Trends in practice and outcomes from 2011 to 2015 for surgical aortic valve replacement: an update from the German Aortic Valve Registry on 42 776 patients
Open Access
- 27 November 2017
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery
- Vol. 53 (3), 552-559
- https://doi.org/10.1093/ejcts/ezx408
Abstract
Surgical aortic valve replacement (sAVR) is coming under close scrutiny with the recent upswing in the use of less invasive approaches. The aim of this analysis was to identify current trends in patient selection, procedural characteristics and outcomes after sAVR in Germany. We analysed data from 42 776 patients included in the German Aortic Valve Registry who underwent sAVR with and without coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) between 2011 and 2015. Baseline, procedural and short-term outcome parameters were analysed. Of all registered patients, 26 618 (62.2%) underwent isolated sAVR and 16 158 (37.8%) sAVR + CABG. The median age was 72 years, and the median Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality (STS PROM) was 2.3%. From 2011 to 2015, there was a decline in STS PROM (2.4–2.2%, P < 0.001) and a decline in risk factors, such as pulmonary hypertension (9.1–3.2%, P < 0.001), occlusive arterial disease (19.6–17.7%, P = 0.003), mitral regurgitation ≥2° (10.6–7.6%, P < 0.001) and New York Heart Association Class III/IV (65.3–59.2%, P < 0.001). In-hospital mortality was 2.3%, 1.3% had disabling stroke, 0.4% residual aortic regurgitation ≥2°, and the incidence of new-onset pacemaker/implantable cardioverter–defibrillator implantation was 3.9%. There was an increase in the use of biological valves in patients P < 0.001), and the proportion of rapid deployment valves increased significantly (1.5–8.4%, P < 0.001) over the investigated time period. Both isolated sAVR as well as sAVR + CABG resulted in excellent in-hospital outcomes based on >42 000 patients treated between 2011 and 2015. The implementation of alternative treatment strategies has resulted in palpable changes in patient and device selection.Keywords
This publication has 30 references indexed in Scilit:
- Late outcomes comparison of nonelderly patients with stented bioprosthetic and mechanical valves in the aortic position: A propensity-matched analysisThe Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 2014
- Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Failed Bioprosthetic Surgical ValvesPublished by American Medical Association (AMA) ,2014
- 2014 AHA/ACC Guideline for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease: Executive SummaryJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 2014
- Trends and outcomes of valve surgery: 16-year results of Netherlands Cardiac Surgery National Database†European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, 2014
- Guidelines on the management of valvular heart disease (version 2012)European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, 2012
- Updated Standardized Endpoint Definitions for Transcatheter Aortic Valve ImplantationJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 2012
- Combined elective percutaneous coronary intervention and transapical transcatheter aortic valve implantationInteractive CardioVascular and Thoracic Surgery, 2012
- Aortic Valve Replacement: A Prospective Randomized Evaluation of Mechanical Versus Biological Valves in Patients Ages 55 to 70 YearsJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 2009
- Systematic Strategy of Prophylactic Coronary Angiography Improves Long-Term Outcome After Major Vascular Surgery in Medium- to High-Risk Patients: A Prospective, Randomized StudyJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 2009
- Very Long-Term Survival Implications of Heart Valve Replacement With Tissue Versus Mechanical Prostheses in Adults <60 Years of AgeCirculation, 2007