Detail
Článek
Článek online
FT
Medvik - BMČ
  • Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Aortic valve performance after remodelling versus reimplantation in a propensity-matched comparison

J. Gofus, J. Vojacek, M. Karalko, P. Zacek, A. Kolesar, T. Toporcer, M. Urban, F. Glac, S. Cerny, P. Homola, J. Hlubocky, A. Slautin, P. Fila, D. Zakova, J. Sterba, H. Rashid, A. Van Linden, T. Holubec

. 2024 ; 66 (2) : . [pub] 20240802

Jazyk angličtina Země Německo

Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, multicentrická studie, srovnávací studie

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc24019407

Grantová podpora
Cooperatio, area Cardiovascular science

OBJECTIVES: Both aortic root remodelling and aortic valve (AV) reimplantation have been used for valve-sparing root replacement in patients with aortic root aneurysm with or without aortic regurgitation. There is no clear evidence to support one technique over the another. This study aimed to compare remodelling with basal ring annuloplasty versus reimplantation on a multicentre level with the use of propensity-score matching. METHODS: This was a retrospective international multicentre study of patients undergoing remodelling or reimplantation between 2010 and 2021. Twenty-three preoperative covariates (including root dimensions and valve characteristics) were used for propensity-score matching. Perioperative outcomes were analysed along with longer-term freedom from AV reoperation/reintervention and other major valve-related events. RESULTS: Throughout the study period, 297 patients underwent remodelling and 281 had reimplantation. Using propensity-score matching, 112 pairs were selected and further compared. We did not find a statistically significant difference in perioperative outcomes between the matched groups. Patients after remodelling had significantly higher reintervention risk than after reimplantation over the median follow-up of 6 years (P = 0.016). The remodelling technique (P = 0.02), need for decalcification (P = 0.03) and degree of immediate postoperative AV regurgitation (P < 0.001) were defined as independent risk factors for later AV reintervention. After exclusion of patients with worse than mild AV regurgitation immediately after repair, both techniques functioned comparably (P = 0.089). CONCLUSIONS: AV reimplantation was associated with better valve function in longer-term postoperatively than remodelling. If optimal immediate repair outcome was achieved, both techniques provided comparable AV function.

