The Need for a Specific Risk Prediction System in Native Valve Infective Endocarditis Surgery

The need for a specific risk score system for infective endocarditis (IE) surgery has been previously claimed. In a single-center pilot study, preliminary to future multicentric development and validation, bivariate and multivariate (logistic regression) analysis of early postoperative mortality predictors in 440 native valve IE patients were performed. Mathematical procedures assigned scores to the independent predictors emerged (AUC of the ROC curve: 0.88). Overall mortality was 9.1%. Six predictors were identified and assigned scores, including age (5–13 points), renal failure (5), NYHA class IV (9), critical preoperative state (11), lack of preoperative attainment of blood culture negativity (5), perivalvular involvement (5). Four risk classes were drawn ranging from “very low risk” (≤5 points, mean predicted mortality 1%), and to “very high risk” (≥20 points, 43% mortality). IE-specific risk stratification models are both needed, as disease-specific factors (e.g., cultures, abscess), beside the generic ones (e.g., age, renal impairment) affect mortality, and feasible

Can prosthesis type influence the recurrence of infective endocarditis after surgery for native valve endocarditis? A propensity weighted comparison

Objectives: Our goal was to investigate whether the incidence of valve-related adverse events might be different depending on the valve substitute after valve replacement for left-sided native valve endocarditis. Methods: We assessed the long-term freedom from recurrence, reoperation and survival of 395 patients who had valve replacements for native valve endocarditis (314 mechanical vs 81 biological). Age <18 years, reoperation, prosthetic endocarditis, right valve involvement, valve repair and homograft implants were the main exclusion criteria. The balance between the 2 groups was addressed by weighting the results on the inverse of the propensity score. Results: After inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW), freedom from recurrence of infective endocarditis was not significantly different (mechanical 84.1 ± 3.2% vs 50.6 ± 21.7%; P = 0.29) nor was freedom from reoperation different (mechanical 85.7 ± 3.1% vs biological 50.9 ± 21.9%; P = 0.29). Excluding competing deaths, patients receiving a bioprosthesis had a similar subdistribution hazard of the above end points compared to recipients of a mechanical valve [recurrence IPTW: hazard ratio (HR) 1.631, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.756-3.516; P = 0.21; reoperation IPTW-HR 1.737, 95% CI 0.780-3.870; P = 0.18]. Mechanical valves were associated with improved long-term survival (34.9 ± 5.8% vs 10.5 ± 7.4% at 30 years; P = 0.0009; in particular: aortic valve subgroup 41.6 ± 9.3% vs 10.1 ± 8.2%; P < 0.0001), although the hazard of cardiovascular mortality did not favour either valve type (IPTW: HR 1.361, 95% CI 0.771-2.404; P = 0.29). Conclusions: Our analysis showed a clinical trend in favour of mechanical valves as valve substitutes for native valve endocarditis, especially in the aortic position. In view of long-term freedom from adverse events, the choice of the valve type should be tailored according to patient characteristics and specific clinical conditions.OBJECTIVES: Our goal was to investigate whether the incidence of valve-related adverse events might be different depending on the valve substitute after valve replacement for left-sided native valve endocarditis.METHODS: We assessed the long-term freedom from recurrence, reoperation and survival of 395 patients who had valve replacements for native valve endocarditis (314 mechanical vs 81 biological). Age <18 years, reoperation, prosthetic endocarditis, right valve involvement, valve repair and homograft implants were the main exclusion criteria. The balance between the 2 groups was addressed by weighting the results on the inverse of the propensity score.RESULTS: After inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW), freedom from recurrence of infective endocarditis was not significantly different (mechanical 84.1 +/- 3.2% vs 50.6 +/- 21.7%; P = 0.29) nor was freedom from reoperation different (mechanical 85.7 +/- 3.1% vs biological 50.9 +/- 21.9%; P = 0.29). Excluding competing deaths, patients receiving a bioprosthesis had a similar subdistribution hazard of the above end points compared to recipients of a mechanical valve [recurrence IPTW: hazard ratio (HR) 1.631, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.756-3.516; P = 0.21; reoperation IPTW-HR 1.737, 95% CI 0.780-3.870; P = 0.18]. Mechanical valves were associated with improved long-term survival (34.9 +/- 5.8% vs 10.5 +/- 7.4% at 30 years; P = 0.0009; in particular: aortic valve subgroup 41.6 +/- 9.3% vs 10.1 +/- 8.2%; P < 0.0001), although the hazard of cardiovascular mortality did not favour either valve type (IPTW: HR 1.361, 95% CI 0.771-2.404; P = 0.29).CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis showed a clinical trend in favour of mechanical valves as valve substitutes for native valve endocarditis, especially in the aortic position. In view of long-term freedom from adverse events, the choice of the valve type should be tailored according to patient characteristics and specific clinical conditions

First-time, isolated surgical aortic valve replacement after prior coronary artery bypass surgery: Results from the RECORD multicenter registry

Background This multicenter study was undertaken to determine the immediate and long-term outcomes in patients undergoing a primary surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR) who had a previous coronary artery bypass graft surgery with patent grafts. Methods One hundred and thirteen consecutive patients (mean EuroSCORE II, 10.3-\ub1-7.7%, median 8.0%) who underwent first-time isolated AVR after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) were the subjects of this multicenter study. The procedure was performed through a full sternotomy in 95.7% of cases, a patent internal mammary artery graft was clamped in 76.6% of patients. The temperature of cardioplegia was 6412-\ub0C in 62.8% of patients and systemic temperature was <32-\ub0C in 23.9% of patients. Results Thirty-day mortality was 4.4%. Stroke was observed in 8.0% of patients, low cardiac output syndrome in 14.1%, prolonged tracheal intubation in 20.8%, and intensive care unit stay was longer than five days in 19.5% of patients. Among patients with a patent internal mammary graft (91 patients), clamping of this graft (5.7% vs. 0%, p-=-0.57) was associated with a nonsignificant trend toward increased 30-day mortality. One-, three- and five-year survival rates were 91.5%, 90.4%, and 88.4%, respectively. Conclusions Patients undergoing isolated AVR after prior CABG have a good immediate and late survival. A history of prior CABG should not be considered an absolute indication for transcatheter AVR. doi: 10.1111/jocs.12365 (J Card Surg 2014;29:450-454) \ua9 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc

Long-Term Outcome of Infective Endocarditis Involving Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices: Impact of Comorbidities and Lead Extraction

: (1) Background: Management of cardiac implantable electronic device-related infective endocarditis (CIED-IE) hinges on complete hardware removal. We assessed whether long-term prognosis is affected by device removal, considering baseline patient comorbid conditions; (2) Methods: A total of 125 consecutive patients hospitalized for CIED-IE were included in this retrospective analysis. Outcomes were in-hospital, one-year, and long-term mortality. There were 109 patients who underwent device removal, 91 by transvenous lead extraction (TLE) and 18 by open heart surgery (OHS); (3) Results: TLE translated into lower hospital mortality (4.4% vs. 22.5% with OHS; p = 0.03). Septic pulmonary embolism was the only independent predictor of in-hospital mortality (OR:7.38 [1.49-36.6], p = 0.013). One-year mortality was in contrast independently associated to tricuspid valve involvement (p = 0.01) and Charlson comorbidity index (CCI, p = 0.039), but not the hardware removal modality. After a median follow-up of 41 months, mortality rose to 24%, and was significantly influenced only by CCI. Specifically, patients with a higher CCI who were also treated with TLE showed a survival rate not significantly different from those managed with medical therapy only; (4) Conclusions: In CIED-IE, TLE is the strategy of choice for hardware removal, improving early outcomes. Long-term benefits of TLE are lessened by comorbidities. In cases of CIED-IE with high CCI, a more conservative approach might be an option

Surgical factors and complications affecting hospital outcome in redomitral surgery: Insights from a multicentre experience

