Recent Outcomes of Surgical Redo Aortic Valve Replacement in Prosthetic Valve Failure.

Thorac Cardiovasc Surg

Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Heart Stroke Vascular Institute, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

Published: April 2024

AI Article Synopsis

  • Valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement (AVR) is being considered as a safer alternative to redo surgical AVR due to its higher risks, particularly when dealing with failed prostheses.
  • A study involving 324 patients from 2010 to 2021 found an overall operative mortality rate of 4.6%, which dropped to 2.5% when excluding those with endocarditis.
  • Key risk factors for operative mortality identified were the presence of endocarditis, longer cardiopulmonary bypass time, and lower left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), indicating that patients without endocarditis and acceptable LVEF have good outcomes with redo AVR.

Article Abstract

Background:  As redo surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR) is relatively high risk, valve-in-valve transcatheter AVR has emerged as an alternative for failed prostheses. However, the majority of studies are outdated. This study assessed the current clinical outcomes of redo AVR.

Methods And Results:  This study enrolled 324 patients who underwent redo AVR due to prosthetic valve failure from 2010 to 2021 in four tertiary centers. The primary outcome was operative mortality. The secondary outcomes were overall survival, cardiac death, and aortic valve-related events. Logistic regression analysis, clustered Cox proportional hazards models, and competing risk analysis were used to evaluate the independent risk factors. Redo AVR was performed in 242 patients without endocarditis and 82 patients with endocarditis. Overall operative mortality was 4.6% (15 deaths). Excluding patients with endocarditis, the operative mortality of redo AVR decreased to 2.5%. Multivariate analyses demonstrated that endocarditis (hazard ratio [HR]: 3.990,  = 0.014), longer cardiopulmonary bypass time (HR: 1.006,  = 0.037), and lower left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (HR: 0.956,  = 0.034) were risk factors of operative mortality. Endocarditis and lower LVEF were independent predictors of overall survival.

Conclusion:  The relatively high risk of redo AVR was due to reoperation for prosthetic valve endocarditis. The outcomes of redo AVR for nonendocarditis are excellent. Our findings suggest that patients without endocarditis, especially with acceptable LVEF, can be treated safely with redo AVR.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-2281-1897DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

redo avr
24
operative mortality
16
patients endocarditis
16
prosthetic valve
12
redo
9
aortic valve
8
valve replacement
8
valve failure
8
avr
8
high risk
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!