Why the study?
Outcomes of isolated RD-AVR are encouraging, but the role of rapid deployment prostheses in concomitant cardiac surgery was not well known.
Does rapid deployment aortic valve replacement combined with concomitant cardiac procedures result in similar outcomes compared to isolated rapid deployment aortic valve replacement?
Does rapid deployment aortic valve replacement combined with concomitant cardiac procedures result in similar outcomes compared to isolated rapid deployment aortic valve replacement?
Rapid deployment aortic valve replacement is safe and effective even when combined with complex concomitant cardiac procedures, showing similar outcomes to isolated procedures.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports RD-AVR safety in concomitant procedures; extends Level 5 registry data but leaves open need for randomized confirmation.
Background: Rapid deployment aortic valve replacement (RD-AVR) has been recently introduced with encouraging results. Outcomes of isolated RD-AVR include good hemodynamic profile, facilitation of minimally invasive techniques, and reduction of surgical times. However, role of this prosthesis in concomitant surgery is not well known. Methods: In 2016, we formed a registry to monitor the introduction of this prosthesis, RApid Deployment Aortic Replacement (RADAR). We aim to report mid-term outcomes focusing on patients who had RD-AVR combined with other surgical procedures. Results: Between July 2012 and February 2021, 370 patients were included in this registry (mean age, 75.8±8.0 years; 64.32% male; mean EuroSCORE II, 3.5±2.8). Of these, 128 (34.59%) had concomitant procedures including myocardial revascularization surgery in 69 patients (53.91%), surgery on the ascending aorta in 34 (26.56%), and procedures on other valves in 10 patients (7.81%). There were no significant differences between the isolated AVR and concomitant AVR groups in postoperative complications, in-hospital mortality (4.72% vs. 3.32%, P=0.524), or hemodynamic behavior of these prostheses. Three-year survival was 83.73% and 89.89% in the isolated and concomitant AVR group respectively. There was no difference in survival between the two groups (log-rank test, P=0.4124). Conclusions: Our results support the safety and efficacy of the Edwards INTUITY valve system even in complex aortic valve disease with additional cardiac procedures. RD-AVR could become a useful tool for concomitant surgeries where surgical times are expected to be prolonged.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
González‐Barbeito et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: