Lund O, Chandrasekaran V, Grocott-Mason R, Elwidaa H, Mazhar R, Khaghani A, Mitchell A, Ilsley C, Yacoub M H
Academic Department of Cardiac Surgery, Harefield Hospital, Middlesex, United Kingdom.
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1999 Jan;117(1):77-90; discussion 90-1. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5223(99)70471-x.
Allografts offer many advantages over prosthetic valves, but allograft durability varies considerably.
From 1969 through 1993, 618 patients aged 15 to 84 years underwent their first aortic valve replacement with an aortic allograft. Concomitant surgery included aortic root tailoring (n = 58), replacement or tailoring of the ascending aorta (n = 56), and coronary artery bypass grafting (n = 87). Allograft implantation was done by means of a "freehand" subcoronary technique (n = 551) or total root replacement (n = 67). The allografts were antibiotic sterilized (n = 479), cryopreserved (n = 12), or viable (unprocessed, harvested from brain-dead multiorgan donors or heart transplant recipients, n = 127). Maximum follow-up was 27.1 years.
Thirty-day mortality was 5.0%, and crude survival was 67% and 35% at 10 and 20 years. Ten- and 20-year rates of freedom from complications were as follows: endocarditis, 93% and 89%; primary tissue failure, 62% and 18%; and redo aortic valve replacement, 81% and 35%. Multivariable Cox analyses identified several valve- and procedure-related determinants: rising allograft donor age and antibiotic-sterilized allograft for mortality; donor more than 10 years older than patient for endocarditis; rising donor age minus patient age, rising implantation time (from harvest to aortic valve replacement), and donor age more than 65 years for tissue failure; and rising donor age minus patient age, young patient age, rising implantation time, and subcoronary implantation preceded by aortic root tailoring for redo aortic valve replacement. Estimated 10- and 20-year rates of freedom from tissue failure for a 70-year-old patient with a viable valve from a 30-year-old donor and no other risk factors were 91% and 64%; the figures were 71% and 20% if the donor age was 65 years. The rates of freedom from tissue failure for a 30-year-old patient with a 30-year-old donor were 82% and 39%; the figures were 49% and 3% with a 65-year-old donor. Beneficial influences of a viable valve were largely covered by short harvest time (no delay for allografts from brain dead organ donors or heart transplant recipients) and short implantation time.
Primary allograft aortic valve replacement can give acceptable results for up to 25 years. The late results can be improved by the use of a viable allograft, by matching patient and donor age, and by more liberal use of free root replacement with re-implantation of the coronary arteries rather than tailoring the root to accommodate a subcoronary implantation.
同种异体移植物与人工瓣膜相比有许多优势,但同种异体移植物的耐久性差异很大。
1969年至1993年,618例年龄在15至84岁的患者首次接受主动脉同种异体移植物置换主动脉瓣。同期手术包括主动脉根部修整(n = 58)、升主动脉置换或修整(n = 56)以及冠状动脉旁路移植术(n = 87)。同种异体移植物植入采用“徒手”冠状动脉下技术(n = 551)或全根部置换(n = 67)。同种异体移植物经抗生素消毒(n = 479)、冷冻保存(n = 12)或新鲜(未处理,从脑死亡的多器官供体或心脏移植受者获取,n = 127)。最大随访时间为27.1年。
30天死亡率为5.0%,10年和20年的粗生存率分别为67%和35%。10年和20年无并发症发生率如下:心内膜炎,93%和89%;原发性组织衰竭,62%和18%;再次主动脉瓣置换,81%和35%。多变量Cox分析确定了几个与瓣膜和手术相关的决定因素:同种异体移植物供体年龄增加和抗生素消毒的同种异体移植物与死亡率相关;供体比患者大10岁以上与心内膜炎相关;供体年龄减去患者年龄增加、植入时间(从获取到主动脉瓣置换)增加以及供体年龄超过65岁与组织衰竭相关;供体年龄减去患者年龄增加、患者年龄小、植入时间增加以及在主动脉根部修整后进行冠状动脉下植入与再次主动脉瓣置换相关。对于一名70岁患者,使用来自一名30岁供体的新鲜瓣膜且无其他危险因素,估计10年和20年无组织衰竭发生率分别为91%和64%;如果供体年龄为65岁,这两个数字分别为71%和20%。一名30岁患者使用一名30岁供体的瓣膜,无组织衰竭发生率分别为82%和39%;使用一名65岁供体的瓣膜,这两个数字分别为49%和3%。新鲜瓣膜的有益影响在很大程度上被较短的获取时间(脑死亡器官供体或心脏移植受者的同种异体移植物无延迟)和较短的植入时间所覆盖。
原发性同种异体移植物主动脉瓣置换术在长达25年的时间内可取得可接受的结果。通过使用新鲜同种异体移植物、匹配患者和供体年龄以及更广泛地使用冠状动脉再植入的全根部置换而非修整根部以适应冠状动脉下植入,可改善晚期结果。