Conventional aortic valve replacement in transcatheter aortic valve implantation candidates: A 5-year experience

Sreekumar - Subramanian, Ardawan J. Rastan, David Holzhey, Martin Haensig, Joerg Kempfert, Michael A. Borger, Thomas Walther, Friedrich W. Mohr

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

15 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Patient selection for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) remains highly controversial. Some screened patients subsequently undergo conventional aortic valve replacement (AVR) because they are unsuitable TAVI candidates. This study examined the indications and outcomes for these patients, thereby determining the efficacy of the screening process. Between January 2006 and December 2010, 79 consecutive patients (49% men), aged older than 75 years with high surgical risk, were screened for TAVI, but subsequently underwent conventional AVR through a partial or complete sternotomy. The indications, demographics, and outcomes of this cohort were studied. Mean age was 80.4 ± 3.6 years. Mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 0.55 ± 0.16, and the mean logistic European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation was 13% ± 7%. Of the 79 patients, 6 (7.6%) had prior cardiac surgical procedures. Indications for TAVI denial after patient evaluations were a large annulus in 31 (39%), acceptable risk profile for AVR in 24 (30%), need for urgent operation in 11 (14%), and concomitant cardiovascular pathology in 5 (6%). Mean cross-clamp time was 55 ± 14 minutes, and cardiopulmonary bypass time was 81 ± 21 minutes. Concomitant procedures included a Maze in 12 patients (15%). Postoperative morbidity included permanent stroke in 2 (2.5%), respiratory failure in 9 (11%), and pacemaker implantation in 2 (2.5%). Hospital mortality was 1.3% (1 of 79). Cumulative survival at 6, 12, and 36 months was 88.5%, 87.1% and 72.7%, respectively. Our existing patient evaluation process accurately defines an acceptable risk cohort for conventional AVR. The late mortality rate reflects the advanced age and comorbidities of this cohort. The data suggest that overzealous widening of TAVI inclusion criteria may be inappropriate.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)726-730
Number of pages5
JournalAnnals of Thoracic Surgery
Volume94
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 2012

Fingerprint

Aortic Valve
Cardiac Surgical Procedures
Sternotomy
Hospital Mortality
Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement
Cardiopulmonary Bypass
Respiratory Insufficiency
Stroke Volume
Patient Selection
Comorbidity
Stroke
Demography
Pathology
Morbidity
Survival
Mortality

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Surgery
  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine

Cite this

Conventional aortic valve replacement in transcatheter aortic valve implantation candidates : A 5-year experience. / Subramanian, Sreekumar -; Rastan, Ardawan J.; Holzhey, David; Haensig, Martin; Kempfert, Joerg; Borger, Michael A.; Walther, Thomas; Mohr, Friedrich W.

In: Annals of Thoracic Surgery, Vol. 94, No. 3, 09.2012, p. 726-730.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Subramanian, Sreekumar - ; Rastan, Ardawan J. ; Holzhey, David ; Haensig, Martin ; Kempfert, Joerg ; Borger, Michael A. ; Walther, Thomas ; Mohr, Friedrich W. / Conventional aortic valve replacement in transcatheter aortic valve implantation candidates : A 5-year experience. In: Annals of Thoracic Surgery. 2012 ; Vol. 94, No. 3. pp. 726-730.
@article{b265b1296d4e4294aa4efdb2b7dcad2e,
title = "Conventional aortic valve replacement in transcatheter aortic valve implantation candidates: A 5-year experience",
abstract = "Patient selection for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) remains highly controversial. Some screened patients subsequently undergo conventional aortic valve replacement (AVR) because they are unsuitable TAVI candidates. This study examined the indications and outcomes for these patients, thereby determining the efficacy of the screening process. Between January 2006 and December 2010, 79 consecutive patients (49{\%} men), aged older than 75 years with high surgical risk, were screened for TAVI, but subsequently underwent conventional AVR through a partial or complete sternotomy. The indications, demographics, and outcomes of this cohort were studied. Mean age was 80.4 ± 3.6 years. Mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 0.55 ± 0.16, and the mean logistic European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation was 13{\%} ± 7{\%}. Of the 79 patients, 6 (7.6{\%}) had prior cardiac surgical procedures. Indications for TAVI denial after patient evaluations were a large annulus in 31 (39{\%}), acceptable risk profile for AVR in 24 (30{\%}), need for urgent operation in 11 (14{\%}), and concomitant cardiovascular pathology in 5 (6{\%}). Mean cross-clamp time was 55 ± 14 minutes, and cardiopulmonary bypass time was 81 ± 21 minutes. Concomitant procedures included a Maze in 12 patients (15{\%}). Postoperative morbidity included permanent stroke in 2 (2.5{\%}), respiratory failure in 9 (11{\%}), and pacemaker implantation in 2 (2.5{\%}). Hospital mortality was 1.3{\%} (1 of 79). Cumulative survival at 6, 12, and 36 months was 88.5{\%}, 87.1{\%} and 72.7{\%}, respectively. Our existing patient evaluation process accurately defines an acceptable risk cohort for conventional AVR. The late mortality rate reflects the advanced age and comorbidities of this cohort. The data suggest that overzealous widening of TAVI inclusion criteria may be inappropriate.",
author = "Subramanian, {Sreekumar -} and Rastan, {Ardawan J.} and David Holzhey and Martin Haensig and Joerg Kempfert and Borger, {Michael A.} and Thomas Walther and Mohr, {Friedrich W.}",
year = "2012",
month = "9",
doi = "10.1016/j.athoracsur.2012.04.068",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "94",
pages = "726--730",
journal = "Annals of Thoracic Surgery",
issn = "0003-4975",
publisher = "Elsevier USA",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Conventional aortic valve replacement in transcatheter aortic valve implantation candidates

