• Media type: E-Article
  • Title: Surgical aortic valve replacement in patients aged 50–69 years—insights from the German Aortic Valve Registry (GARY)
  • Contributor: Vogt, Ferdinand; Santarpino, Giuseppe; Fujita, Buntaro; Frerker, Christian; Bauer, Timm; Beckmann, Andreas; Bekeredjian, Raffi; Bleiziffer, Sabine; Möllmann, Helge; Walther, Thomas; Beyersdorf, Friedhelm; Hamm, Christian; Böning, Andreas; Baldus, Stephan; Ensminger, Stephan; Fischlein, Theodor; Eckner, Dennis; Möllmann, Helge; Walther, Thomas; Beyersdorf, Friedhelm; Hamm, Christian; Ensminger, Stephan
  • Published in: European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery
  • Published: Oxford University Press (OUP), 2022
  • Language: English
  • DOI: 10.1093/ejcts/ezac286
  • ISSN: 1010-7940; 1873-734X
  • Keywords: Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine ; Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine ; General Medicine ; Surgery
  • Abstract: <jats:title>Abstract</jats:title> <jats:p /> <jats:sec> <jats:title>OBJECTIVES</jats:title> <jats:p>The aim of this study was to analyse the outcome of patients between 50 and 69 years of age undergoing biological or mechanical aortic valve replacement.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>METHODS</jats:title> <jats:p>Data were collected from the German Aortic Valve Registry. Data were analysed regarding baseline characteristics and outcome parameters such as 5-year survival, stroke and reintervention.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>RESULTS</jats:title> <jats:p>In total,</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title> </jats:title> <jats:p>3046 patients undergoing isolated surgical aortic valve replacement between 2011 and 2012 were investigated and a propensity score matching was performed. Within this period, 2239 patients received a biological prostheses, while 807 patients received a mechanical prosthesis. Mean age in the biological group was 63.07 (±5.11) and 57.34 (±4.67) in the mechanical group (standardized mean difference 1.172). In the overall cohort, there were more female patients in the biological group (32.7% vs 28.4%) and log EuroSCORE I was higher (5.41% vs 4.26%). After propensity matching (610 pairs), there was no difference in the mortality at 5-year follow-up (12.1% biological vs 9.2% mechanical P = 0.05) nor for reoperation/reintervention (2.5% biological vs 2.0% mechanical, P = 0.546). Patients undergoing mechanical aortic valve replacement suffered from a higher stroke rate 3.3% vs 1.5% (P = 0.04) at 5-year follow-up.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>CONCLUSIONS</jats:title> <jats:p>Aortic valve replacement with biological or mechanical prostheses showed similar 5-year outcomes for survival and reoperation in a propensity-matched cohort, but significantly increased stroke rate after mechanical aortic valve replacement. This could influence the choice of a mechanical valve in younger patients.</jats:p> </jats:sec>
  • Description: <jats:title>Abstract</jats:title>
    <jats:p />
    <jats:sec>
    <jats:title>OBJECTIVES</jats:title>
    <jats:p>The aim of this study was to analyse the outcome of patients between 50 and 69 years of age undergoing biological or mechanical aortic valve replacement.</jats:p>
    </jats:sec>
    <jats:sec>
    <jats:title>METHODS</jats:title>
    <jats:p>Data were collected from the German Aortic Valve Registry. Data were analysed regarding baseline characteristics and outcome parameters such as 5-year survival, stroke and reintervention.</jats:p>
    </jats:sec>
    <jats:sec>
    <jats:title>RESULTS</jats:title>
    <jats:p>In total,</jats:p>
    </jats:sec>
    <jats:sec>
    <jats:title> </jats:title>
    <jats:p>3046 patients undergoing isolated surgical aortic valve replacement between 2011 and 2012 were investigated and a propensity score matching was performed. Within this period, 2239 patients received a biological prostheses, while 807 patients received a mechanical prosthesis. Mean age in the biological group was 63.07 (±5.11) and 57.34 (±4.67) in the mechanical group (standardized mean difference 1.172). In the overall cohort, there were more female patients in the biological group (32.7% vs 28.4%) and log EuroSCORE I was higher (5.41% vs 4.26%). After propensity matching (610 pairs), there was no difference in the mortality at 5-year follow-up (12.1% biological vs 9.2% mechanical P = 0.05) nor for reoperation/reintervention (2.5% biological vs 2.0% mechanical, P = 0.546). Patients undergoing mechanical aortic valve replacement suffered from a higher stroke rate 3.3% vs 1.5% (P = 0.04) at 5-year follow-up.</jats:p>
    </jats:sec>
    <jats:sec>
    <jats:title>CONCLUSIONS</jats:title>
    <jats:p>Aortic valve replacement with biological or mechanical prostheses showed similar 5-year outcomes for survival and reoperation in a propensity-matched cohort, but significantly increased stroke rate after mechanical aortic valve replacement. This could influence the choice of a mechanical valve in younger patients.</jats:p>
    </jats:sec>
  • Footnote: