Comparative Evaluation of Aortic Valve Replacement Methods in Patients Over 70 with Aortic Stenosis

Background As life expectancy and quality of health improve, more and more people reach old age, and so does the number of heart diseases. One of the most urgent problems among elderly patients is degenerative stenosis of the aortic valve (AV). The conservative treatment of symptoms of chronic heart failure with AV stenosis improves the patient’s condition only for a while, whereas surgical treatment such as replacement of AV is recognized as the main effective method of treating a defect. Recently, alternative technologies for prosthetic AV have been developed, aimed at reducing adverse effects of artificial circulation (AC) in high-risk patients and minimizing the scope of surgical intervention.

Aim of study The aim of the study was to evaluate the immediate results of surgical treatment of aortic stenosis using different methods in patients over 70.

Material and methods The article presents the results of treatment of 64 patients over 70 with isolated AV stenosis, operated with different surgical techniques from July, 2016 to January, 2018. All patients were divided into three groups, differing in the severity of the initial condition and the method treatment. Group 1 (transcatheter implantation of the prosthetic AV, EuroSCORE II — 21.81%) consisted of 19 patients, Group 2 (non-suture implantation of a Perceval prosthetic valce under the AC, EuroSCORE II — 13.81%) consisted of 13 patients and Group 3 (“standard” prosthetics, EuroSCORE II — 9.89%) consisted of 32 patients.

Results In Group 1, two patients died, the hospital mortality was 10.5%. In Group 2 and Group 3, one patient died, the hospital mortality was 7.6 and 3.1%, respectively. Implantation of a permanent pacemaker was required in three patients (15.7%) from the TAVI group after installation of Medtronic Core Valve and two patients (15.3%) from the Perceval group.

Conclusion The obtained results of AV replacement by various methods allowed to expand indications for the management of AV stenosis in patients of the older age group with a high surgical risk of operation under AC conditions who had not previously been considered candidates for surgical treatment of aortic malformation due to the age and severity of the concomitant pathology.

1. Bokeriya L.A., Gudkova R.G., Miliyevskaya E.B., et al. Cardiovascular surgery — 2016. Moscow.: Nauchnyy tsentr serdechno-sosudistoy khirurgii im. A.N. Bakuleva Publ. 2016. (In Russian).

2. Akchurin R.S., Kuzina S.V., Osmanov M.R., Imayev T.E. New in surgical correction of critical stenosis of the aortic valve in patients with high operational risk. Kardiologicheskiy vestnik. 2010; (2): 58–61. (In Russian).

3. Astor B.C., Kaczmarek R.G., Hefflin B., Daley R.W. Mortality After Aortic Valve Replacement: Results From a Nationally Representative Database. Ann Thorac Surg. 2000; 70 (6): 1939–1945. PMID: 11156099. DOI: 10.1016/S0003-4975(00)01670-2.

4. Sokolov V.V., Kovaleva E.V., Gureyev A.V., et al. Prosthetics of heart valves in patients older than 70 years. In: Health of the capital — 2010: Abstracts of the IX Moscow Assembly (Moscow, December 16–17, 2010). Moscow, 2010: 7–8. (In Russian).

5. Bakaeen F.G., Chu D., Huh J., Carabello B.A. Is an Age of 80 Years or Greater an Important Predictor of Short-Term Outcomes of Isolated Aortic Valve Replacement in Veterans? Ann Thorac Surg. 2010; 90 (3): 769–774. DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2010.04.066.

6. Sundt T.M., Bailey M.S., Moon M.R., et al. Quality of life after aortic valve replacement at the age of >80 years. Circulation. 2000; 102 (19, Suppl 3): 70–74. PMID: 11082365.

7. Cribier A., Eltchaninoff H., Bash A., et al. Percutaneous transcatheter implantation of an aortic valve prosthesis for calcific aortic stenosis: first human description. Circulation. 2002; 106 (24): 3006–3008. PMID: 12473543.

8. Chandola R., Teoh K., Elhenawy A., Christakis G. Perceval Sutureless valve — are Sutureless valves here. Curr Cardiol Rev. 2015; 11(3): 220–228. PMID: 25394851. PMCID: PMC4558353.

9. Phan K., Tsai Y.-C., Niranjan N., et al. Sutureless aortic valve replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Cardiothorac Surg. 2014; 4(2): 100–111. PMID: 25870805. DOI: 10.3978/j.issn.2225319X.2014.06.01.

10. D’Agostino RB, Grundy S, Sullivan L.M., Willson P.W. For the CHD Risk Prediction Group of the Framingham risk prediction scores. Results of a multiple ethnic group investigation. JAMA. 2001; 286(2): 180–187. PMID: 11448281.

11. Pretre R., Turina M. I. Cardiac valve surgery in the octogenarian. Heart. 2000; 83(1): 116–121. PMID: 10618352.

12. Eniseyeva E.S. Valvular heart disease: diagnosis and management of patients. Irkutsk, 2015. 84 p. (In Russian).

13. Clinical guidelines for the management, diagnosis and treatment of valvular heart disease. Moscow: Izd NTSSSKH im AN Bakuleva RAMN Publ., 2009. 356 p. (In Russian).

