In recent years, the number of interventions for valvular heart disease has been increasing day by day, and it has become a hot topic in the field of cardiovascular surgery. Given the aging global population and trends in the prevalence of valvular disease and the broadening of indications for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), a breakthrough of 130000 TAVR procedures is expected by 2026. In the new technology development period, the development potential and technical advantages of heart valve interventional therapy should be faced squarely. This paper focuses on key issues such as comparison of outcomes after TAVR versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), prosthetic valve endocarditis after TAVR, and broadening of indications for TAVR, as well as recommendations on how surgeons face the era of TAVR. We hope that this article will help and attract the attention of cardiac surgeons.
ObjectiveTo investigate clinical outcomes and risk factors of patients with valvular heart disease (VHD) and giant left ventricle undergoing heart valve replacement (HVR). MethodsClinical data of 144 VHD patients with giant left ventricle who underwent HVR in Union Hospital of Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology from January 2009 to December 2012 were retrospectively analyzed. There were 116 male and 28 female patients with their age of 15-69 (44.9±11.9) years and disease duration of 57.8±98.3 months (range, 1 month to 40 years). There were 92 patients with rheumatic VHD, 28 patients with degenerative VHD, 15 patients with congenital VHD, and 9 patients with infective endocarditis. A total of 137 patients who were discharged alive were followed up. Risk factors of postoperative mortality, morbidity and late death of VHD patients with giant left ventricle undergoing HVR were analyzed with t-test, chi-square test or Fisher's exact test, and logistic regression analysis. The life-table method was used to calculate long-term survival rate and draw the survival curve. ResultsMajor postoperative complications included low cardiac output syndrome (LCOS) in 19 patients (13.2%), ventricular arrhythmias in 56 patients (38.9%), prosthetic paravalvular leaks in 7 patients (4.9%), pleural effusion in 33 patients (22.9%), pericardial effusion in 8 patients (5.6%), liver failure in 23 patients (16.0%), and renal failure in 5 patients (3.5%). Seven patients (4.9%) died postoperatively. Logistic univariate analysis showed that advanced-age ( > 50 years), rheumatic VHD, higher preoperative NYHA class (Ⅲ or Ⅳ), long disease duration, poor preoperative left ventricular function[left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) < 40%], double valve replace-ment (DVR), other concomitant intracardiac procedures, prolonged cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time and aortic cross-clamping time, postoperative LCOS and ventricular arrhythmias were risk factors of early mortality of VHD patients with giant left ventricle undergoing HVR (P < 0.05). Logistic multivariate analysis showed that advanced age ( > 50 years), long disease duration, higher preoperative NYHA class (Ⅳ), poor preoperative left ventricular function (LVEF < 40%), DVR, prolonged CPB time were independent predictors of early mortality (P < 0.05). Logistic multivariate analysis showed that higher preoperative NYHA class (Ⅲ or Ⅳ), other concomitant intracardiac procedures, poor preoperative left ventricular function (LVEF < 50%) were independent predictors of postoperative LCOS (P < 0.05). Higher preoperative NYHA class (Ⅲ or Ⅳ) and preoperative non-sinus rhythm were independent predictors of postoperative ventricular arrhy-thmias (P < 0.05). Within 2 weeks after the operation, left ventricular end-diastolic dimension (LVEDD), left atrial diameter (LAD), LVEF and left ventricular fractional shortening (LVFS) were all significantly reduced compared with preoperative parameters (P < 0.05). Five patients died during follow-up. One-year, 2-year, 3-year and 4-year survival rates were 97.1%, 95.0%, 92.7% and 92.7% respectively. Preoperative LVEF, LVEDD and NYHA were significantly different between patients who died or survived during follow-up. ConclusionsHVR can produce low postoperative mortality, high long-term survival rates and satisfactory clinical outcomes for VHD patients with giant left ventricle. Advanced age ( > 50 years), long disease duration, higher preoperative NYHA class (Ⅳ), preoperative non-sinus rhythm, poor preoperative left ventricular function (LVEF < 40%), DVR and prolonged operation time may be risk factors of postoperative mortality and morbidity. Poor preoperative left ventricular function and significantly enlarged left ventricle may be risk factors of late death after HVR.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the changes of left ventricular morphology and contractile function of patients with mitral stenosis and small left ventricle after mitral valve replacement. MethodsStudies on the changes of left ventricular morphology and contractile function of patients with mitral stenosis and small left ventricle after mitral valve replacement were searched from the databases of Wangfang, VIP, CNKI, PubMed, Elsevier Science Direct, and Cochrane Library from establishment to January 2015. Quality of articles was evaluated. Relevant data were extracted from eligible studies to conduct meta-analysis. Mean differences (MD) of left ventricle end-diastolic volume index (LVEDVI), left ventricle end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and left ventricular fraction shortening (LVFS) between the preoperative and the postoperative value from eligible studies were analyzed and pooled, and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. R2.15.3 software was applied for statistical analysis. ResultsEight eligible studies involving 446 patients were analyzed in the study. The quality of included literature was high. The results of meta-analysis showed that LVEDVI and LVEDD increased by 14.51 ml/m2 with 95%CI -22.78 to -6.25 (P<0.01) and 4.88 mm with 95%CI -10.85 to 1.09 (P=0.11) respectively at 2 weeks postoperatively compared with preoperative value. LVEF decreased by 3.05% with 95%CI -3.02% to 9.12% (P=0.32) while LVFS increased by 1.16% with 95%CI -4.83% to 2.50% (P=0.53) at 2 weeks postoperatively. Compared with preoperative value, LVEDVI and LVEDD markedly increased by 16.11 ml/m2 with 95%CI -20.32 to -11.90 (P<0.01) and 10.56 mm with 95%CI -11.52 to -9.60 (P<0.01) respectively at 6 months postoperatively. LVEF and LVFS increased by 7.69% with 95%CI -17.18% to 1.8% (P=0.11) and 6.21% with 95%CI -10.07% to -2.36% (P<0.01) respectively at 6 months postoperatively compared with preoperative value. ConclusionLeft ventricular morphology and contractile function of patients with mitral stenosis and small left ventricle recovers well after mitral valve replacement.