Is routine use of stentless aortic prostheses justified in an elderly (aged ≥75 years) population?

Ayyaz Ali, Pankaj Kumar, Thanos Athanasiou, James Halstead, Hutan Ashrafian, Ziad Ali, Sanjay Kumar, Panagiotis Theodorou, John R. Pepper

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

2 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background and aim of the study: Stentless prostheses in the aortic position produce a superior hemodynamic profile in comparison to that with stented valves. To determine whether routine use of stentless valves in an elderly population is justified, a 10-year retrospective review was performed of a consecutive series of patients aged ≥75 years undergoing stentless aortic valve replacement (AVR). Methods: Demographic, operative and mortality data were obtained retrospectively. Survivors were interviewed by telephone according to a defined protocol. Univariate and multivariate analysis was used to identify independent predictors of 30-day and overall medium-term mortality. Definitions and analyses were in accordance with joint STS/AATS guidelines. Results: A total of 103 patients (57 males, 46 females; mean age 79.8 years; range: 75-91 years) underwent AVR with a either a Toronto stentless porcine valve (size range: 21-29 mm; n = 74) or an aortic homograft (n = 29). Twenty-eight patients (27%) had either urgent/emergency surgery, 12 (11%) underwent redo surgery, and in 54 cases (52%), the preoperative left ventricular function was significantly impaired (ejection fraction <50%). Forty patients (39%) also underwent concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting. The mean cross-clamp and cardiopulmonary bypass times were 105 ± 22 min and 144 ± 47 min, respectively. The overall 30-day mortality was 11.6% (n = 12). The 30-day mortality for all elective cases was 5.3%, but for isolated elective AVR was only 2.5%. Using a multivariate model, the only independent predictor of 30-day mortality and medium-term overall mortality was increasing age. The mean follow up period was 3.6 years (range: 0.1-9.3 years), and the Kaplan-Meier actuarial five-year survival was 52%. At follow up, 92% of patients were in NYHA functional classes I and II. Conclusion: Stentless AVR in elderly patients is associated with excellent functional and survival outcome in the medium term. Furthermore, in elective cases, age alone should not be a deterrent to the routine use of stentless aortic valves.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)64-70
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Heart Valve Disease
Volume14
Issue number1
StatePublished - 2005
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Is routine use of stentless aortic prostheses justified in an elderly (aged ≥75 years) population?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this