Surgical ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) can be performed without additional risk of operative mortality or major morbidity, and is recommended at the time of concomitant mitral operations to ...restore sinus rhythm. (Class I, Level A) Surgical ablation for AF can be performed without additional operative risk of mortality or major morbidity, and is recommended at the time of concomitant isolated aortic valve replacement, isolated coronary artery bypass graft surgery, and aortic valve replacement plus coronary artery bypass graft operations to restore sinus rhythm. (Class I, Level B nonrandomized) Surgical ablation for symptomatic AF in the absence of structural heart disease that is refractory to class I/III antiarrhythmic drugs or catheter-based therapy or both is reasonable as a primary stand-alone procedure, to restore sinus rhythm. (Class IIA, Level B randomized) Surgical ablation for symptomatic persistent or longstanding persistent AF in the absence of structural heart disease is reasonable, as a stand-alone procedure using the Cox-Maze III/IV lesion set compared with pulmonary vein isolation alone. (Class IIA, Level B nonrandomized) Surgical ablation for symptomatic AF in the setting of left atrial enlargement (≥4.5 cm) or more than moderate mitral regurgitation by pulmonary vein isolation alone is not recommended. (Class III no benefit, Level C expert opinion) It is reasonable to perform left atrial appendage excision or exclusion in conjunction with surgical ablation for AF for longitudinal thromboembolic morbidity prevention. (Class IIA, Level C limited data) At the time of concomitant cardiac operations in patients with AF, it is reasonable to surgically manage the left atrial appendage for longitudinal thromboembolic morbidity prevention. (Class IIA, Level C expert opinion) In the treatment of AF, multidisciplinary heart team assessment, treatment planning, and long-term follow-up can be useful and beneficial to optimize patient outcomes. (Class I, Level C expert opinion).
Abstract Objectives The aim of this study was to assess the outcome of isolated tricuspid regurgitation (TR) and the added value of quantitative evaluation of its severity. Background TR is of ...uncertain clinical outcome due to confounding comorbidities. Isolated TR (without significant comorbidities, structural valve disease, significant pulmonary artery systolic pressure elevation by Doppler, or overt cardiac cause) is of unknown clinical outcome. Methods In patients with isolated TR assessed both qualitatively and quantitatively by a proximal isovelocity surface area method, a long-term outcome analysis was conducted. Patients with severe comorbid diseases were excluded. Results The study involved 353 patients with isolated TR (age 70 years; 33% male; ejection fraction, 63%; all with right ventricular systolic pressure <50 mm Hg). Severe isolated TR was diagnosed in 76 patients (21.5%) qualitatively and 68 patients (19.3%) by quantitative criteria (effective regurgitant orifice ERO ≥40 mm2 ). The 10-year survival and cardiac event rates were 63 ± 5% and 29 ± 5%. Severe isolated TR independently predicted higher mortality (adjusted hazard ratio: 1.78 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.10 to 2.82, p = 0.02 for qualitative definition and 2.67 95% CI: 1.66 to 4.23 for an ERO ≥40 mm2 , p < 0.0001). The addition of grading by quantitative criteria in nested models eliminated the significance of the qualitative grading and improved the model prediction (p < 0.001 for survival and p = 0.02 for cardiac events). The 10-year survival rate was lower with an ERO ≥40 mm2 versus <40 mm2 (38 ± 7% vs. 70 ± 6%; p < 0.0001), independent of all characteristics, right ventricular size or function, comorbidity, or pulmonary pressure (p < 0.0001 for all), and lower than expected in the general population (p < 0.001). Freedom from cardiac events was lower with an ERO ≥40 mm2 versus <40 mm2 independently of all characteristics, right ventricular size or function, comorbidity, or pulmonary pressure (p < 0.0001 for all). Cardiac surgery for severe isolated TR was rarely performed (16 ± 5% 5 years after diagnosis). Conclusions Isolated TR can be severe and is associated with excess mortality and morbidity, warranting heightened attention to diagnosis and quantitation. Quantitative assessment of TR, particularly ERO measurement, is a powerful independent predictor of outcome, superior to standard qualitative assessment.
The introduction of transcatheter aortic valve replacement mandates attention to outcomes after surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in low-risk, intermediate-risk, and very high-risk patients.
