Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Objective

Aortic valve disease is more and more common in western countries. While percutaneous approaches should be preferred in older adults, previous reports have shown good outcomes after surgery. Moreover, advantages of minimally invasive approaches may be valuable for octogenarians. We sought to compare outcomes of conventional aortic valve replacement (CAVR) versus minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (MIAVR) in octogenarians.

Methods

We retrospectively collected data of 75 consecutive octogenarians who underwent primary, elective, isolated aortic valve surgery through conventional approach (41 patients, group CAVR) or partial upper sternotomy (34 patients, group MIAVR).

Results

Mean age was 81.9 ± 0.9 and 82.3 ± 1.1 years in CAVR and MIAVR patients, respectively (P = 0.09). MIAVR patients had lower 24-hour chest drain output (353.4 ± 207.1 vs 501.7 ± 229.9 mL, P < 0.01), shorter mechanical ventilation (9.6 ± 2.4 vs 11.3 ± 2.3 hours, P < 0.01), lower need for blood transfusions (35.3% vs 63.4%, P = 0.02), and shorter hospital stay (6.8 ± 1.6 vs 8.3 ± 4.3 days, P < 0.01). Thirty-day mortality was zero in both groups. Survival at 1, 3, and 5 years was 89.9%, 80%, and 47%, respectively, in the CAVR group, and 93.2%, 82.4%, and 61.8% in the MIAVR group, with no statistically significant differences (log-rank test, P = 0.35).

Conclusions

Aortic valve surgery in older patients provided excellent results, as long as appropriate candidates were selected. MIAVR was associated with shorter mechanical ventilation, reduced blood transfusions, and reduced hospitalization length, without affecting perioperative complications or mid-term survival.

Keywords

aortic valve aortic valve replacement octogenarians minimally invasive

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Lindroos

Kupari

Heikkilä

et al. Prevalence of aortic valve abnormalities in the elderly: an echocardiographic study of a random population sample. J Am Coll Cardiol 1993; 21: 1220–1225.8459080

Stewart

BF.

Siscovick

Lind

et al. Clinical factors associated with calcific aortic valve disease. Cardiovascular Health Study. J Am Coll Cardiol 1997; 29: 630–634.9060903

ISTAT Data 2019 . Italian Annual Report. ISBN 978-88-458-2003-8. 2019: 87–119.

Baumgartner

Falk

Bax

et al. ESC/EACTS guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease. Eur Heart J 2017; 2017: 2739–2791.

Hewitt

TD.

Santa Maria

PL.

Alvarez

. Cardiac surgery in Australian octogenarians: 1996–2001. ANZ J Surg 2003; 73: 749–754.12956792

Asimakopoulos

Edwards

MB.

Taylor

. Aortic valve replacement in patients 80 years of age and older: survival and cause of death based on 1100 cases: collective results from the UK Heart Valve Registry. Circulation 1997; 96: 3403–3408.9396434

Phan

Xie

Di Eusanio

et al. A meta-analysis of minimally invasive versus conventional sternotomy for aortic valve replacement. Ann Thorac Surg 2014; 98: 1499–1511.25064516

Bruno

Cammertoni

Rosenhek

et al. Improved patient recovery with minimally invasive aortic valve surgery: a propensity-matched study. Innovations 2019; 14: 419–427.31431105

Lee

DH.

Buth

KJ.

Martin

B-J

et al. Frail patients are at increased risk for mortality and prolonged institutional care after cardiac surgery. Circulation 2010; 121: 973–978.20159833

10.

Afilalo

Mottillo

Eisenberg

et al. Addition of frailty and disability to cardiac surgery risk scores identifies elderly patients at high risk of mortality or major morbidity. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2012; 5: 222–228.22396586

11.

Hamerman

. Toward an understanding of frailty. Ann Intern Med 1999; 130: 945–950.10375351

12.

Afilalo

Eisenberg

MJ.

Morin

J-F

et al. Gait speed as an incremental predictor of mortality and major morbidity in elderly patients undergoing cardiac surgery. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010; 56: 1668–1676.21050978

13.

Arora

RC.

Brown

CH.

Sanjanwala

et al. “NEW” prehabilitation: a 3-way approach to improve postoperative survival and health-related quality of life in cardiac surgery patients. Can J Cardiol 2018; 34: 839–849.29960613

14.

Guralnik

JM.

Simonsick

EM.

Ferrucci

et al. A short physical performance battery assessing lower extremity function: association with self-reported disability and prediction of mortality and nursing home admission. J Gerontol 1994; 49: M85–M94.8126356

15.

Pfeiffer

. A short portable mental status questionnaire for the assessment of organic brain deficit in elderly patients. J Am Geriatr Soc 1975; 23: 433–441.1159263

16.

Fried

LP.

Tangen

CM.

