Efficacy of Double Valve Replacement/Repair in Patients with Reduced Left Ventricular Ejection Fractions

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.59958/hsf.7837

Keywords:

heart valve disease, mortality, heart failure, ventricular ejection fraction

Abstract

Introduction: A reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is a known risk factor for double valve replacement or aortic valve replacement in combination with concomitant mitral valve repair (DVR) and is associated with high morbidity and mortality rates. In this study, we sought to analyze the 30-day mortality and long-term survival rates of patients with reduced LVEFs. Methods: A multicenter, retrospective, observational cohort study of patients who underwent DVR was performed at four centers from January 2016 to December 2021. LVEFs were categorized as 41%–50% (n = 120) or ≤40% (n = 58). For the effects of risk factors on 30-day mortality, binary logistic regression was performed. Survival rates were assessed with the Kaplan–Meier method. Results: A total of 178 patients who underwent DVR were included in this study, of whom 67.42% (n = 120) had LVEFs ranging from 41–50% and 32.58% (n = 58) had LVEFs ≤40%. More mechanical valves and tricuspid valve-forming rings were applied in the LVEF ≤40% group (68.97% versus 53.33%, p = 0.047; 31.03% versus 10.83%, p = 0.001). The 30-day mortality rates of DVR patients with LVEFs ranging from 41–50% and ≤40% were 8.33% and 17.24%, respectively (p = 0.078). During the follow-up period, there were no significant differences in long-term survival (log rank p = 0.75). On multivariable logistic regression analysis, age >65 years [odds ratio (OR): 5.559, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.668–18.524, p = 0.005] and cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) duration >200 min (OR: 5.031, 95% CI: 1.773–14.277, p = 0.002) were significantly associated with the likelihood of 30-day mortality. Conclusions: Although the differences in 30-day mortality and long-term survival rates between DVR patients with LVEFs ranging from 41–50% and ≤40% were not statistically significant in our cohort, an age >65 years and a CPB duration >200 min were predictors of 30-day mortality.

References

Lehmann S, Merk DR, Etz CD, Oberbach A, Uhlemann M, Emrich F, et al. Porcine xenograft for aortic, mitral and double valve replacement: long-term results of 2544 consecutive patients. European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. 2016; 49: 1150–1156.

Hellgren L, Kvidal P, Ståhle E. Improved early results after heart valve surgery over the last decade. European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. 2002; 22: 904–911.

Chen L, Xiao Y, Ma R, Chen B, Hao J, Qin C, et al. Bipolar radiofrequency ablation is useful for treating atrial fibrillation combined with heart valve diseases. BMC Surgery. 2014; 14: 32.

Akhtar RP, Abid AR, Naqshband MS, Mohydin BS, Khan JS. Outcome of double vs. single valve replacement for rheumatic heart disease. Journal of the College of Physicians and Surgeons—Pakistan. 2011; 21: 9–14.

Turina J, Stark T, Seifert B, Turina M. Predictors of the long-term outcome after combined aortic and mitral valve surgery. Circulation. 1999; 100: II48–II53.

Talwar S, Mathur A, Choudhary SK, Singh R, Kumar AS. Aortic valve replacement with mitral valve repair compared with combined aortic and mitral valve replacement. The Annals of Thoracic Surgery. 2007; 84: 1219–1225.

Egger ML, Gahl B, Koechlin L, Schömig L, Matt P, Reuthebuch O, et al. Outcome of patients with double valve surgery between 2009 and 2018 at University Hospital Basel, Switzerland. Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery. 2022; 17: 152.

Maile MD, Mathis MR, Habib RH, Schwann TA, Engoren MC. Association of Both High and Low Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction With Increased Risk After Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting. Heart, Lung & Circulation. 2021; 30: 1091–1099.

Bianco V, Kilic A, Mulukutla S, Gleason TG, Kliner D, Allen CC, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with reduced ejection fraction. The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery. 2021; 161: 1022–1031.e5.

Omer S, Adeseye A, Jimenez E, Cornwell LD, Massarweh NN. Low left ventricular ejection fraction, complication rescue, and long-term survival after coronary artery bypass grafting. The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery. 2022; 163: 111–119.e2.