...The study population included 141,905 patients who underwent isolated primary SAVR from 2002 to 2010. Patients were risk-stratified by Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) predicted risk of mortality (PROM) <4% (group 1, n = 113,377), 4% to 8% (group 2, n = 19,769), and >8% (group 3, n = 8,759). The majority of patients were considered at low risk (80%), and only 6.2% were categorized as being at high risk. Outcomes were analyzed based on two time periods: 2002 to 2006 (n = 63,754) and 2007 to 2010 (n = 78,151).
The mean age was 65 years in group 1, 77 in group 2, and 77 in group 3 (p < 0.0001). The median STS PROM for the entire population was 1.84: 1.46% in group 1, 5.24% in group 2, and 11.2% in group 3 (p < 0.0001). Compared with PROM, in-hospital mean mortality was lower than expected in all patients (2.5% vs 2.95%) and when analyzed within risk groups was as follows: group 1 (1.4% vs 1.7%), group 2 (5.1% vs 5.5%), and group 3 (11.8% vs 13.7%) (p < 0.0001). In the most recent surgical era, operative mortality was significantly reduced in group 2 (5.4% vs 6.4%, p = 0.002) and group 3 (11.9% vs 14.4%, p = 0.0004) but not in group 1.
Nearly 80% of patients undergoing SAVR have outcomes that are superior to those by the predicted risk models. In the most recent era, early results have further improved in medium-risk and high-risk patients. This large real-world assessment serves as a benchmark for patients with aortic valve stenosis as therapeutic options are further evaluated.
Data from The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database were analyzed to identify trends in patient characteristics and outcomes of mitral valve operations in North America.
All ...patients with isolated primary mitral valve operations with or without tricuspid valve repair, surgical atrial fibrillation ablation, or atrial septal defect closure performed July 2011 to September 2016 were identified. A subgroup analysis assessed patients with degenerative leaflet prolapse (DLP).
Isolated primary mitral valve operations were performed on 87,214 patients at 1,125 centers, increasing by 24% between 2011 (n = 14,442) and 2016 (n = 17,907). The most common etiology was DLP (60.7%); 4.3% had functional mitral regurgitation. Preoperatively, 47.3% of patients had an ejection fraction less than 60% and 34.2% had atrial fibrillation. Overall mitral valve repair rate was 65.6%, declining from 67.1% (2011) to 63.2% (2016; p < 0.0001). Repair rates were related to etiology (DLP, 82.5%; rheumatic, 17.5%). Of the 29,970 mitral valve replacements, 16.2% were preceded by an attempted repair. Repair techniques included prosthetic annuloplasty (94.3%), leaflet resection (46.5%), and artificial cord implantation (22.7%). Bioprosthetic valves were implanted with increasing frequency (2011, 65.4%; 2016, 75.8%; p < 0.0001). Less-invasive operations were performed in 23.0% and concomitant tricuspid valve repair in 15.7%. Unadjusted operative mortality was 3.7% (replacements) and 1.1% (repairs).
Patients undergoing primary isolated mitral valve operations commonly have ventricular dysfunction, atrial fibrillation, and heart failure. Although contemporary outcomes are excellent, earlier guideline-directed referral and increased frequency and quality of repair may further improve results of mitral valve operations.
Reoperative aortic valve replacement (re-AVR) after previous AVR is a complex procedure involving redo sternotomy and removal of a previous prosthesis. With increasing use of valve-in-valve ...transcatheter aortic valve replacement for failed aortic bioprostheses, an evaluation of contemporary outcomes of re-AVR in patients with bioprostheses is warranted.
The study included 3,380 patients from The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database (July 2011 to September 2013) who underwent elective, isolated re-AVR after a previous AVR. Outcomes in these patients were compared with those of 54,183 patients with isolated primary AVR during the same period. A subgroup analysis of explanted bioprostheses in re-AVR (previous bioprosthetic valve: n = 2,213) was performed.
Re-AVR patients were younger (66 vs 70 years, p < 0.001) compared with primary AVR patients. Re-AVR was associated with higher operative mortality (4.6% vs 2.2%, p < 0.0001), composite operative mortality and major morbidity (21.6% vs 11.8%, p < 0.0001), postoperative stroke (1.9% vs 1.4%, p = 0.02), postoperative aortic insufficiency mild or greater (2.8% vs 1.7%, p < 0.0001), pacemaker requirement (11.0% vs 4.3%, p < 0.0001), and vascular complications (0.06% vs 0.01%, p = 0.04). For the explanted previous bioprosthetic valve group, operative mortality was 4.7%, composite outcome was 21.9%, stroke rate was 1.8%, and pacemaker requirement was 11.5%.
