Cargando…

Trends and outcomes of concomitant aortic valve replacement and coronary artery bypass grafting in the UK and a survey of practices

OBJECTIVES: Concomitant revascularization of coronary artery disease at the same time as treatment for aortic valvopathy favourably impacts survival. However, combined surgery may be associated with increased adverse outcomes compared to aortic valve replacement (AVR) or coronary artery bypass graft...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fudulu, Daniel P, Layton, Georgia R, Nguyen, Bao, Sinha, Shubhra, Dimagli, Arnaldo, Guida, Gustavo, Abbasciano, Riccardo, Viviano, Alessandro, Angelini, Gianni D, Zakkar, Mustafa
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10580967/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37462523
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ejcts/ezad259
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVES: Concomitant revascularization of coronary artery disease at the same time as treatment for aortic valvopathy favourably impacts survival. However, combined surgery may be associated with increased adverse outcomes compared to aortic valve replacement (AVR) or coronary artery bypass grafting in isolation. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed all patients who underwent AVR with bypass grafting between February 1996 and March 2019 using data from the National Adult Cardiac Surgery Audit. We used a generalized mixed-effects model to assess the effect of the number and type of bypass grafts associated with surgical AVR on in-hospital mortality, postoperative stroke, and the need for renal dialysis. Furthermore, we conducted an international cross-sectional survey of cardiac surgeons to explore their views about concomitant AVR with coronary bypass grafting interventions. RESULTS: Fifty-one thousand two hundred and seventy-two patients were included in the study. Patients receiving 2 or more bypass grafts demonstrated more significant preoperative comorbidity and disease severity. Patients undergoing 2 and >2 grafts in addition to AVR had increased mortality as compared to patients undergoing AVR and only 1 graft [odds ratio (OR) 1.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) [1.05–1.30], P = 0.005 and OR 1.15, 95% CI [1.02–1.30], P = 0.024 respectively]. A single arterial conduit was associated with a reduction in mortality (OR 0.75, 95% CI [0.68–0.82], P < 0.001) and postoperative dialysis (OR 0.87, 95% CI [0.78–0.96], P = 0.006), but this association was lost with >1 arterial conduit. One hundred and three surgeons responded to our survey, with only a small majority believing that the number of bypass grafts can influence short- or long-term postoperative outcomes in these patients, and an almost equal split in responders supporting the use of staged or hybrid interventions for patients with concomitant pathology. CONCLUSIONS: The number of grafts performed during combined AVR and coronary artery bypass grafting is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. The use of an arterial graft was also associated with reduced mortality. Future studies are needed to assess the effect of incomplete revascularization and measure long-term outcomes. Based on our data, current published evidence, and the collective expert opinion we gathered, we endorse future work to investigate the short and long-term efficacy and safety of hybrid intervention for patients with concomitant advanced coronary and aortic valve disease.