Operation in the gray zone: is SAVR still useful in patients aged between 75 and 80 years?

IF 1.6 Q3 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Future cardiology Pub Date : 2024-11-25 DOI:10.1080/14796678.2024.2433827
Ivo Deblier, Karl Dossche, Anthony Vanermen, Wilhelm Mistiaen
{"title":"Operation in the gray zone: is SAVR still useful in patients aged between 75 and 80 years?","authors":"Ivo Deblier, Karl Dossche, Anthony Vanermen, Wilhelm Mistiaen","doi":"10.1080/14796678.2024.2433827","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Aortic valve replacement is the only effective treatment for symptomatic aortic valve disease. Transcatheter implantation has been introduced as alternative for surgery (SAVR), but its penetration varied widely. For high-risk octogenarian patients, the advantages of TAVI are clear. Patients between 75 and 79 years of age could be considered as \"the gray zone.\"</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We compared the outcome of SAVR with or without concomitant procedures between patients younger than 75 versus 75-79 years for their preoperative profile, operative parameters, and postoperative outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Older patients had a higher risk score with more cardiovascular comorbidity and renal dysfunction. They required more concomitant CABG but less mitral valve repair. Cardiopulmonary bypass time was similar. In-hospital complication rates, need for blood transfusion, and length of stay in intensive care unit were higher in older patients. Thirty-day mortality was not significantly increased, Euroscore II overestimated mortality in both age groups. Age over 75 years was not an independent predictor for mortality. Need for emergent SAVR was only predictive in the older group. Long-term survival was acceptable. Age over 75 years was not the dominant predictor.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>SAVR remains a valid option to treat symptomatic aortic valve disease in the age group of 75-79.</p>","PeriodicalId":12589,"journal":{"name":"Future cardiology","volume":" ","pages":"1-10"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Future cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14796678.2024.2433827","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Aortic valve replacement is the only effective treatment for symptomatic aortic valve disease. Transcatheter implantation has been introduced as alternative for surgery (SAVR), but its penetration varied widely. For high-risk octogenarian patients, the advantages of TAVI are clear. Patients between 75 and 79 years of age could be considered as "the gray zone."

Methods: We compared the outcome of SAVR with or without concomitant procedures between patients younger than 75 versus 75-79 years for their preoperative profile, operative parameters, and postoperative outcomes.

Results: Older patients had a higher risk score with more cardiovascular comorbidity and renal dysfunction. They required more concomitant CABG but less mitral valve repair. Cardiopulmonary bypass time was similar. In-hospital complication rates, need for blood transfusion, and length of stay in intensive care unit were higher in older patients. Thirty-day mortality was not significantly increased, Euroscore II overestimated mortality in both age groups. Age over 75 years was not an independent predictor for mortality. Need for emergent SAVR was only predictive in the older group. Long-term survival was acceptable. Age over 75 years was not the dominant predictor.

Conclusions: SAVR remains a valid option to treat symptomatic aortic valve disease in the age group of 75-79.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
灰色地带的手术:SAVR 对 75 至 80 岁的患者是否仍然有用?
简介:主动脉瓣置换术是治疗无症状主动脉瓣疾病的唯一有效方法:主动脉瓣置换术是治疗无症状主动脉瓣疾病的唯一有效方法。经导管植入术作为手术(SAVR)的替代疗法已经问世,但其普及率参差不齐。对于高风险的八旬患者,经导管主动脉瓣置换术的优势显而易见。75至79岁的患者可被视为 "灰色地带":我们比较了 75 岁以下患者与 75-79 岁患者在接受或不接受同期手术的情况下进行 SAVR 的术前情况、手术参数和术后结果:结果:老年患者的风险评分较高,心血管合并症和肾功能不全的情况较多。他们需要同时进行更多的心血管造影术,但二尖瓣修复术较少。心肺旁路时间相似。高龄患者的院内并发症发生率、输血需求和重症监护室住院时间更长。30天死亡率没有明显增加,Euroscore II高估了两个年龄组的死亡率。年龄超过75岁并不是死亡率的独立预测因素。只有年龄较大的患者才需要进行紧急 SAVR。长期存活率尚可。年龄超过75岁并不是主要的预测因素:结论:SAVR仍是治疗75-79岁年龄组无症状主动脉瓣疾病的有效选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Future cardiology
Future cardiology CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
5.90%
发文量
87
期刊介绍: Research advances have contributed to improved outcomes across all specialties, but the rate of advancement in cardiology has been exceptional. Concurrently, the population of patients with cardiac conditions continues to grow and greater public awareness has increased patients" expectations of new drugs and devices. Future Cardiology (ISSN 1479-6678) reflects this new era of cardiology and highlights the new molecular approach to advancing cardiovascular therapy. Coverage will also reflect the major technological advances in bioengineering in cardiology in terms of advanced and robust devices, miniaturization, imaging, system modeling and information management issues.
期刊最新文献
Primary congenital abdominal aortic aneurysm associated with renovascular hypertension in pediatric patient. Operation in the gray zone: is SAVR still useful in patients aged between 75 and 80 years? Current approach to atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk prediction. Robotic magnetic-guided catheter ablation: an emerging treatment for congenital heart disease. Electrocardiographic and biochemical predictors of left ventricular remodeling early after ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1