Re-AVR is now performed with an acceptable operative mortality, which is higher than primary AVR. The overall incidence of stroke, vascular complication, and postoperative aortic insufficiency was low although higher than primary AVR. These results may serve as a benchmark for future analysis of valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement and may have an effect on future choice of transcatheter aortic valve replacement vs re-AVR.
The RIFLE (risk, injury, failure, loss of kidney function, and end-stage renal failure) classification for acute kidney injury (AKI) was recently modified by the Acute Kidney Injury Network (AKIN). ...The two definition systems differ in several aspects, and it is not clearly determined which has the better clinical accuracy.
In a retrospective observational study we investigated 4,836 consecutive patients undergoing cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass from 2005 to 2007 at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. AKI was defined by RIFLE and AKIN criteria.
Significantly more patients were diagnosed as AKI by AKIN (26.3%) than by RIFLE (18.9%) criteria (P < 0.0001). Both definitions showed excellent association to outcome variables with worse outcome by increased severity of AKI (P < 0.001, all variables). Mortality was increased with an odds ratio (OR) of 4.5 (95% CI 3.6 to 5.6) for one class increase by RIFLE and an OR of 5.3 (95% CI 4.3 to 6.6) for one stage increase by AKIN. The multivariate model showed lower predictive ability of RIFLE for mortality. Patients classified as AKI in one but not in the other definition set were predominantly staged in the lowest AKI severity class (9.6% of patients in AKIN stage 1, 2.3% of patients in RIFLE class R). Potential misclassification of AKI is higher in AKIN, which is related to moving the 48-hour diagnostic window applied in AKIN criteria only. The greatest disagreement between both definition sets could be detected in patients with initial postoperative decrease of serum creatinine.
Modification of RIFLE by staging of all patients with acute renal replacement therapy (RRT) in the failure class F may improve predictive value. AKIN applied in patients undergoing cardiac surgery without correction of serum creatinine for fluid balance may lead to over-diagnosis of AKI (poor positive predictive value). Balancing limitations of both definition sets of AKI, we suggest application of the RIFLE criteria in patients undergoing cardiac surgery.
Objective Despite growing awareness of the clinical significance of atrial fibrillation (AF) and observational data demonstrating the safety and efficacy of surgical therapy, AF ablation is variably ...performed among patients with AF undergoing cardiac surgery. We examined the national trends of surgical ablation and perioperative outcomes for stand-alone surgical ablation of AF. Methods Using the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database, 91,801 (2005-2010) surgical AF ablations were performed of which 4893 (5.3%) were stand-alone procedures. The outcomes of 854 propensity-matched pairs having “on” versus “off” cardiopulmonary bypass stand-alone ablation were compared. Results The percentage of patients with preoperative AF increased from 2005 to 2010 (from 10.0% to 12.2%). Overall, 40.6% of patients with AF underwent concomitant surgical ablation—a significant decline of 1.6% from 2005 to 2010. The number of stand-alone surgical ablations increased significantly from 552 to 1041 cases (2005-2010). Overall, the stand-alone group had a mean age of 60 years, 71% were men, and 80% were treated “off” cardiopulmonary bypass. The “on” cardiopulmonary bypass group had significantly more pulmonary disease, diabetes, and congestive heart failure. Overall, the operative mortality and stroke rate was 0.7% for each. After propensity matching, the “off” cardiopulmonary bypass group underwent significantly fewer reoperations for bleeding and had a lower incidence of prolonged ventilation and shorter hospitalization. New pacemaker implantation was low, without group differences. Conclusions The prevalence of AF in patients undergoing cardiac surgery has increased, as has the number of stand-alone surgical ablations. The treatment of concomitant disease declined slightly. Isolated surgical ablation is safe, performed “on” or “off” cardiopulmonary bypass. These results support consideration of surgical AF ablation as an alternative to percutaneous ablation for patients with lone AF.
