主动脉根置换术后再手术及其对长期生存的影响

{"title":"主动脉根置换术后再手术及其对长期生存的影响","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.xjon.2024.05.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>Reoperation after aortic root replacement (ARR) is associated with increased operative risk and complexity. This study evaluated clinical outcomes and reoperation rates in patients undergoing ARR.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>From 2004 to 2021, 2700 adult patients underwent an ARR in a 2-institution database. Among 2542 surviving patients, 705 patients who had a history of previous cardiac surgery as well as 11 patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement after index ARR were excluded. Among the finalized cohort of 1826 patients, 88 (4.8%) underwent a reoperation (REDO) on the aortic valve or proximal aorta (root/ascending) a mean of 3.1 years after index ARR whereas 1738 (95%) did not undergo reoperation (no-REDO). A subgroup analysis was performed among those undergoing reoperation by indication including valve dysfunction (48%), endocarditis/graft infection (33%), and aortic aneurysm/dissection/rupture (12%). Reoperative indication was unknown in 6 patients (7%).</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The REDO group was younger at time of index ARR (52 vs 58 years, <em>P</em> &lt; .0001) and had more bicuspid aortic valves (56% vs 37%, <em>P</em> = .0003). Most patients underwent modified Bentall ARR (61%), whereas 38% underwent a valve-sparing root replacement. Index root operations were similar between groups. At time of reoperation, 53% underwent aortic valve replacement and 35% underwent redo root replacement. Long-term survival was similar between REDO and no-REDO groups (80% vs 85%, <em>P</em> = .26) and reoperation was not a risk factor for late mortality (hazard ratio, 1.31; <em>P</em> = .26); however, REDO ARR was a risk factor for late mortality (hazard ratio, 2.41; <em>P</em> = .02).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The incidence of aortic valve and/or proximal aorta reoperation after index ARR is relatively low at 4.8%; however, root reoperation is a risk factor for late mortality.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":74032,"journal":{"name":"JTCVS open","volume":"21 ","pages":"Pages 45-57"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reoperation after aortic root replacement and its impact on long-term survival\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.xjon.2024.05.003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>Reoperation after aortic root replacement (ARR) is associated with increased operative risk and complexity. This study evaluated clinical outcomes and reoperation rates in patients undergoing ARR.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>From 2004 to 2021, 2700 adult patients underwent an ARR in a 2-institution database. Among 2542 surviving patients, 705 patients who had a history of previous cardiac surgery as well as 11 patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement after index ARR were excluded. Among the finalized cohort of 1826 patients, 88 (4.8%) underwent a reoperation (REDO) on the aortic valve or proximal aorta (root/ascending) a mean of 3.1 years after index ARR whereas 1738 (95%) did not undergo reoperation (no-REDO). A subgroup analysis was performed among those undergoing reoperation by indication including valve dysfunction (48%), endocarditis/graft infection (33%), and aortic aneurysm/dissection/rupture (12%). Reoperative indication was unknown in 6 patients (7%).</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The REDO group was younger at time of index ARR (52 vs 58 years, <em>P</em> &lt; .0001) and had more bicuspid aortic valves (56% vs 37%, <em>P</em> = .0003). Most patients underwent modified Bentall ARR (61%), whereas 38% underwent a valve-sparing root replacement. Index root operations were similar between groups. At time of reoperation, 53% underwent aortic valve replacement and 35% underwent redo root replacement. Long-term survival was similar between REDO and no-REDO groups (80% vs 85%, <em>P</em> = .26) and reoperation was not a risk factor for late mortality (hazard ratio, 1.31; <em>P</em> = .26); however, REDO ARR was a risk factor for late mortality (hazard ratio, 2.41; <em>P</em> = .02).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The incidence of aortic valve and/or proximal aorta reoperation after index ARR is relatively low at 4.8%; however, root reoperation is a risk factor for late mortality.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74032,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JTCVS open\",\"volume\":\"21 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 45-57\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JTCVS open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666273624001232\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JTCVS open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666273624001232","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的主动脉根部置换术(ARR)后再次手术与手术风险和复杂性增加有关。本研究评估了主动脉根部置换术患者的临床预后和再次手术率。方法从 2004 年到 2021 年,两家机构的数据库中共有 2700 名成年患者接受了主动脉根部置换术。在 2542 名存活患者中,排除了 705 名既往有心脏手术史的患者,以及 11 名在指数 ARR 后接受经导管主动脉瓣置换术的患者。在最终确定的 1826 例患者中,88 例(4.8%)在指数 ARR 后平均 3.1 年接受了主动脉瓣或主动脉近端(根部/升支)的再次手术(REDO),而 1738 例(95%)没有接受再次手术(无 REDO)。根据瓣膜功能障碍(48%)、心内膜炎/移植物感染(33%)和主动脉瘤/夹层/破裂(12%)等适应症对接受再次手术的患者进行了亚组分析。6名患者(7%)的再手术指征不明。结果REDO组患者在进行指数ARR时年龄较小(52岁 vs 58岁,P < .0001),双尖主动脉瓣较多(56% vs 37%,P = .0003)。大多数患者接受了改良 Bentall ARR(61%),而 38% 的患者接受了保留瓣膜的根部置换术。两组患者的根部指数手术相似。再次手术时,53%的患者接受了主动脉瓣置换术,35%的患者接受了重做根部置换术。REDO 组和非 REDO 组的长期生存率相似(80% vs 85%,P = .26),重新手术不是晚期死亡的风险因素(危险比 1.31;P = .26);但是,REDO ARR 是晚期死亡的风险因素(危险比 2.41;P = .02)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Reoperation after aortic root replacement and its impact on long-term survival

Objective

Reoperation after aortic root replacement (ARR) is associated with increased operative risk and complexity. This study evaluated clinical outcomes and reoperation rates in patients undergoing ARR.

Methods

From 2004 to 2021, 2700 adult patients underwent an ARR in a 2-institution database. Among 2542 surviving patients, 705 patients who had a history of previous cardiac surgery as well as 11 patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement after index ARR were excluded. Among the finalized cohort of 1826 patients, 88 (4.8%) underwent a reoperation (REDO) on the aortic valve or proximal aorta (root/ascending) a mean of 3.1 years after index ARR whereas 1738 (95%) did not undergo reoperation (no-REDO). A subgroup analysis was performed among those undergoing reoperation by indication including valve dysfunction (48%), endocarditis/graft infection (33%), and aortic aneurysm/dissection/rupture (12%). Reoperative indication was unknown in 6 patients (7%).

Results

The REDO group was younger at time of index ARR (52 vs 58 years, P < .0001) and had more bicuspid aortic valves (56% vs 37%, P = .0003). Most patients underwent modified Bentall ARR (61%), whereas 38% underwent a valve-sparing root replacement. Index root operations were similar between groups. At time of reoperation, 53% underwent aortic valve replacement and 35% underwent redo root replacement. Long-term survival was similar between REDO and no-REDO groups (80% vs 85%, P = .26) and reoperation was not a risk factor for late mortality (hazard ratio, 1.31; P = .26); however, REDO ARR was a risk factor for late mortality (hazard ratio, 2.41; P = .02).

Conclusions

The incidence of aortic valve and/or proximal aorta reoperation after index ARR is relatively low at 4.8%; however, root reoperation is a risk factor for late mortality.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Repair of acute type A aortic dissection: The simplest solution is not always the best Are there etiology-specific risk factors for adverse outcomes in patients on Impella 5.5 support? Type B aortic dissection in Marfan patients after the David procedure: Insights from patient-specific simulation Reoperation after aortic root replacement and its impact on long-term survival Should we wait until the morning?
×
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