T2 - A 5-year experience

AU - Subramanian, Sreekumar -

AU - Rastan, Ardawan J.

AU - Holzhey, David

AU - Haensig, Martin

AU - Kempfert, Joerg

AU - Borger, Michael A.

AU - Walther, Thomas

AU - Mohr, Friedrich W.

PY - 2012/9

Y1 - 2012/9

N2 - Patient selection for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) remains highly controversial. Some screened patients subsequently undergo conventional aortic valve replacement (AVR) because they are unsuitable TAVI candidates. This study examined the indications and outcomes for these patients, thereby determining the efficacy of the screening process. Between January 2006 and December 2010, 79 consecutive patients (49% men), aged older than 75 years with high surgical risk, were screened for TAVI, but subsequently underwent conventional AVR through a partial or complete sternotomy. The indications, demographics, and outcomes of this cohort were studied. Mean age was 80.4 ± 3.6 years. Mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 0.55 ± 0.16, and the mean logistic European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation was 13% ± 7%. Of the 79 patients, 6 (7.6%) had prior cardiac surgical procedures. Indications for TAVI denial after patient evaluations were a large annulus in 31 (39%), acceptable risk profile for AVR in 24 (30%), need for urgent operation in 11 (14%), and concomitant cardiovascular pathology in 5 (6%). Mean cross-clamp time was 55 ± 14 minutes, and cardiopulmonary bypass time was 81 ± 21 minutes. Concomitant procedures included a Maze in 12 patients (15%). Postoperative morbidity included permanent stroke in 2 (2.5%), respiratory failure in 9 (11%), and pacemaker implantation in 2 (2.5%). Hospital mortality was 1.3% (1 of 79). Cumulative survival at 6, 12, and 36 months was 88.5%, 87.1% and 72.7%, respectively. Our existing patient evaluation process accurately defines an acceptable risk cohort for conventional AVR. The late mortality rate reflects the advanced age and comorbidities of this cohort. The data suggest that overzealous widening of TAVI inclusion criteria may be inappropriate.

AB - Patient selection for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) remains highly controversial. Some screened patients subsequently undergo conventional aortic valve replacement (AVR) because they are unsuitable TAVI candidates. This study examined the indications and outcomes for these patients, thereby determining the efficacy of the screening process. Between January 2006 and December 2010, 79 consecutive patients (49% men), aged older than 75 years with high surgical risk, were screened for TAVI, but subsequently underwent conventional AVR through a partial or complete sternotomy. The indications, demographics, and outcomes of this cohort were studied. Mean age was 80.4 ± 3.6 years. Mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 0.55 ± 0.16, and the mean logistic European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation was 13% ± 7%. Of the 79 patients, 6 (7.6%) had prior cardiac surgical procedures. Indications for TAVI denial after patient evaluations were a large annulus in 31 (39%), acceptable risk profile for AVR in 24 (30%), need for urgent operation in 11 (14%), and concomitant cardiovascular pathology in 5 (6%). Mean cross-clamp time was 55 ± 14 minutes, and cardiopulmonary bypass time was 81 ± 21 minutes. Concomitant procedures included a Maze in 12 patients (15%). Postoperative morbidity included permanent stroke in 2 (2.5%), respiratory failure in 9 (11%), and pacemaker implantation in 2 (2.5%). Hospital mortality was 1.3% (1 of 79). Cumulative survival at 6, 12, and 36 months was 88.5%, 87.1% and 72.7%, respectively. Our existing patient evaluation process accurately defines an acceptable risk cohort for conventional AVR. The late mortality rate reflects the advanced age and comorbidities of this cohort. The data suggest that overzealous widening of TAVI inclusion criteria may be inappropriate.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84865239733&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84865239733&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2012.04.068

DO - 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2012.04.068

M3 - Article

C2 - 22818966

AN - SCOPUS:84865239733

VL - 94

SP - 726

EP - 730

JO - Annals of Thoracic Surgery

JF - Annals of Thoracic Surgery

SN - 0003-4975

IS - 3

ER -