Department of Cardiology, Erasmus MC University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Department of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, Erasmus MC University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Eur J Heart Fail. 2020 Oct;22(10):1878-1887. doi: 10.1002/ejhf.1989. Epub 2020 Oct 6.
The aim of this study was to compare early- and late-term survival and causes of death between patients with and without a concomitant aortic valve (AoV) procedure during continuous-flow left ventricular assist device (LVAD) surgery.
All adult primary continuous-flow LVAD patients on the International Society of Heart and Lung Transplantation (ISHLT) Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (IMACS) Registry (n = 15 267) were included in this analysis and stratified into patients submitted to a concomitant AoV procedure (AoV replacement or AoV repair) and patients without an AoV procedure. The primary outcome was early (≤90 days) survival post-LVAD surgery. Secondary outcomes were late survival (survival during the entire follow-up period) and conditional survival (in patients who survived the first 90 days post-LVAD surgery), and determinants. Patients who underwent concomitant AoV replacement (n = 457) had significantly reduced late survival compared with patients with AoV repair (n = 328) or without an AoV procedure (n = 14 482) (56% vs. 61% and 62%, respectively; P = 0.001). After adjustment for other significant predictors, concomitant AoV replacement remained an independent predictor for early [hazard ratio (HR) 1.226, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.037-1.449] and late (HR 1.477, 95% CI 1.154-1.890) mortality. However, patients undergoing AoV replacement or repair, in whom the presence of moderate-to-severe AoV regurgitation was diagnosed prior to LVAD implantation, had survival similar to patients not undergoing AoV interventions.
Concomitant AoV surgery in patients undergoing LVAD implantation is an independent predictor of mortality. Additional research is needed to determine the best AoV surgical strategy at the time of LVAD surgery.
本研究旨在比较主动脉瓣(AoV)同期手术与非同期手术的患者在连续血流左心室辅助装置(LVAD)手术后的早期和晚期存活率及死亡原因。
本研究纳入了国际心肺移植协会(ISHLT)机械辅助循环支持(IMACS)注册中心所有接受原发性连续血流 LVAD 治疗的成年患者(n=15267),并根据是否同期行 AoV 手术(AoV 置换或 AoV 修复)将患者分为两组。主要结局为 LVAD 手术后的早期(≤90 天)存活率。次要结局为晚期存活率(整个随访期间的存活率)和条件存活率(在存活至 LVAD 手术后 90 天的患者中)以及决定因素。同期行 AoV 置换术(n=457)的患者与同期行 AoV 修复术(n=328)或非同期 AoV 手术(n=14482)的患者相比,晚期存活率显著降低(分别为 56%、61%和 62%;P=0.001)。在调整了其他重要预测因素后,同期 AoV 置换术仍然是早期(危险比[HR]1.226,95%置信区间[CI]1.037-1.449)和晚期(HR 1.477,95%CI 1.154-1.890)死亡的独立预测因素。然而,在 LVAD 植入前诊断出中度至重度 AoV 反流的 AoV 置换或修复患者,其存活率与未行 AoV 干预的患者相似。
LVAD 植入患者同期行 AoV 手术是死亡率的独立预测因素。需要进一步研究以确定 LVAD 手术时最佳的 AoV 手术策略。