An SM, Nam JS, Kim HJ, Bae HJ, Chin JH, Lee EH, et al. Postoperative changes in left ventricular systolic function after combined mitral and aortic valve replacement in patients with rheumatic heart disease. Journal of Cardiac Surgery. 2021; 36: 3654–3661.

Jiang YY, Cheng M, Zhang W, Peng XX, Sun QJ, Lv H, et al. Outcomes of different mitral valve approaches combined with aortic valve replacement in patients with degenerative valve disease. The Heart Surgery Forum. 2024; 27: E391–E396.

Jiang YY, Kong XR, Xue FL, Chen HL, Zhou W, Chai JW, et al. Incidence, risk factors and clinical outcomes of acute kidney injury after heart transplantation: a retrospective single center study. Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery. 2020; 15: 302.

Pieri M, Belletti A, Monaco F, Pisano A, Musu M, Dalessandro V, et al. Outcome of cardiac surgery in patients with low preoperative ejection fraction. BMC Anesthesiology. 2016; 16: 97.

Unger P, Lancellotti P, Amzulescu M, David-Cojocariu A, de Cannière D. Pathophysiology and management of combined aortic and mitral regurgitation. Archives of Cardiovascular Diseases. 2019; 112: 430–440.

Hu K, Li J, Wan Y, Hong T, Lu SY, Guo CF, et al. Heart valve disease in elderly Chinese population: effect of advanced age and comorbidities on treatment decision-making and outcomes. Journal of Geriatric Cardiology. 2016; 13: 593–601.

Koertke H, Zittermann A, Wagner O, Secer S, Christ of Huth, Sciangula A, et al. Telemedicine-guided, very low-dose international normalized ratio self-control in patients with mechanical heart valve implants. European Heart Journal. 2015; 36: 1297–1305.

Panda BR, Shankar R, Kuruvilla KT, Philip MA, Thankachen R, Shukla V, et al. Combined mitral and aortic valve replacement for rheumatic heart disease: fifteen-year follow up and long-term results. The Journal of Heart Valve Disease. 2009; 18: 170–179.

Tong G, Yu H, Zhou X, Zhang B, Bi S, Luo L, et al. Concomitant surgical atrial fibrillation ablation is safe and efficacious in patients undergoing double valve replacement - A cohort study. International Journal of Surgery. 2018; 57: 54–59.

Urban M, Pirk J, Szarszoi O, Skalsky I, Maly J, Netuka I. Mitral valve repair versus replacement in simultaneous aortic and mitral valve surgery. Experimental and Clinical Cardiology. 2013; 18: 22–26.

Fernandes AMS, Andrade GMD, Oliveira RM, Biscaia GT, Reis FFBD, Macedo CR, et al. Evaluation of variables responsible for hospital mortality in patients with rheumatic heart disease undergoing double valve replacement. Revista Brasileira De Cirurgia Cardiovascular. 2014; 29: 537–542.

Jiang X, Liu J, Khan F, Tang R, Zhang Y, Gu T. Aortic and mitral valve surgery for infective endocarditis with reconstruction of the intervalvular fibrous body: an analysis of clinical outcomes. Journal of Thoracic Disease. 2020; 12: 1427–1436.

Prasada S, Desai MY, Saad M, Smilowitz NR, Faulx M, Menon V, et al. Preoperative Atrial Fibrillation and Cardiovascular Outcomes After Noncardiac Surgery. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2022; 79: 2471–2485.

Petersen J, Vettorazzi E, Hakmi S, Alassar Y, Meyer C, Willems S, et al. Should concomitant surgical ablation for atrial fibrillation be performed in elderly patients? The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery. 2021; 161: 1816–1823.e1.

Published

2024-09-17

How to Cite

Shen, G., Peng, X., Yang, X., Pan, Y., Jiang, Y., Zhang, W., Cheng, M., Wang, P., Wang, H., & Wang, W. (2024). Efficacy of Double Valve Replacement/Repair in Patients with Reduced Left Ventricular Ejection Fractions. The Heart Surgery Forum, 27(9), E1052-E1058. https://doi.org/10.59958/hsf.7837

Issue

Section

Article