Walston

et al. Frailty in older adults: evidence for a phenotype. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2001; 56: M146–M157.11253156

17.

Arthur

HM.

Daniels

McKelvie

et al. Effect of a preoperative intervention on preoperative and postoperative outcomes in low-risk patients awaiting elective coronary artery bypass graft surgery. A randomized, controlled trial. Ann Intern Med 2000; 133: 253–262.10929164

18.

Cermak

NM.

Res

PT.

de Groot

LCPGM

et al. Protein supplementation augments the adaptive response of skeletal muscle to resistance-type exercise training: a meta-analysis. Am J Clin Nutr 2012; 96: 1454–1464.23134885

19.

Ditchfield

JA.

Granger

Spratt

et al. Aortic valve replacement in octogenarians. Heart Lung Circ 2014; 23: 841–846.24751512

20.

Chiappini

Camurri

Loforte

et al. Outcome after aortic valve replacement in octogenarians. Ann Thorac Surg 2004; 78: 85–89.15223409

21.

Gehlot

Mullany

CJ.

Ilstrup

et al. Aortic valve replacement in patients aged eighty years and older: early and long-term results. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1996; 111: 1026–1036.8622300

22.

ElBardissi

AW.

Shekar

Couper

et al. Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement in octogenarian, high-risk, transcatheter aortic valve implantation candidates. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2011; 141: 328–335.21047646

23.

Zingone

Gatti

Rauber

et al. Early and late outcomes of cardiac surgery in octogenarians. Ann Thorac Surg 2009; 87: 71–78.19101271

24.

Shan

Saxena

McMahon

et al. A systematic review on the quality of life benefits after aortic valve replacement in the elderly. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2013; 145: 1173–1189.23415689

25.

Hendrickson

SC.

Glower

. A method for perfusion of the leg during cardiopulmonary bypass via femoral cannulation. Ann Thorac Surg 1998; 65: 1807–1808.9647119

26.

Brown

ML.

McKellar

SH.

Sundt

et al. Ministernotomy versus conventional sternotomy for aortic valve replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2009; 137: 670–679.19258087

27.

Christiansen

Stypmann

Tjan

et al. Minimally-invasive versus conventional aortic valve replacement-perioperative course and mid-term results. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 1999; 16: 647–652.10647835

28.

Masiello

Coscioni

Panza

et al. Surgical results of aortic valve replacement via partial upper sternotomy: comparison with median sternotomy. Cardiovasc Surg 2002; 10: 333–338.12359403

29.

Thourani

VH.

Myung

Kilgo

et al. Long-term outcomes after isolated aortic valve replacement in octogenarians: a modern perspective. Ann Thorac Surg 2008; 86: 1458–1465.19049731

30.

Borger

MA.

Moustafine

Conradi

et al. A randomized multicenter trial of minimally invasive rapid deployment versus conventional full sternotomy aortic valve replacement. Ann Thorac Surg 2015; 99: 17–25.25441065

31.

Barnhart

Accola

Grossi

et al. TRANSFORM (Multicenter Experience With Rapid Deployment Edwards INTUITY Valve System for Aortic Valve Replacement) US clinical trial: safety and performance of a rapid deployment aortic valve. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surgery 2017; 153: 241–251.

32.

Murphy

GJ.

Reeves

BC.

Rogers

et al. Increased mortality, postoperative morbidity, and cost after red blood cell transfusion in patients having cardiac surgery. Circulation 2007; 116: 2544–2552.17998460

33.

van Straten

AHM.

Külcü

Özdemir

et al. Preoperative hemoglobin level as a predictor of mortality after aortic valve replacement. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 2013; 27: 716–722.23706642

34.

Murtuza

Pepper

JR.

Stanbridge

et al. Minimal access aortic valve replacement: is it worth it? Ann Thorac Surg 2008; 85: 1121–1131.18291224

35.

Melby

SJ.

Zierer

Kaiser

et al. Aortic valve replacement in octogenarians: risk factors for early and late mortality. Ann Thorac Surg 2007; 83: 1651–1657.17462374

36.

Sharony

Grossi

EA.

Saunders

et al. Minimally invasive aortic valve surgery in the elderly: a case-control study. Circulation 2003; 108: II43–II47.12970207

37.

Merk

DR.

Lehmann

Holzhey

et al. Minimal invasive aortic valve replacement surgery is associated with improved survival: a propensity-matched comparison. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2015; 47: 11–17.24599160

38.

Furukawa

Kuss

Aboud

et al. Ministernotomy versus conventional sternotomy for aortic valve replacement: matched propensity score analysis of 808 patients. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2014; 46: 221–227.24446478

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.02 MB

3.85 MB

2.66 MB

Minimally Invasive Aortic Valve Surgery in Octogenarians: Reliable Option or Fallback Solution?