Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Heart, Vascular, and Thoracic Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio.
Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio.
Ann Thorac Surg. 2021 Jun;111(6):1893-1900. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2020.07.033. Epub 2020 Sep 25.
The value of allografts for aortic root replacement is controversial, with recent concern about limited durability. Currently, we prefer allografts for invasive infective endocarditis. Purposes of this study were to assess allograft performance and durability in our cumulative experience with aortic allografts.
From January 1987 to January 2017, 2042 adults received 2110 aortic allograft root replacements at our institution: 986 (47%) for infective endocarditis (669 [68%] for prosthetic valve endocarditis) and 1124 (53%) for other indications. Mean recipient age was 54 ± 15 years, and mean allograft donor age was 35 ± 13 years. Follow-up was 85% complete and comprised 17,253 patient-years of data. Longitudinal allograft performance was extracted from 6339 available echocardiographic studies. Durability was assessed by explant for allograft structural failure.
Allograft mean gradient at hospital discharge was 6 mm Hg and 9, 13, and 15 mm Hg at 5, 10, and 15 years post-implant, respectively. Severe aortic regurgitation was 0% at hospital discharge, but 14%, 25%, and 35% at 5, 10, and 15 years, respectively. A total of 405 allografts were explanted for structural failure, actuarially 2%, 14%, 34%, and 51% at 5, 10, 15, and 20 years, respectively. Risk factors for structural failure were younger recipient age, larger body surface area, hypertension, and thoracic aorta disease; donor factors were older age and larger allograft size. Implant for infective endocarditis was not associated with accelerated structural failure.
This study affirms allografts' long-term acceptable hemodynamic performance and durability. Concern about structural failure should not limit allograft use. Recipient hypertension, allograft size, and donor age are modifiable risk factors.
同种异体移植物在主动脉根部置换中的价值存在争议,最近人们对其耐久性有限表示担忧。目前,我们更倾向于将同种异体移植物用于侵袭性感染性心内膜炎。本研究的目的是评估同种异体移植物在我们使用同种异体移植物的累积经验中的表现和耐久性。
从 1987 年 1 月至 2017 年 1 月,我院 2042 名成人接受了 2110 例同种异体主动脉根部置换术:986 例(感染性心内膜炎 47%,其中 669 例[68%]为人工瓣膜心内膜炎)和 1124 例(其他指征 53%)。受体平均年龄为 54 ± 15 岁,供体平均年龄为 35 ± 13 岁。随访率为 85%,包括 17253 例患者年的数据。从 6339 例可获得的超声心动图研究中提取了同种异体移植物的纵向性能。通过同种异体结构性失败的植入物来评估耐久性。
同种异体移植物平均梯度在出院时为 6mmHg,分别在植入后 5、10 和 15 年时为 9、13 和 15mmHg。出院时严重主动脉瓣反流为 0%,但分别在 5、10、15 年时为 14%、25%和 35%。共有 405 个同种异体移植物因结构性失败而被植入,在 5、10、15 和 20 年时,分别为 2%、14%、34%和 51%。结构性失败的危险因素包括受体年龄较小、体表面积较大、高血压和胸主动脉疾病;供体因素为年龄较大和同种异体移植物较大。因感染性心内膜炎而植入的同种异体移植物与结构性失败的加速无关。
本研究证实了同种异体移植物的长期可接受的血液动力学性能和耐久性。对结构性失败的担忧不应限制同种异体移植物的使用。受体高血压、同种异体移植物大小和供体年龄是可改变的危险因素。