Overestimation of the Operative Risk by the EuroSCORE Also in High-Risk Patients Undergoing Aortic Valve Replacement with a Stentless Biological Prosthesis
Background: The EuroSCORE generally overestimates the risk of standard aortic valve replacement (AVR). The predictive value of this risk algorithm for high-risk patients undergoing stentless AVR is unclear; therefore, we compared the EuroSCORE prediction with our results in this patient population.
Methods: One hundred thirty-two patients with a logistic EuroSCORE of at least 10 (mean, 25) underwent primary isolated AVR with a stentless bioprosthesis between January 2004 and December 2007. Seventy-one patients (54%) were octogenarians or nonagenarians, 62 (47%) had a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction, and 46 (35%) had an extracardiac arteriopathy.
Results: Maximum/mean pressure gradients for the implanted valve prostheses were 19/11 mm Hg, and the mean regurgitation grade was 0.06. Stroke occurred in 3% of the patients, and a permanent pacemaker was required in 3%. The 30-day mortality rate was 8%. Another 5% of the patients died after the 30th postoperative day but within the same hospital admission. The predicted mortality was almost 100% greater than the observed mortality.
Conclusion: We observed a mortality rate that was 50% lower than that predicted by the logistic EuroSCORE. Therefore, one should not hesitate to use stentless valves in highrisk patients because the EuroSCORE greatly overestimates their surgical risk.
Bonow RO, Carabello B, de Leon AC Jr, et al. 1998. Guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: executive summary. A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee on Management of Patients with Valvular Heart Disease). Circulation 98:1949-84.nBorger MA, Carson SM, Ivanov J, et al. 2005. Stentless aortic valves are hemodynamically superior to stented valves during mid-term follow-up: a large retrospective study. Ann Thorac Surg 80:2180-5.nCribier A, Eltchaninoff H, Tron C, et al. 2006. Treatment of calcific aortic stenosis with the percutaneous heart valve: mid-term follow up from the initial feasibility study. J Am Coll Cardiol 47:1214-23.nDewey TM, Brown D, Ryan WH, Herbert MA, Prince SL, Mack MJ. 2008. Reliability of risk algorithms in predicting early and late operative outcomes in high-risk patients undergoing aortic valve replacement. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 135:180-7.nGammie JS, Brown JW, Brown JM, et al. 2006. Aortic valve bypass for the high-risk patient with aortic stenosis. Ann Thorac Surg 81:1605-10.nGeissler HJ, Hölzl P, Marohl S, et al. 2000. Risk stratification in heart surgery: comparison of six score systems. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 17:400-6.nGrossi EA, Schwartz CF, Yu PJ, et al. 2008. High-risk aortic valve replacement: Are the outcomes as bad as predicted? Ann Thorac Surg 85:102-7.nHarken DE, Soroff HS, Taylor WJ, Lefemine AA, Gupta SK, Lunzer S. 1960. Partial and complete prostheses in aortic insufficiency. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 40:744-62.nLieberman EB, Bashore TM, Hermiller JB, et al. 1995. Balloon aortic valvuloplasty in adults: failure of procedure to improve long-term survival. J Am Coll Cardiol 26:1522-8.nMarcheix B, Lemarche Y, Berry C, et al. 2007. Surgical aspects of endovascular retrograde implantation of the aortic CoreValve bioprosthesis in high-risk older patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 134:1150-6.nRoques F, Nashef SAM, Michel P, et al. 1999. Risk factors and outcome in European cardiac surgery: analysis of the EuroSCORE multinational database of 19030 patients. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 15:816-23.nWalther T, Falk V, Kempfert J, et al. 2008. Transapical minimally invasive aortic valve implantation; the initial 50 patients. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 33:983-8.nYe J, Cheung A, Lichtenstein SV, et al. 2007. Six-month outcome of transapical transcatheter aortic valve implantation in the initial seven patients. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 31:16-21.n