Repair of aortic root in patients with aneurysm or dissection: comparing the outcomes of valve-sparing root replacement with those from the Bentall procedure / Reparação de raiz aórtica em pacientes com aneurisma ou dissecção: comparando os resultados da técnica de substituição valve-sparing com os da operação de Bentall

INTRODUCTION: Management of aortic root aneurysm or dissection has been the subject of much discussion that has led to some modifications. The current trend is a valve-sparing root replacement. We compared the outcome following valve sparing root repair with Bentall procedure. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 70 patients who underwent root replacement for aneurysm or dissection and compared the outcomes of valve-sparing root replacement with those of the Bentall procedure from January 2007 to December 2011 at our institution. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients had valve-sparing aortic root replacement (VSR, including reimplantation or remodeling) (23 males and 2 females), and 45 patients had the Bentall procedure (34 males and 11 females). Patients who underwent a VSR were younger with a mean age of 55.4 ± 14.8 years compared to those who underwent the Bentall procedure with a mean age of 60.6 ± 12.7 (P=ns). The preoperative aortic insufficiency (AI) in the VSR group was moderate in 8 (32%) patients, and severe in 6 (24%). Preoperative creatinine was 1 ± 0.35 mg/dl in the VSR group and 1.1 ± 0.87 mg/dl in the Bentall group. In the VSR group, 3 (12%) patients had emergency surgery; by contrast, in the Bentall group, 8 (17%) patients had emergent surgery. Concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting (excluding coronary reimplantation) was performed in 8 (32%) patients in the VSR group and in 12 (26.6%) patients in the Bentall group (P=0.78); additional valve procedures were performed in 2 (8%) patients in the VSR group and in 11 (24.4%) patients in the Bentall group. The perioperative mortality was 8% (n=2) and 13.3% (n=6), for the VSR and Bentall procedures, respectively (P=0.7, ns). The total duration of intensive care unit stay was 116.6 ± 106 hours for VSR patients and 152.5 ± 218.2 hours for Bentall patients (P=0.5). The overall length of stay in the hospital was 10 ± 8.1 days for VSR and 11 ± 9.52 days for Bentall (P=0.89). The one-year survival was 92% for the VSR group and 79.0% for the Bentall group. The seven-year survival for the VSR group was 92% and 79% for the Bentall group (95% CI [1.215 to 0.1275], P=0.1). CONCLUSION: Aortic valve-sparing root replacement can be performed with acceptable morbidity and mortality with a comparable long-term survival to the Bentall procedure.

INTRODUÇÃO: Manejo de aneurisma da aorta ou dissecção da raiz tem sido objeto de muita discussão que levou a algumas modificações. A tendência atual é o uso da técnica de substituição valve-sparing (VSR). Nós comparamos o resultado da reparação da raiz utilizando a técnica de substituição valve-sparing com o procedimento de Bentall. MÉTODOS: Foram avaliados, retrospectivamente, 70 pacientes submetidos à substituição da raiz de aneurisma ou dissecção, comparando os resultados da técnica de substituição valve-sparing com os do procedimento Bentall de janeiro de 2007 a dezembro de 2011 em nossa instituição. RESULTADOS: Vinte e cinco pacientes foram submetidos à substituição da valva aórtica com o uso da técnica valve-sparing (VSR, incluindo o reimplante ou remodelação) (23 homens e duas mulheres), e 45 pacientes pelo procedimento de Bentall (34 homens e 11 mulheres). Pacientes que se submeteram à VSR eram mais jovens, com idade média de 55,4 ± 14,8 anos em comparação àqueles que foram submetidos ao procedimento Bentall, idade média de 60,6 ± 12,7 anos (P = ns). A insuficiência aórtica pré-operatória no grupo VSR foi moderada em oito (32%) pacientes e grave em seis (24%). Creatinina pré-operatória foi 1 ± 0,35 mg/dl, no grupo do VSR, e 1,1 ± 0,87 mg/dl, no grupo de Bentall. No grupo VSR, três (12%) pacientes foram operados em caráter de emergência e, no grupo de Bentall, oito (17%). Revascularização do miocárdio concomitante (excluindo reimplante coronariano) foi realizada em oito (32%) pacientes no grupo VSR e, em 12 (26,6%), no grupo de Bentall (P=0,78); procedimentos valvares adicionais foram realizados em 2 (8%) pacientes no grupo do VSR e em 11 (24,4%) no grupo de Bentall. A mortalidade perioperatória foi de 8% (n = 2) e 13,3% (n = 6), para os procedimentos de VSR e Bentall, respectivamente (P=0,7, ns). O tempo de internação na unidade de terapia intensiva foi de 116,6 ± 106,0 horas para pacientes VSR e 152,5 ± 218,2 horas para pacientes Bentall (P=0,5). O tempo de permanência no hospital foi de 10 ± 8,1 dias para VSR e 11 ± 9,52 dias para Bentall (P=0,89). A sobrevida em um ano foi de 92,0 % para o grupo VSR e 79,0% para o grupo de Bentall. A sobrevivência de sete anos para o grupo VSR foi de 92% e 79% para o grupo de Bentall (IC95% [1,215 a 0,1275], P=0,1). CONCLUSÃO: A técnica valve-sparing substituição da raiz aórtica pode ser realizada com a morbidade e mortalidade aceitáveis, e sobrevivência aceitável a longo prazo comparável com o procedimento de Bentall.

