Pilegaard H K, Lund O, Nielsen T T, Magnussen K, Knudsen M A, Albrechtsen O K
Departments of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery and Cardiology, Skejby Sygehus-Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Tex Heart Inst J. 1991;18(1):24-33.
From 1965 through 1986, 817 patients underwent aortic valve replacement at our institution. Six hundred forty-five patients received Starr-Edwards ball valves, including 286 Silastic ball valves (Models 1200/1260), 165 cloth-covered caged-ball prostheses (Models 2300/2310/2320), and 194 track-valve prostheses (Model 2400). In contrast, 172 patients received disc-valve prostheses, including 126 St. Jude Medical aortic bi-leaflet disc valves, 32 Lillehei-Kaster pivoting disc valves, and 14 Björk-Shiley valves (6 convexoconcave and 8 monostrut). With respect to preoperative data, the 2 groups were comparable, with the following differences. The Starr-Edwards group included 1) more men (77% versus 51%; p < 0.0001); 2) a significantly older patient population (59 +/- 10 years versus 56 +/- 15 years; p < 0.0001); 3) more patients in New York Heart Association functional class III or IV (72% versus 65%; p < 0.01); 4) fewer patients with angina pectoris as a limiting symptom (20% versus 36%; p < 0.0001); and 5) patients who tended to receive larger prostheses (26 +/- 2 mm versus 23 +/- 3 mm, p < 0.0001). The overall 10-year survival rate +/- standard error was 59% +/- 2% for patients receiving Starr-Edwards valves and 63% +/- 6% for those with disc valves. The linearized complication rates (expressed as percentage per patient-year +/- standard error) for the Starr-Edwards and disc-valve groups, respectively, were 2.0% +/- 0.2% and 1.4% +/- 0.5% for thromboembolism, 2.1% +/- 0.2% and 3.9% +/- 0.8% for Coumadin-related hemorrhage, 0.5% +/- 0.1% and 0.3% +/- 0.2% for endocarditis, 0.3% +/- 0.1% and 0.7% +/- 0.3% for other prosthesis-related complications, and 4.8% +/- 0.1% and 6.4% +/- 1.0% for all complications together. There were no instances of thrombotic occlusion or mechanical failure. After the 6th postoperative year, no thromboembolic events were encountered in patients with a Silastic ball valve; the 15-year freedom from thromboembolic events was 89%. Cox regression analysis showed that 1) a prosthetic orifice diameter of 15 mm or less was associated with an increased mortality; 2) disc valves entailed an increased rate of hemorrhage and prosthesis-related complications considered as a whole; 3) and Lillehei-Kaster valves led to an increased rate of prosthesis-related complications other than thromboembolism, hemorrhage, and endocarditis. Neither the type of prosthesis nor the size influenced the rate of thromboembolism, endocarditis, or prosthesis replacement. Because of their proven durability and relatively low price, we advocate the continued use of Starr-Edwards Model 1260 Silastic ball valves that have an orifice diameter of 16 mm or more.
1965年至1986年期间,我院共有817例患者接受了主动脉瓣置换术。645例患者植入了斯塔尔-爱德华兹球瓣,其中包括286例硅橡胶球瓣(1200/1260型号)、165例布包裹笼球式人工瓣膜(2300/2310/2320型号)和194例轨道瓣人工瓣膜(2400型号)。相比之下,172例患者植入了碟瓣,其中包括126例圣犹达医疗公司的主动脉双叶碟瓣、32例利尔海-卡斯特旋转碟瓣和14例比约克-希利瓣膜(6例凸凹型和8例单支柱型)。就术前数据而言,两组具有可比性,存在以下差异。斯塔尔-爱德华兹组包括:1)男性更多(77%对51%;p<0.0001);2)患者年龄显著更大(59±10岁对56±15岁;p<0.0001);3)纽约心脏协会心功能Ⅲ或Ⅳ级的患者更多(72%对65%;p<0.01);4)以心绞痛为限制症状的患者更少(20%对36%;p<0.0001);5)倾向于植入更大人工瓣膜的患者(26±2mm对23±3mm,p<0.0001)。接受斯塔尔-爱德华兹瓣膜患者的总体10年生存率±标准误为59%±2%,接受碟瓣患者的为63%±6%。斯塔尔-爱德华兹组和碟瓣组的线性化并发症发生率(以每位患者每年的百分比±标准误表示),血栓栓塞分别为2.0%±0.2%和1.4%±0.5%,华法林相关出血分别为2.1%±0.2%和3.9%±0.8%,心内膜炎分别为0.5%±0.1%和0.3%±0.2%,其他与人工瓣膜相关的并发症分别为0.3%±0.1%和0.7%±0.3%,所有并发症合计分别为4.8%±0.1%和6.4%±1.0%。未发生血栓性阻塞或机械故障的情况。术后第6年之后,植入硅橡胶球瓣的患者未发生血栓栓塞事件;15年无血栓栓塞事件的概率为89%。Cox回归分析表明:1)人工瓣膜开口直径为15mm或更小与死亡率增加相关;2)总体而言,碟瓣导致出血和与人工瓣膜相关并发症的发生率增加;3)利尔海-卡斯特瓣膜导致除血栓栓塞、出血和心内膜炎之外的与人工瓣膜相关并发症的发生率增加。人工瓣膜的类型和尺寸均未影响血栓栓塞、心内膜炎或人工瓣膜置换的发生率。鉴于其已证实的耐用性和相对较低的价格,我们主张继续使用开口直径为16mm或更大的斯塔尔-爱德华兹1260型号硅橡胶球瓣。