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc24019407
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20241024110749.0
007      
ta
008      
241015s2024 gw f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1093/ejcts/ezae234 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)39102871
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a gw
100    1_
$a Gofus, Jan $u Department of Cardiac Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital in Hradec Kralove, Charles University, Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic $1 https://orcid.org/0000000203463137
245    10
$a Aortic valve performance after remodelling versus reimplantation in a propensity-matched comparison / $c J. Gofus, J. Vojacek, M. Karalko, P. Zacek, A. Kolesar, T. Toporcer, M. Urban, F. Glac, S. Cerny, P. Homola, J. Hlubocky, A. Slautin, P. Fila, D. Zakova, J. Sterba, H. Rashid, A. Van Linden, T. Holubec
520    9_
$a OBJECTIVES: Both aortic root remodelling and aortic valve (AV) reimplantation have been used for valve-sparing root replacement in patients with aortic root aneurysm with or without aortic regurgitation. There is no clear evidence to support one technique over the another. This study aimed to compare remodelling with basal ring annuloplasty versus reimplantation on a multicentre level with the use of propensity-score matching. METHODS: This was a retrospective international multicentre study of patients undergoing remodelling or reimplantation between 2010 and 2021. Twenty-three preoperative covariates (including root dimensions and valve characteristics) were used for propensity-score matching. Perioperative outcomes were analysed along with longer-term freedom from AV reoperation/reintervention and other major valve-related events. RESULTS: Throughout the study period, 297 patients underwent remodelling and 281 had reimplantation. Using propensity-score matching, 112 pairs were selected and further compared. We did not find a statistically significant difference in perioperative outcomes between the matched groups. Patients after remodelling had significantly higher reintervention risk than after reimplantation over the median follow-up of 6 years (P = 0.016). The remodelling technique (P = 0.02), need for decalcification (P = 0.03) and degree of immediate postoperative AV regurgitation (P < 0.001) were defined as independent risk factors for later AV reintervention. After exclusion of patients with worse than mild AV regurgitation immediately after repair, both techniques functioned comparably (P = 0.089). CONCLUSIONS: AV reimplantation was associated with better valve function in longer-term postoperatively than remodelling. If optimal immediate repair outcome was achieved, both techniques provided comparable AV function.
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    _2
$a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
650    _2
$a retrospektivní studie $7 D012189
650    _2
$a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
650    12
$a tendenční skóre $7 D057216
650    12
$a aortální chlopeň $x chirurgie $7 D001021
650    _2
$a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
650    12
$a replantace $x metody $7 D012092
650    12
$a aortální insuficience $x chirurgie $7 D001022
650    _2
$a senioři $7 D000368
650    _2
$a reoperace $x statistika a číselné údaje $7 D012086
650    _2
$a výsledek terapie $7 D016896
650    _2
$a chirurgická náhrada chlopně $x metody $7 D019918
650    _2
$a anuloplastika srdeční chlopně $x metody $7 D058385
650    _2
$a dospělí $7 D000328
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
655    _2
$a multicentrická studie $7 D016448
655    _2
$a srovnávací studie $7 D003160
700    1_
$a Vojacek, Jan $u Department of Cardiac Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital in Hradec Kralove, Charles University, Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic $1 https://orcid.org/0000000211509158 $7 xx0080226
700    1_
$a Karalko, Mikita $u Department of Cardiac Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital in Hradec Kralove, Charles University, Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic $1 https://orcid.org/0000000225354652
700    1_
$a Zacek, Pavel $u Department of Cardiac Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital in Hradec Kralove, Charles University, Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic $1 https://orcid.org/0000000211205453
700    1_
$a Kolesar, Adrian $u Department of Cardiac Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and East Slovak Institute of Cardiovascular Disease, Pavol Jozef Šafárik University, Košice, Slovakia $1 https://orcid.org/0000000293907191
700    1_
$a Toporcer, Tomas $u Department of Cardiac Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and East Slovak Institute of Cardiovascular Disease, Pavol Jozef Šafárik University, Košice, Slovakia
700    1_
$a Urban, Martin $u Department of Cardiac Surgery, Hospital AGEL Trinec-V Podlesí, Trinec, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Glac, Filip $u Department of Cardiac Surgery, Hospital AGEL Trinec-V Podlesí, Trinec, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Cerny, Stepan $u Department of Cardiac Surgery, Na Homolce Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic $u Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, University Hospital in Motol, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Homola, Pavel $u Department of Cardiac Surgery, Na Homolce Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Hlubocky, Jaroslav $u 2nd Department of Surgery, 1st Faculty of Medicine and General University Hospital in Prague, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Slautin, Andrey $u 2nd Department of Surgery, 1st Faculty of Medicine and General University Hospital in Prague, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Fila, Petr $u Department of Cardiovascular Surgery and Transplantation, Faculty of Medicine, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Zakova, Daniela $u Department of Cardiovascular Surgery and Transplantation, Faculty of Medicine, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Sterba, Jan $u Department of Cardiovascular Surgery and Transplantation, Faculty of Medicine, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Rashid, Hiwad $u Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, University Hospital Frankfurt and Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt/Main, Germany
700    1_
$a Van Linden, Arnaud $u Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, University Hospital Frankfurt and Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt/Main, Germany
700    1_
$a Holubec, Tomas $u Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, University Hospital Frankfurt and Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt/Main, Germany
773    0_
$w MED00001607 $t European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery $x 1873-734X $g Roč. 66, č. 2 (2024)
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39102871 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y - $z 0
990    __
$a 20241015 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20241024110743 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 2201940 $s 1231380
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC-MEDLINE
BMC    __
$a 2024 $b 66 $c 2 $e 20240802 $i 1873-734X $m European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery $n Eur J Cardiothorac Surg $x MED00001607
GRA    __
$p Cooperatio, area Cardiovascular science
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20241015

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Možnosti archivace