Aortic Annulus Enlargement: Early and Long-Terms Results
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3889/oamjms.2017.006Keywords:
Aortic valve, heart valve prothesis, aortic valve replacement, aortic annulus enlargement, patient prothesis mismatchAbstract
AIM: Patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) is a common occurrence in aortic valve surgery. Even the discussions about the impact of this phenomenon on the results of aortic valve surgery, the management of this problem remain one of the main topics in this kind of surgery. One of the ways of a solution is aortic annulus enlargement. The main topic of this study is to evaluate the early and longterm results of this technique in our country.
METHODS: During the period January 2010 –January 2015, 641 patients performed aortic valve surgery. In ten patients we performed aortic annulus enlargement according to Manouguian technique to avoid severe patient-prothesis mismatch.Operative mortality and perioperative complications (low cardiac output, pulmonary complications, etc..) were considered the indicators of the early results. Survival, clinical presentation according to NYHA, quality of life were the indicators to evaluate long-term results. Preoperative and postoperative echocardiographic data were also used to evaluate our results. We collected the data from hospital registrations and periodical clinical visit and echographic examination after hospital discharge.
RESULTS: In our group, 6 of 10 patients were diagnosed with stenotic aortic valve, two patients had aortic valve regurgitation and two mixed valve pathology. Four patients had concomitant cardiac surgery procedure, mitral or CABG. In all cases, aortic valve pathology was the primary diagnose.In the preoperative echocardiographic examination mean transvalvular gradient was 54.3 ± 6.42.We had no death during early or late postoperative period. Only one patient had pulmonary complications and long time of respiratory assistance because of his pulmonary pathology.The same patient had low cardiac output and wound infection. Early after surgery mean transprostethic gradient was 16.2 ± 3.44 and late postoperative was 15.9 ± 4.3. No patient had the severe patient-prothesis mismatch. Mean follow-up was 49 ± 20.26 months. During follow-up, we had no death, and all patients had very good quality of life.
CONCLUSIONS: Aortic valve annulus enlargement can be used with very good early and late results with the final goal to increase the potential benefit of the patient from surgery of aortic valve.Downloads
Metrics
Plum Analytics Artifact Widget Block
References
Manouguian S, Seybold-Epting W. Patch enlargement of the aortic valve ring by extending the aortic incision to the anterior mitral leaflet. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1979;78:402—12. PMid:470420 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5223(19)38105-X
Bonow RO, Carabello BA, Chatterjee K, De Leon AC Jr, Faxon DP, et al. 2008 Focused Update Incorporated Into the ACC/AHA 2006 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the 1998 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease) Endorsed by the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;52:e1-e142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2008.05.007 PMid:18848134 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2008.05.007
Vahanian A, Baumgartner H, Bax J, Butchart E, Dion R, et al. Guidelines on the management of valvular heart disease; The Task Force on the Management of Valvular Heart Disease of the European Society of Cardiology. European Heart Journal. 2007;28:230–268. PMid:17259184 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehm095
Rahimtoola ShH. The Problem of Valve Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch. Circulation. 1978;58:20-24. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.58.1.20 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.58.1.20
Dumani S, Likaj E, Kacani A, Dibra L, Petrela E, Beca V, Refatllari A. Incidence and Impact of Patient-Prosthesis Mismatch in Isolated Aortic Valve Surgery. Open Access Maced J Med Sci. 2015; 3(4):624-629. https://doi.org/10.3889/oamjms.2015.108 PMid:27275298 PMCid:PMC4877898 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3889/oamjms.2015.108
Kulik A, Al-Saigh M, Chan V, Masters RG, Bédard P, Lam BK,Rubens FD, Hendry PJ, Mesana TG, Ruel M. Enlargement of the Small Aortic Root During Aortic Valve Replacement: Is There a Benefit? Ann Thorac Surg. 2008;85:94 –101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2007.07.058 PMid:18154789 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2007.07.058
Castro LJ, Arcidi MJ, Fisher AL, Gaudiani VA. Routine enlargement of the small aortic root: a preventive strategy to minimize mismatch. Ann Thorac Surg. 2002;74:31—6. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-4975(02)03680-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-4975(02)03680-9
Coutinho GF, Correia PM, Paupe´rio G, De Oliveira F,Antunes MJ. Aortic root enlargement does not increase the surgical risk and short-term patient outcome? European Journal of Cardio-thoracic Surgery. 2011;40:441—447. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejcts.2010.11.064 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejcts.2010.11.064
Kitamura M, Satoh M, Hachida M, Endo M, Hashimoto A, Koyanagi H. Aortic valve replacement in small aortic annulus with or without annular enlargement. J Heart Valve Dis.1996;5(Suppl 3):289 –93.
LaPar DJ, Ailawadi G, Bhamidipati CM, Stukenborg G, Crosby IK, Kern JA , Kron IL. Small Prosthesis Size in Aortic Valve Replacement Does Not Affect Mortality. Ann Thorac Surg. 2011;92:880-888. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2011.04.105 PMid:21871273 PMCid:PMC3260881 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2011.04.105
Urso Sa Sadaba R, Aldamiz-Echevarria G. Is patient-prosthesis mismatch an independent risk factor for early and mid-term overall mortality in adult patients undergoing aortic valve replacement? Interactive Cardio Vascular and Thoracic Surgery. 2009;9:510–519. https://doi.org/10.1510/icvts.2009.207597 PMid:19497953 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1510/icvts.2009.207597
Kulik A,Burwash IG,Kapila V,Mesana TG,Ruel M. Long-term outcomes after valve replacement for low-gradient aortic stenosis: impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch. Circulation. 2006 Jul 4;114(1 Suppl):I553-8. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.105.001180 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.105.001180
Ruel M, Al-Faleh H, Kulik A, Chan KL, Mesana TG, Burwash IG. Prosthesis–patient mismatch after aortic valve replacement predominantly affects patients with preexisting left ventricular dysfunction: Effect on survival, freedom from heart failure, and left ventricular mass regression. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2006;131:1036-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtcvs.2005.10.028 PMid:16678587 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtcvs.2005.10.028
Eric Jamieson WR, Ye J, Higgins J, Cheung A, Fradet GJ, Skarsgard P, Germann E, Chan F, Lichtenstein S. Effect of Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch on Long-Term Survival With Aortic Valve Replacement: Assessment to 15 Years. Ann Thorac Surg. 2010;89:51–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2009.08.070 PMid:20103205 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2009.08.070
Howell NJ,Keogh BE, Ray D, Bonser RS, Graham TR Mascaro J, Rooney SJ, Wilson IC, Pagano D. Patient-Prosthesis Mismatch in Patients With Aortic Stenosis Undergoing Isolated Aortic Valve Replacement Does Not Affect Survival. Ann Thorac Surg. 2010;89:60–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2009.07.037 PMid:20103206 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2009.07.037
Head SJ, Mokhles MM, Osnabrugge RL, Pibarot P, Mack MJ, Takkenberg JJ, Bogers AJ, Kappetein AP. The impact of prosthesis–patient mismatch on long-term survival after aortic valve replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 34 observational studies comprising 27 186 patients with 133 141 patient-years. European heart journal. 2012;33(12):1518-29. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehs003 PMid:22408037 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehs003
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0
