|
|
||||||||||
|
J Am Coll Cardiol, 2006; 47:1012-1017, doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2005.10.049
(Published online 13 February 2006). © 2006 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation |
Servei de Cardiologia, Hospital Universitari Vall dHebron, Barcelona, Spain
Manuscript received May 31, 2005; revised manuscript received August 5, 2005, accepted October 17, 2005.
* Reprint requests and correspondence: Dr. Pilar Tornos, Servei de Cardiologia, Hospital Universitari Vall dHebron, P Vall dHebron 119-129, 08035 Barcelona, Spain. (Email: ptornos{at}vhebron.net).
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
BACKGROUND: The impact of earlier surgery for chronic severe AR as defined in guidelines has not been evaluated.
METHODS: A total of 170 patients with chronic severe AR submitted to aortic valve replacement were prospectively followed up. Patients were divided in two groups depending on the clinical situation at the time of surgery. Group A were 60 patients who were operated on following guidelines advice of earlier surgery, and group B were 110 patients who were operated on late with regard to guideline recommendations.
RESULTS: Follow-up was 10 ± 6 years (1 to 22 years). During follow-up 44 patients died, 7 patients (12%) from group A and 37 (37%) from group B (p = 0.001). The cause of death was non-cardiac in 11 patients, 2 (3%) in group A and 9 (8%) in group B. Cardiac deaths occurred in 33 patients, 5 (9%) from group A and 28 (28%) from group B (p = 0.002). Causes of death differed between groups A and B: heart failure or sudden death were significantly more frequent in group B (20 patients vs. 1 patient, p = 0.001). Overall survival in groups A and B was 90 ± 4% vs. 75 ± 8% at 5 years, 86 ± 5% vs. 64 ± 5% at 10 years, and 78 ± 7% vs. 53 ± 6% at 15 years, respectively (p = 0.009).
CONCLUSIONS: Early operation as defined in the guidelines improves long-term survival in patients with chronic AR.
| ||||||||||
The aim of these recommendations is to offer a favorable postoperative long-term course. Although guidelines have been available for some years, the real impact of earlier surgery as defined in guidelines has not been evaluated, and there is some concern about the real benefit of surgery in the asymptomatic patient (1214).
In the present study we analyze the impact of adherence to guidelines recommendations regarding earlier surgery on the long-term postoperative outcome in a large series of patients who were operated on in a single institution for isolated chronic severe AR according to a predefined protocol established in 1982 (15), similar to the subsequent ACC/AHA and ESC guidelines, which were designed in the late 1990s.
| Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Statistical analysis. Descriptive analysis was performed with mean values ± SD and range for continuous variables and absolute and relative frequencies of patients in each category for categorical variables. Differences between study groups were evaluated with the use of unpaired Student t test for continuous variables and chi-square test for categorical variables. Paired t test was used when appropriate. The probability of survival during follow-up was calculated by Kaplan-Meier analysis; the survival curves obtained were compared with the log-rank test (Mantel-Cox). Two Cox models were developed to assess the relative risk of cardiovascular death and death due to heart failure or sudden death. An additional analysis was also performed with the same methodology considering the two study groups only on the basis of NYHA functional class (I to II vs. III to IV), irrespective of the LVEF or LV dimensions of the patients.
A two-tailed value of p < 0.05 was considered significant. Statistical analysis was performed with the statistical package SPSS 11.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, Illinois).
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
|
Follow-up was 10 ± 6 years (1 to 22 years) and only one patient was lost to follow-up, and another was lost after 10 years. During follow-up 44 patients died, 7 patients (12 %) from group A and 37 (37%) from group B, p = 0.001 (Table 3). The cause of death was non-cardiovascular in 11 patients (2 in group A and 9 in group B). Cardiovascular deaths occurred in 33 patients, 5 from group A (9%) and 28 (28%) from group B (p = 0.002). Causes of death differed between groups A and B: heart failure and sudden death were significantly more frequent in group B (20 patients vs. 1 patient, p = 0.001). Preoperative and one-year postoperative clinical and echocardiographic data from patients dying of heart failure and sudden death during follow-up are shown in Table 4.
|
|
Overall survival in groups A and B was in the best-case scenario (i.e., considering as alive the two patients with incomplete follow-up) 90 ± 4% and 75 ± 8% at 5 years, 86 ± 5% and 64 ± 5% at 10 years, and 78 ± 7% and 53 ± 6% at 15 years, respectively (p = 0.009) (Fig. 1). In the worst-case scenario, considering as death the two patients with incomplete follow-up, the difference in survival of the two patient groups was still significant (p = 0.028).
|
|
Analysis on the basis of preoperative NYHA functional class. Data were additionally analyzed on the basis of categorizing the population in preoperative NYHA functional classes I to II (group A: n = 104) versus III to IV (group B: n = 66) irrespective of the LVEF or dimensions. The main study results then disclosed a more marked survival difference between groups than with our original classification: operative mortality was now significantly greater in group B (3% vs. 14%, p < 0.01). During follow-up, 15 patients in group A (15%) and 29 (51%) in group B died (p < 0.0001); deaths were cardiovascular in 10 (10%) from group A and in 23 (35%) from group B (p < 0.0001). With this new categorization, the relative risk of cardiac death in group B patients was 6.16. The 15-year survival was 76 ± 6% in group A and 38 ± 6% in group B (p < 0.0001); however, echocardiographic improvement was less marked in both groups: EDD at one year was 55 ± 7 mm in group A and 61 ± 15 mm in group B, ESD was 39 ± 9 mm in group A and 46 ± 16 mm in group B, and LVEF was 54 ± 11% in group A and 44 ± 18% in group B.
