Title of article :
Immediate and long-term results of valve replacement for native and prosthetic valve endocarditis
Author/Authors :
Dominique Delay MD، نويسنده , , Michel Pellerin، نويسنده , , Michel Carrier، نويسنده , , Richard Marchand، نويسنده , , Pierre Auger، نويسنده , , Louis P. Perrault، نويسنده , , Yves Hébert، نويسنده , , Raymond Cartier، نويسنده , , Pierre Page، نويسنده , , L. Conrad Pelletier، نويسنده ,
Issue Information :
روزنامه با شماره پیاپی سال 2000
Pages :
5
From page :
1219
To page :
1223
Abstract :
Background. The objective of the present study was to compare current results of prosthetic valve replacement following acute infective native valve endocarditis (NVE) with that of prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE). Prosthetic valve replacement is often necessary for acute infective endocarditis. Although valve repair and homografts have been associated with excellent outcome, homograft availability and the importance of valvular destruction often dictate prosthetic valve replacement in patients with acute bacterial endocarditis. Methods. A retrospective analysis of the experience with prosthetic valve replacement following acute NVE and PVE between 1988 and 1998 was performed at the Montreal Heart Institute. Results. Seventy-seven patients (57 men and 20 women, mean age 48 ± 16 years) with acute infective endocarditis underwent valve replacement. Fifty patients had NVE and 27 had PVE. Four patients (8%) with NVE died within 30 days of operation and there were no hospital deaths in patients with PVE. Survival at 1, 5, and 7 years averaged 80% ± 6%, 76% ± 6%, and 76% ± 6% for NVE and 70% ± 9%, 59% ± 10%, and 55% ± 10% for PVE, respectively (p = 0.15). Reoperation-free survival at 1, 5, and 7 years averaged 80% ± 6%, 76% ± 6%, and 76% ± 6% for NVE and 45% ± 10%, 40% ± 10%, and 36% ± 9% for PVE (p = 0.003). Five-year survival for NVE averaged 75% ± 9% following aortic valve replacement and 79% ± 9% following mitral valve replacement. Five-year survival for PVE averaged 66% ± 12% following aortic valve replacement and 43% ± 19% following mitral valve replacement (p = 0.75). Nine patients underwent reoperation during follow-up: indications were prosthesis infection in 4 patients (3 mitral, 1 aortic), dehiscence of mitral prosthesis in 3, and dehiscence of aortic prosthesis in 2. Conclusions. Prosthetic valve replacement for NVE resulted in good long-term patient survival with a minimal risk of reoperation compared with patients who underwent valve replacement for PVE. In patients with PVE, those who needed reoperation had recurrent endocarditis or noninfectious periprosthetic dehiscence.
Journal title :
The Annals of Thoracic Surgery
Serial Year :
2000
Journal title :
The Annals of Thoracic Surgery
Record number :
617140
Link To Document :
بازگشت