The optimal management of severe mitral valve regurgitation in patients without class I triggers (heart failure symptoms or left ventricular dysfunction) remains controversial in part due to the ...poorly defined long-term consequences of current management strategies. In the absence of clinical trial data, analysis of large multicenter registries is critical.
To ascertain the comparative effectiveness of initial medical management (nonsurgical observation) vs early mitral valve surgery following the diagnosis of mitral regurgitation due to flail leaflets.
The Mitral Regurgitation International Database (MIDA) registry includes 2097 consecutive patients with flail mitral valve regurgitation (1980-2004) receiving routine cardiac care from 6 tertiary centers (France, Italy, Belgium, and the United States). Mean follow-up was 10.3 years and was 98% complete. Of 1021 patients with mitral regurgitation without the American College of Cardiology (ACC) and the American Heart Association (AHA) guideline class I triggers, 575 patients were initially medically managed and 446 underwent mitral valve surgery within 3 months following detection.
Association between treatment strategy and survival, heart failure, and new-onset atrial fibrillation.
There was no significant difference in early mortality (1.1% for early surgery vs 0.5% for medical management, P=.28) and new-onset heart failure rates (0.9% for early surgery vs 0.9% for medical management, P=.96) between treatment strategies at 3 months. In contrast, long-term survival rates were higher for patients with early surgery (86% vs 69% at 10 years, P < .001), which was confirmed in adjusted models (hazard ratio HR, 0.55 95% CI, 0.41-0.72, P < .001), a propensity-matched cohort (32 variables; HR, 0.52 95% CI, 0.35-0.79, P = .002), and an inverse probability-weighted analysis (HR, 0.66 95% CI, 0.52-0.83, P < .001), associated with a 5-year reduction in mortality of 52.6% (P < .001). Similar results were observed in relative reduction in mortality following early surgery in the subset with class II triggers (59.3 after 5 years, P = .002). Long-term heart failure risk was also lower with early surgery (7% vs 23% at 10 years, P < .001), which was confirmed in risk-adjusted models (HR, 0.29 95% CI, 0.19-0.43, P < .001), a propensity-matched cohort (HR, 0.44 95% CI, 0.26-0.76, P = .003), and in the inverse probability-weighted analysis (HR, 0.51 95% CI, 0.36-0.72, P < .001). Reduction in late-onset atrial fibrillation was not observed (HR, 0.85 95% CI, 0.64-1.13, P = .26).
Among registry patients with mitral valve regurgitation due to flail mitral leaflets, performance of early mitral surgery compared with initial medical management was associated with greater long-term survival and a lower risk of heart failure, with no difference in new-onset atrial fibrillation.
The risk for and consequences of recurrent mitral regurgitation (MR) following degenerative mitral valve repair are poorly understood.
This study sought to examine recurrent MR risk along with ...reoperation and survival rates.
We evaluated patients undergoing primary mitral repair for isolated degenerative MR over 1 decade. Median follow-up was 11.5 years (interquartile range: 9.2 to 13.6 years) and was 99% complete. Multivariate analysis of post-repair MR recurrence employed Cox proportional hazards and multistate modeling.
A total of 1,218 patients met the study criteria; the mean age was 64 ± 13 years, mean ejection fraction was 63 ± 9%, and 864 (71%) patients were men. Prolapse was posterior in 62%, bileaflet in 26%, and anterior in 12%. The 15-year incidence of recurrent MR (i.e., MR ≥2) was 13.3%, incidence of mitral reoperation was 6.9%, and overall mortality was 44.0%. Repair before 1996 independently predicted MR recurrence (hazard ratio: 1.52). Additional determinants were: age, mild intraoperative residual MR, anterior leaflet prolapse, bileaflet prolapse, perfusion time >90 min, and lack of annuloplasty. Recurrence of moderate or greater MR was associated with adverse left ventricular remodeling and increased likelihood of death (hazard ratio: 1.72). Among those undergoing repair after 1996, MR recurrence rate was 1.5 per 100 patient-years during the first year post-repair, decreasing markedly to 0.9 thereafter.
Our study demonstrated that recurrent MR following degenerative mitral valve repair is associated with adverse left ventricular remodeling and late death. The incidence of MR recurrence decreases markedly following the first year after intervention. A transparent discussion of recurrent MR risk has pressing relevance when referring patients with complex mitral valve prolapse.
PDF
