and 53.3% +/- 8.9%, and rates of freedom from valve-related mortality were 92.9% +/- 1.5%, 85.8% +/- 3.5%, and 85.8% +/- 3.5%. The rates of freedom from permanent valve-related impairment were 91.5% +/- 1.7%, 85.4% +/- 3.5%, and 79.3% +/- 6.7%, and those from all valve-related mortality and morbidity were 74.1% +/- 2.3%, 53.8% +/- 5%, and 49% +/- 5.6%. At last follow-up, 90% (139/154) of the survivors were in New York Heart Association class I-II. Left ventricular ejection fraction less than 50%, age older than 70 years, and preoperative ventricular arrhythmias were independent risk factors for valve-related late deaths. Diabetes, ejection fraction less than 50%, and coronary artery disease were independent determinants of all valve-related events.

CONCLUSIONS

Functional results of survivors of combined mitral-aortic surgery are excellent. However long-term valve-related morbidity and mortality are substantial. In the patient population studied, the predictors are determined by patient-related factors, mainly myocardial factors, but not by valve-related factors.