Holzhey David, Mohr Friedrich W, Walther Thomas, Möllmann Helge, Beckmann Andreas, Kötting Joachim, Figulla Hans Reiner, Cremer Jochen, Kuck Karl-Heinz, Lange Rüdiger, Sack Stefan, Schuler Gerhard, Beyersdorf Friedhelm, Böhm Michael, Heusch Gerd, Meinertz Thomas, Neumann Till, Papoutsis Konstantinos, Schneider Steffen, Welz Armin, Hamm Christian W
Heart Center Leipzig, Germany.
Heart Center Leipzig, Germany.
Ann Thorac Surg. 2016 Feb;101(2):658-66. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2015.07.090. Epub 2015 Nov 11.
Conventional aortic valve replacement (AVR) remains the therapy of choice for many patients with severe aortic valve disease. The unique German Aortic Valve Registry (GARY) allows the comparison of contemporary outcomes of AVR with those of transcatheter AVRs. We report here real-world, all-comers outcomes of AVR, including combined AVR and coronary bypass grafting (AVR+CABG).
A total of 34,063 patients who received AVR (22,107 patients, 39% female; mean age 68.0 ± 11.3 years, mean logistic European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation, 8.6%) or AVR+CABG (11,956 patients, 28% female; mean age 72.6 ± 7.8 years, mean logistic European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation, 10.7%) between 2011 and 2013 were analyzed and followed up to assess the 1-year outcome.
In-hospital mortality was 2.3% for AVR and 4.1% for AVR+CABG. Other important outcome variables include stroke (AVR, 1.2%; AVR+CABG, 1.9%) and new pacemaker implantation (AVR, 4.4%; AVR+CABG, 3.6%). Survival at 1 year was 93.2% for AVR and 89.4% for AVR+CABG. Total stroke rates at 1 year were 1.6% for AVR and 2.0% AVR+CABG. Quality of life assessment indicated that most patients were in New York Heart Association Functional Classification I or II (AVR, 86%; AVR+CABG, 84%) and that they were satisfied with the overall postoperative course (AVR, 88%; AVR+CABG, 87%).
Contemporary surgical AVR yields excellent outcomes with low in-hospital mortality, a low overall complication rate, and good 1-year outcome for all risk groups. Accordingly, conventional AVR remains an important therapeutic option for many patients.
对于许多患有严重主动脉瓣疾病的患者,传统主动脉瓣置换术(AVR)仍是首选治疗方法。独特的德国主动脉瓣注册研究(GARY)能够对AVR与经导管主动脉瓣置换术的当代治疗结果进行比较。我们在此报告AVR的真实世界、所有患者的治疗结果,包括AVR联合冠状动脉旁路移植术(AVR+CABG)。
分析了2011年至2013年间接受AVR(22107例患者,39%为女性;平均年龄68.0±11.3岁,平均逻辑欧洲心脏手术风险评估系统评分为8.6%)或AVR+CABG(11956例患者,28%为女性;平均年龄72.6±7.8岁,平均逻辑欧洲心脏手术风险评估系统评分为10.7%)的34063例患者,并对其进行随访以评估1年治疗结果。
AVR的住院死亡率为2.3%,AVR+CABG的住院死亡率为4.1%。其他重要的治疗结果变量包括中风(AVR为1.2%;AVR+CABG为1.9%)和新起搏器植入(AVR为4.4%;AVR+CABG为3.6%)。AVR的1年生存率为93.2%,AVR+CABG的1年生存率为89.4%。AVR的1年总中风率为1.6%,AVR+CABG为2.0%。生活质量评估表明,大多数患者属于纽约心脏协会心功能分级I或II级(AVR为86%;AVR+CABG为84%),并且他们对术后总体过程感到满意(AVR为88%;AVR+CABG为87%)。
当代外科AVR可产生优异的治疗结果,住院死亡率低,总体并发症发生率低,且对所有风险组的1年治疗结果良好。因此,传统AVR对许多患者仍然是一个重要的治疗选择。