OBJECTIVES: Several single-centre experiences have reported significant operative mortality and morbidity after mitral valve surgery in redo scenarios (ReMVS). Several preoperative risk factors outlining 'high-risk' categories have been reported, but scanty data on the impact of different operative techniques for these major challenging procedures have been analysed to date. The aim of the study is to investigate those intraoperative factors and postoperative events affecting early survival after redo mitral procedures. METHODS: Operative mortality and major morbidity events from a large multicentre registry enrolling 832 consecutive redo mitral procedures were analysed. Intraoperative technical issues and postoperative complications impacting operative mortality were identified. RESULTS: ReMVS was associated with significant operative mortality (12.5%), acute myocardial infarction (AMI; 5.9%), stroke (4.9%), acute respiratory insufficiency (14.8%), pneumonia (7.0%), acute renal insufficiency (16.1%) and failure (12.6%), reintervention for bleeding (7.6%), massive transfusion (28.0%), need for permanent pacemaker (10.1%). Injury of a previous patent left internal mammary artery (LIMA) graft [odds ratio (OR) 4.2, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.6-11.5; P = 0.005], major cardiovascular iatrogenic lesions at re-entry (OR 19.2, 95% CI: 9.2-39.9; P 48 h (OR 5.3, 95% CI: 2.9-9.4; P = 0.001) and massive (>6 units) transfusions (OR 4.4, 95% CI: 2.4-8.0; P = 0.001) also predicted operative mortality. CONCLUSIONS: ReMVS still carries the risk of significant early mortality and major morbidity. Major lesion to cardiovascular structures is the most dreadful iatrogenic complication, and injury of a previous LIMA graft identifies patients at higher risk of operative mortality. Prolonged cross-clamp times, extracellular crystalloid cardioplegia and massive transfusions have profound impact on early outcome, as well as the development of perioperative AMI, eventually requiring IABP and prolonged intubation. The combination of antegrade and retrograde cardioplegia seems to offer a better myocardial protection in these high-risk patients

Long-Term Outcome of Infective Endocarditis Involving Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices: Impact of Comorbidities and Lead Extraction

(1) Background: Management of cardiac implantable electronic device-related infective endocarditis (CIED-IE) hinges on complete hardware removal. We assessed whether long-term prognosis is affected by device removal, considering baseline patient comorbid conditions; (2) Methods: A total of 125 consecutive patients hospitalized for CIED-IE were included in this retrospective analysis. Outcomes were in-hospital, one-year, and long-term mortality. There were 109 patients who underwent device removal, 91 by transvenous lead extraction (TLE) and 18 by open heart surgery (OHS); (3) Results: TLE translated into lower hospital mortality (4.4% vs. 22.5% with OHS; p = 0.03). Septic pulmonary embolism was the only independent predictor of in-hospital mortality (OR:7.38 [1.49&ndash;36.6], p = 0.013). One-year mortality was in contrast independently associated to tricuspid valve involvement (p = 0.01) and Charlson comorbidity index (CCI, p = 0.039), but not the hardware removal modality. After a median follow-up of 41 months, mortality rose to 24%, and was significantly influenced only by CCI. Specifically, patients with a higher CCI who were also treated with TLE showed a survival rate not significantly different from those managed with medical therapy only; (4) Conclusions: In CIED-IE, TLE is the strategy of choice for hardware removal, improving early outcomes. Long-term benefits of TLE are lessened by comorbidities. In cases of CIED-IE with high CCI, a more conservative approach might be an option

Impact of failed mitral valve repair on hospital outcome of redo mitral valve procedures

OBJECTIVES: The prognostic impact of failed mitral valve repair (FMR) on in-hospital outcome after redo mitral valve surgery has not been thoroughly investigated. METHODS: Hospital outcomes after redo mitral valve surgery because of an FMR in patients from nine European centres were reported. Logistic regressions identified predictors of mortality in combined or isolated redo mitral valve operations. Hospital outcome was compared between propensity-matched cohorts with FMR and native mitral valves in the context of redo surgery and FMR versus failed prostheses. RESULTS: A total of 246 patients with FMR yielded a 6.5% mortality rate at redo surgery. FMR per se did not impact mortality at multivariable analysis (P = 0.64). A preoperative Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) score >2 chronic obstructive lung disease (COPD) (OR 15.2, P 2 COPD (OR 12.3, P = 0.049), age at surgery (OR 1.15 for each incremental year, P = 0.049) and cardiopulmonary bypass duration (OR 1.02, P = 0.022) predicted mortality in isolated redo mitral valve surgery for FMR. The fourth (> 68 years = 13.8% mortality) and the fifth quintiles of age (>73.4 years = 14.8%) reported the highest mortality (OR 3.8 and 4.2 respectively, P = 0.002) in this subgroup. Propensity-matched cohorts of FMR and native mitral valves in the context of redo surgery showed no differences in terms of mortality (P = 0.69) and major morbidity (acute myocardial infarction P = 0.31, stroke P = 0.65, acute kidney injury P = 1.0), whereas more perioperative dialysis (P = 0.04) and transfusions (P = 0.02) were noted in propensity-matched failed prostheses compared to FMR. CONCLUSIONS: A failed mitral repair does not impact hospital outcome of redo surgery. Given the role of severe left ventricular dysfunction and advanced age on hospital mortality rates, an early indication for redo surgery may improve outcome