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
We have considered that patients operated on "early" were those who were only moderately symptomatic or had a moderate degree of LV dysfunction at the time of surgery. All group A patients fulfilled these criteria. In contrast, patients considered to have been operated on "too late" were those with severe symptoms or with severely depressed LV function at the time of surgery. It might be wondered if group A patients include individuals who were operated on too early (i.e., before fulfilling the guidelines criteria for operation). This is not the case, because no patient was operated on that was asymptomatic and with LVEF >50% and ESD <55 mm. In fact, group A patients belong to a cohort of AR patients with an extended preoperative follow-up in our department, in whom meticulous symptoms assessment was performed in each visit. In contrast, most group B patients were sent to us already with clear reasons for surgery, either severe symptoms or severely depressed LVEF.
The results of the present series clearly reflect the long-term benefit of having surgery according to guidelines recommendations and validate the beneficial influence of guidelines adherence toward early surgery. Overall survival was statistically different between both groups. In group A, no patient died of heart failure during follow-up, and only one patient died suddenly. The remaining four patients died of causes that were unlikely to have been prevented by earlier surgery. Also, at the end of follow-up, LV dimensions and LVEF were normal in group A and statistically different from that of group B. Remarkably, in group B most cardiac deaths were either sudden or due to heart failure, and these death occurred in patients in whom no improvement of ventricular function occurred after surgery. Although a proportion of patients with poor preoperative prognostic markers had an acceptable outcome, failure of improvement shortly after surgery identified a subset of patients with particular poor prognosis, as previously described (9).
Our results could be considered obvious, because patients operated on in better conditions do better in the long term. One could then argue perhaps that all patients with severe AR should be operated on. There are several reasons to delay surgery until guideline recommendations are reached: natural history studies have clearly shown that asymptomatic patients with severe AR may remain asymptomatic and with preserved LV function for many years before reaching the proposed operative values (5,13,1620), and our data have demonstrated that when patients are operated on as soon as these values occur, the postoperative outcome in relation to LV function is excellent.
Therefore, it seems wise to defer surgery at least until unfavorable predictors such as the ones reported in guidelines are present. That surgical indication should not await the development of symptoms is well-illustrated by the additional analysis of our population classifying the patients only on the basis of NYHA functional class regardless of LV function. When classified in this way, group B patients (NYHA functional classes III to IV) had a predictably higher operative mortality and poorer long-term survival than with our original classification, whereas group A patients, which now includes many with a markedly depressed ventricular function, had a less marked long-term recovery of hemodynamic parameters. Although this behavior might seem too obvious, it nevertheless emphasizes that our categorization of patients in "early" and "late" surgery was on the basis of sensible criteria.
Nevertheless, results in our group A patients reflect that patients operated on early cannot avoid some mortality, either perioperative or during follow-up, probably related not to LV dysfunction but to aortic disease, endocarditis, and complications of the anticoagulation, all of which are unlikely to benefit by earlier surgery. It might be wondered if newer prostheses or surgical advances could, in the future, decrease these late mortality figures. In fact, our hospital mortality rate can be considered high; however, 38% were operated on in the 1980s and, as previously mentioned, in no patient was surgery denied because of severe LV dysfunction. Although our study clearly indicates the benefits of early surgery, it has to be emphasized that the outcome in group B patients also indicates a benefit of surgery, both regarding quality of life and ventricular function, and reinforces previous opinions that surgery should be offered to all patients with severe aortic insufficiency, even with extreme degrees of dilation or LV dysfunction (21,22).
Certainly this is not a clinical trial, but a cohort study where effectiveness of having followed established recommendations for early surgery in real life is assessed. This study modality might not adjust for confounding as accurately as a clinical trial. In this particular instance, however, the number of confounding variables might not be so large as to forbid adequate adjustment in an observational study and, indeed, our study design has the advantage of including the whole population of patients with a very long follow-up, thus providing a comprehensive view of the problem. In summary, our results illustrate how, in real clinical practice the adherence to guidelines for early surgery have beneficial effect on the outcome of AR patients, stressing the importance of the routine implementation of guidelines.
| Acknowledgments |
|---|
| Footnotes |
|---|
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
R. W. Emery, A. M. Emery, A. Knutsen, and G. V. Raikar Aortic Valve Replacement with a Mechanical Cardiac Valve Prosthesis Card. Surg. Adult, January 1, 2008; 3(2008): 841 - 856. [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
F. Bredin, A. Olsson, and A. Franco-Cereceda No Additive Effect of Passive Containment Surgery in Patients With Aortic Regurgitation and Left Ventricular Dilation Ann. Thorac. Surg., August 1, 2007; 84(2): 510 - 513. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Authors/Task Force Members, A. Vahanian, H. Baumgartner, J. Bax, E. Butchart, R. Dion, G. Filippatos, F. Flachskampf, R. Hall, B. Iung, et al. Guidelines on the management of valvular heart disease: The Task Force on the Management of Valvular Heart Disease of the European Society of Cardiology Eur. Heart J., January 26, 2007; (2007) ehl428v1. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. H. Rahimtoola The Year in Valvular Heart Disease J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., January 23, 2007; 49(3): 361 - 374. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. O. Bonow, B. A. Carabello, K. Chatterjee, A. C. de Leon Jr, D. P. Faxon, M. D. Freed, W. H. Gaasch, B. W. Lytle, R. A. Nishimura, P. T. O'Gara, et al. ACC/AHA 2006 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the 1998 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease) Developed in Collaboration With the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists Endorsed by the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., August 1, 2006; 48(3): e1 - e148. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | SUBSCRIPTIONS | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | CARDIOSOURCE | SEARCH | HELP | FEEDBACK |