14. Nishimura R.A., Otto C.M., Bonow R.O., et al. 2014 AHA/ACC Guideline 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. Circulation. 2014; 129(23): 2440–2492. PMID: 24589852. DOI: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000029.

15. Vahanian A., Alfieri O., Andreotti F., et al. Guidelines on the management of valvular heart disease (version 2012). Eur Heart J. 2012; 33(19): 2451– 2496. PMID: 23474606. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehs109.

16. Harken D.E., Soroff H.S., Taylor W.J., et al. Partial and complete prostheses in aortic insufficiency. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1960; (40): 744–762. PMID: 13711583.

17. Kolesnikov S.A., TSukerman G.I., Golikov G.T., et al. Experience in the use of artificial tricuspid valve in the surgical treatment of aortic insufficiency. Grudnaya khirurgiya. 1964; (5): 3–8. (In Russian).

18. Flameng W., Herregods M.C., Hermans H., et al. Effect of sutureless implantation of the Perceval S aortic valve bioprosthesis on intraoperative and early postoperativeoutcomes. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2011; 142(6): 1453–1457. PMID: 21474151. DOI:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2011.02.021.

19. Tsukerman G.I., Bykova V.A., Fursov B.A. The first experience of replacement of mitral and tricuspid valves of the heart with aortic homo- and heterografts. Grudnaya khirurgiya. 1969; (4): 3–10. (In Russian).

20. Clibier A. Development of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI): А 20-year odyssey. Arch Cardiovasc Dis. 2012; 105(3): 146–152. PMID: 22520797. DOI: 10.1016/j.acvd.2012.01.005.

21. Leon M.B. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement compared with surgery in intermediate risk patients with aortic stenosis: final results from the Randomized Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves 2 Study. In.: American College of Cardiology Scientific Sessions 2016; Chicago, IL, USA; April 2–4.

22. Bonow R.O., Carabello B.A., Chatterjee K., et al. ACC/AHA 2006 guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the 1998 guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease) developed in collaboration with the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists endorsed by the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006; 48(3): 1–148. PMID: 16875962. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2006.05.021.

23. Généreux P., Webb J.G., Svensson L.G., et al. Vascular complications after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: insights from the PARTNER (Placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER Valve) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012; 60(6): 1043–1052. PMID: 22883632. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2012.07.003.

24. Abdel-Wahab M., Neumann F.-J., Mehilli J., et al. 1-Year Outcomes After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With Balloon-Expandable Versus Self-Expandable Valves. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015; 66(7): 791–800. PMID: 26271061. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2015.06.026.

25. Erkapic D., De Rosa S., Kelava A., et al. Risk for permanent pacemaker after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a comprehensive analysis of the literature. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2012. 23(4): 391–397. PMID: 22050112. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-8167.2011.02211.x.

26. Piazza N., Nuis R.J., Tzikas A., et al. Persistent conduction abnormalities and requirements for pacemaking six months after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. EuroIntervention. 2010; 6(4): 475–484. PMID: 20884435. DOI: 10.4244/EIJ30V6I4A80.

27. Gogas B.D., Zacharoulis A.A., Antoniadis A.G. Acute coronary o cclusion following TAVR. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2011; 77(3): 435–458. PMID: 21328684. DOI: 10.1002/ccd.22808.

28. Mohr F.W., Holzhey D., Möllmann H., et al. The German Aortic Valve Registry: 1-year results from 13,680 patients with aortic valve disease. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2014; 46(5): 808–816. PMID: 25079769. DOI: 10.1093/ejcts/ezu290.

29. Walther T., Hamm C.W., Schuler G., et al. Perioperative Results and Complications in 15,964 Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacements: Prospective Data From the GARY Registry. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015; 65(20): 2173–2180. PMID: 25787198. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2015.03.034.

30. Molchanov A. N., Idov E. M., Kondrashov K. V., et al. Clinical and hemodynamic outcomes of Perceval S sutureless bioprostheses implanted through a mini-approach in the aortic position. Patologiya krovoobrashcheniya i kardiokhirurgiya. 2017; (3): 32–39. (In Russian).

31. Kocher A.A., Laufer G., Haverich A., et al. One-year outcomes of the Surgical Treatment of Aortic Stenosis with a Next Generation Surgical Aortic Valve (TRITON) trial: a prospective multicenter study of rapiddeployment aortic valve replacement with the EDWARDS INTUITY Valve System. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2013; 145(1): 110–115. PMID: 23058665. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2012.07.108.

32. Flameng W., Herregods M.C., Hermans H., et al. Effect of sutureless implantation of the Perceval S aortic valve bioprosthesis on intraoperative and early postoperativeoutcomes. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2011; 142(6): 1453–1457. PMID: 21474151. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2011.02.021.

33. Phan K., Tsai Y.C., Niranjan N., et al. Sutureless aortic valve replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Сardiothorac Surg. 2015; 4(2): 100–111. PMID: 25870805. DOI: 10.3978/j.issn.2225319X.2014.06.01.

34. Van Boxtel A.G., Houthuizen P., Hamad M.A., et al. Postoperative conduction disorders after implantation of the self-expandable sutureless Perceval S bioprosthesis. J Heart Valve Dis. 2014; 23(3): 319–324. PMID: 25296456.