Coronary artery bypass grafting associated to aortic valve replacement in the elderly: survival and quality of life.

Myocardial ischemia is often associated to aortic valve stenosis in the elderly. Aim of this study was to evaluate the impact on survival and quality of life of CABG associated to aortic valve replacement in the septuagenarians and octogenarians.Between January 1991 and January 2010, 520 patients ageing > 70 years underwent aortic valve replacement with a mechanical prosthesis in two Institutions. They were divided into 2 groups: Group A included 406 patients undergoing isolated aortic valve replacement; Group B 114 patients receiving aortic valve replacement and CABG. A comparative analysis of long-term survival and quality of life (SF-36 test) was performed.Mean age was 74.2 ± 3.6 years (74.3 ± 3.6 in Group A, 74 ± 3.3 in Group B; p = 0.33). Hospital mortality was 9.5% (46 patients). Twenty-nine (7.8%) in Group A and 17 in Group B (15.2%)(p = 0.019). Actuarial survival was 88.5% ± 0.015 at 1 year, 81.9% ± 0.02 at 5 years, 76.6% ± 0.032 at 10 and 57.3 ± 0.1 at 15 years. Ten-year survival was 77% ± 0.034 in Group A and 77.8% ± 0.045 in Group B (p = 0.2). Multivariate analysis did not reveal associated CABG as a predictor of long term mortality. The scores obtained in the SF-36 test were similar in the two groups and significantly higher than those of the general population matched for country, age and sex (p < 0.001 in all domains).Associated CABG determines a significant increase of hospital mortality in the elderly undergoing aortic valve replacement. Survivors did not show differences in long-term outcome and quality of life according to the presence of associated CABG.

Aortic valve replacement with 19-mm bileaflet prostheses in the elderly: left ventricular mass regression and quality of life.

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: The study aim was to evaluate left ventricular mass (LVM) regression, survival and quality of life in elderly patients after aortic valve replacement (AVR) with small-sized bileaflet prostheses. METHODS: Between September 1988 and September 2005, a total of 147 patients aged > 70 years underwent AVR with 19-mm bileaflet prostheses for aortic stenosis. In order to evaluate the impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) on long-term outcome, survivors were allocated to two groups according to the effective orifice area index (EOAI): group A, with EOAI < 0.85 cm2/m2, and group B with EOAI > or = 0.85 cm2/m2. Hospital survivors were interviewed using the SF-36 questionnaire, and the scores compared with those of age- and gender-matched members of the general Italian population. RESULTS: The mean patient age was 74.5 +/- 3.5 years, body surface area (BSA) 1.68 +/- 0.15 m2, and EOAI 0.73 +/- 0.2 cm2/m2. Hospital mortality was 8.8% (n = 13). Actuarial survival was 87.1 +/- 0.028% at one year, 81.3 +/- 0.035% at five years, and 77.2 +/- 0.044% at eight years. Eight-year survival was 74.0 +/- 0.062% in group A and 82.5 +/- 0.064% in group B (p = 0.29). Echocardiographic follow up showed a significant regression of LVM. Scores obtained in the SF-36 test were similar in the two groups, and significantly higher than those of the general Italian population matched for age and gender (p < 0.001 in all domains). CONCLUSION: The implantation of 19-mm bileaflet mechanical prostheses in the elderly allowed LVM regression and a good perceived quality of life. PPM did not influence the long-term survival of these patients.