Dalén Magnus, Biancari Fausto, Rubino Antonino S, Santarpino Giuseppe, Glaser Natalie, De Praetere Herbert, Kasama Keiichiro, Juvonen Tatu, Deste Wanda, Pollari Francesco, Meuris Bart, Fischlein Theodor, Mignosa Carmelo, Gatti Giuseppe, Pappalardo Aniello, Svenarud Peter, Sartipy Ulrik
Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery and Anesthesiology, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
Department of Surgery, Oulu University Hospital, Oulu, Finland.
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2016 Jan;49(1):220-7. doi: 10.1093/ejcts/ezv014. Epub 2015 Feb 3.
The aim of this study was to analyse early postoperative outcomes and 2-year survival after aortic valve replacement (AVR) through a ministernotomy with a sutureless bioprosthesis implantation compared with a full sternotomy with implantation of a stented bioprosthesis.
Patients who underwent primary isolated non-emergent AVR at six European centres were included in the study. Of these, 182 (32%) underwent a ministernotomy with a sutureless bioprosthesis (ministernotomy sutureless group) and 383 (68%) a full sternotomy with a stented bioprosthesis (full sternotomy stented group). Propensity score matching was used to reduce selection bias.
In the overall cohort, 30-day mortality was 1.6 and 2.1%, and 2-year survival was 92 and 92% in the ministernotomy sutureless group and in the full sternotomy stented group, respectively. Propensity score matching resulted in 171 pairs with similar characteristics and operative risk. Aortic cross-clamp (40 vs 65 min, P < 0.001) and cardiopulmonary bypass time (69 vs 87 min, P < 0.001) were shorter in the ministernotomy sutureless group. Patients undergoing ministernotomy received less packed red blood cells but the risk for postoperative permanent pacemaker implantation was higher. There were no differences regarding 30-day mortality or 2-year survival between the two groups.
AVR through a ministernotomy with implantation of a sutureless bioprosthesis was associated with shorter aortic cross-clamp and cardiopulmonary bypass time and less transfusion of packed red blood cells, but a higher risk for postoperative permanent pacemaker implantation compared with a full sternotomy with a stented bioprosthesis.
本研究旨在分析与采用带支架生物假体植入的全胸骨切开术相比,经微创胸骨切开术植入无缝合生物假体进行主动脉瓣置换(AVR)后的早期术后结局和2年生存率。
纳入在六个欧洲中心接受初次单纯非急诊AVR的患者。其中,182例(32%)接受了微创胸骨切开术并植入无缝合生物假体(微创胸骨切开术无缝合组),383例(68%)接受了全胸骨切开术并植入带支架生物假体(全胸骨切开术带支架组)。采用倾向评分匹配以减少选择偏倚。
在整个队列中,微创胸骨切开术无缝合组和全胸骨切开术带支架组的30天死亡率分别为1.6%和2.1%,2年生存率分别为92%和92%。倾向评分匹配产生了171对具有相似特征和手术风险的配对。微创胸骨切开术无缝合组的主动脉阻断时间(40分钟对65分钟,P<0.001)和体外循环时间(69分钟对87分钟,P<0.001)较短。接受微创胸骨切开术的患者输注的浓缩红细胞较少,但术后永久性起搏器植入风险较高。两组在30天死亡率或2年生存率方面无差异。
与采用带支架生物假体的全胸骨切开术相比,经微创胸骨切开术植入无缝合生物假体进行AVR与较短的主动脉阻断时间和体外循环时间以及较少的浓缩红细胞输注相关,但术后永久性起搏器植入风险较高。