Long term results of mechanical prostheses for treatment of active infective endocarditis

OBJECTIVE—To analyse the long term results of mechanical prostheses for treating active infective endocarditis.
DESIGN—Prospective cohort study of a consecutive series of patients diagnosed with infective endocarditis and operated on in the active phase of the infection for insertion of a mechanical prosthesis.
SETTING—Tertiary referral centre in a metropolitan area.
RESULTS—Between 1975 and 1997, 637 cases of infective endocarditis were diagnosed in the centre. Of these, 436 were left sided (with overall mortality of 20.3%). Surgical treatment in the active phase of the infection was needed in 141 patients (72% native, 28% prosthetic infective endocarditis). Mechanical prostheses were used in 131 patients. Operative mortality was 30.5% (40 patients). Ninety one survivors were followed up prospectively for (mean (SD)) 5.4 (4.5) years. Thirteen patients developed prosthetic valve dysfunction. Nine patients suffered reinfection: four of these (4%) were early and five were late. The median time from surgery for late reinfection was 1.4 years. During follow up, 12 patients died. Excluding operative mortality, actuarial survival was 86.6% at five years and 83.7% at 10 years; actuarial survival free from death, reoperation, and reinfection was 73.1% at five years and 59.8% at 10( )years.
CONCLUSIONS—In patients surviving acute infective endocarditis and receiving mechanical prostheses, the rate of early reinfection compares well with reported results of homografts. In addition, prosthesis dysfunction rate is low and long term survival is good. These data should prove useful for comparison with long term studies, when available, using other types of valve surgery in active infective endocarditis.


Keywords: infective endocarditis; surgery; mechanical prosthesi

Outcomes in off-pump vs. on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting stratified by pre-operative risk profile: an assessment using propensity score

Abstract: Aims To assess the benefit of off-pump coronary surgery stratified by the pre-operative risk profile. Methods and results Prospective and multicentric cohort study. All consecutive patients undergoing a first coronary bypass procedure between November 2001 and November 2003 were potentially eligible. Pre-operative EuroSCORE and in-hospital outcomes were prospectively collected using strictly standardized criteria. To ensure optimal adjustment, a propensity score was constructed using clinically relevant variables and incorporating individual centres. Of 1602 patients who underwent a first coronary bypass, EuroSCORE could be calculated in 1585: 787 were of moderate/high pre-operative risk profile (EuroSCORE > 3), of which 347 underwent off-pump procedures, and 798 were of low pre-operative risk profile (EuroSCORE <= 3), of which 349 underwent off-pump procedures. After risk adjusting for propensity score, off-pump patients had less major events (post-operative death, myocardial infarction, and need for reoperation). This benefit was higher in the low-risk stratum (OR ranged between 0.27 and 0.4; P=0.02-0.07) than in the high-risk stratum (OR between 0.4 and 0.7; P, not significant). Conclusion In real-life conditions, off-pump coronary surgery may be more effective than on-pump surgery. In contrast with previous reports, our results suggest that this benefit may be higher in patients with low pre-operative risk