Repair of aortic root in patients with aneurysm or dissection: comparing the outcomes of valve-sparing root replacement with those from the Bentall procedure.

INTRODUCTION: Management of aortic root aneurysm or dissection has been the subject of much discussion that has led to some modifications. The current trend is a valve-sparing root replacement. We compared the outcome following valve sparing root repair with Bentall procedure. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 70 patients who underwent root replacement for aneurysm or dissection and compared the outcomes of valve-sparing root replacement with those of the Bentall procedure from January 2007 to December 2011 at our institution. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients had valve-sparing aortic root replacement (VSR, including reimplantation or remodeling) (23 males and 2 females), and 45 patients had the Bentall procedure (34 males and 11 females). Patients who underwent a VSR were younger with a mean age of 55.4 ± 14.8 years compared to those who underwent the Bentall procedure with a mean age of 60.6 ± 12.7 (P=ns). The preoperative aortic insufficiency (AI) in the VSR group was moderate in 8 (32%) patients, and severe in 6 (24%). Preoperative creatinine was 1 ± 0.35 mg/dl in the VSR group and 1.1 ± 0.87 mg/dl in the Bentall group. In the VSR group, 3 (12%) patients had emergency surgery; by contrast, in the Bentall group, 8 (17%) patients had emergent surgery. Concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting (excluding coronary reimplantation) was performed in 8 (32%) patients in the VSR group and in 12 (26.6%) patients in the Bentall group (P=0.78); additional valve procedures were performed in 2 (8%) patients in the VSR group and in 11 (24.4%) patients in the Bentall group. The perioperative mortality was 8% (n=2) and 13.3% (n=6), for the VSR and Bentall procedures, respectively (P=0.7, ns). The total duration of intensive care unit stay was 116.6 ± 106 hours for VSR patients and 152.5 ± 218.2 hours for Bentall patients (P=0.5). The overall length of stay in the hospital was 10 ± 8.1 days for VSR and 11 ± 9.52 days for Bentall (P=0.89). The one-year survival was 92% for the VSR group and 79.0% for the Bentall group. The seven-year survival for the VSR group was 92% and 79% for the Bentall group (95% CI [1.215 to 0.1275], P=0.1). CONCLUSION: Aortic valve-sparing root replacement can be performed with acceptable morbidity and mortality with a comparable long-term survival to the Bentall procedure.

Myocardial viability and survival in ischemic left ventricular dysfunction

Background The assessment of myocardial viability has been used to identify patients withcoronary artery disease and left ventricular dysfunction in whom coronary-arterybypass grafting (CABG) will provide a survival benefit. However, the efficacy of thisapproach is uncertain. Methods In a substudy of patients with coronary artery disease and left ventricular dysfunctionwho were enrolled in a randomized trial of medical therapy with or withoutCABG, we used single-photon-emission computed tomography (SPECT), dobutamineechocardiography, or both to assess myocardial viability on the basis of prespecifiedthresholds.ResultsAmong the 1212 patients enrolled in the randomized trial, 601 underwent assessmentof myocardial viability. Of these patients, we randomly assigned 298 to receivemedical therapy plus CABG and 303 to receive medical therapy alone. A total of 178of 487 patients with viable myocardium (37%) and 58 of 114 patients without viablemyocardium (51%) died (hazard ratio for death among patients with viable myocardium,0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.48 to 0.86; P = 0.003). However, afteradjustment for other baseline variables, this association with mortality was notsignificant (P = 0.21). There was no significant interaction between viability statusand treatment assignment with respect to mortality (P = 0.53).ConclusionsThe presence of viable myocardium was associated with a greater likelihood ofsurvival in patients with coronary artery disease and left ventricular dysfunction,but this relationship was not significant after adjustment for other baseline variables.The assessment of myocardial viability did not identify patients with a differentialsurvival benefit from CABG, as compared with medical therapy alone.(Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; STICH ClinicalTrials.govnumber, NCT00023595.)

Perioperative effects and safety of nesiritide following cardiac surgery in children.

Nesiritide (Natrecor, Scios Inc), human B-type natriuretic peptide, has hemodynamic effects that may be beneficial in pediatric patients after cardiac surgery. Experience with nesiritide and pediatrics is limited. The purpose of this study was to evaluate perioperative effects and safety of nesiritide in pediatric cardiothoracic surgery. Seventeen patients with congenital heart disease undergoing cardiac surgery were given a loading dose (1 microg/kg) while on cardiopulmonary bypass (constant flow) followed by continuous infusion for 24 hours (0.01 microg/kg/min x 6 hours, then 0.02 microg/kg/min x 18 hours). A 7% decrease in mean blood pressure was seen following nesiritide loading dose on cardiopulmonary bypass. No patient required intervention for hypotension while receiving nesiritide load or infusion. Nesiritide load during surgery and continuous infusion after cardiac surgery in pediatric patients resulted in no significant hemodynamic compromise.