• Journal of Chest Surgery
• /
• v.40 no.3 s.272
• /
• pp.200-208
• /
• 2007

Background: The effect of patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) on the clinical outcome following aortic valve replacement (AVR) remains controversial. This study compared the surgical outcomes of AVR between patients with a patient-prosthesis mismatch and those having undergone an aortic annular enlargement. Material and Method: Six hundred and twenty seven adult patients, who underwent AVR with stented bioprosthetic or mechanical valves, between January 1996 and February 2006, were evaluated. PPM was defined as an indexed effective orifice area (iEOA) ${\leq}0.85cm^2/m^2$, and Severe if the iEOA${\leq}0.65cm^2/m^2$ PPM was present in 103 (16.4%, PPM group) patients, and severe in 11 (1.8%, SPPM group). During the period of the study, 21 patients underwent an AVR with annular enlargement (AE group). Result: The mean iEOA of the AE group was larger than that of the PPM group ($0.95\;vs.\;0.76cm^2/m^2,\;p=0.00$). The AE group had longer CPB, ACC and operation times than the PPM group, and showed a tendency toward higher operative mortality (14.3% vs. 2.9%, p=0.06). The SPPM group had higher AV pressure gradients (peak/mean) than the AE group (72/45 mmHg vs. 38/25 mmHg, p=0.02/0.06) and suffered more AV related events (AV reoperation or severe aortic stenosis)(45.5% vs. 9.5%, p=0.03). LV masses were not regressed in the patients who experienced an AV related event. Conclusion: During AVR in patients with a small aortic annulus, annular enlargement should be carefully applied taking into account the high risk of operative mortality due to annular enlargement and co-morbidities of patients. Aortic annular enlargement; however, should be considered as an alternative method in patients expected to have a severe PPM after an AVR.

• Journal of Chest Surgery
• /
• v.41 no.2
• /
• pp.202-209
• /
• 2008

Background: The introduction of Drug Eluting Stents (DES) decreased the number of patients referred for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). The impact of DES on CABG (Step 1) was studied and compared with the 1-year outcome after CABG with DES (Step 2). Material and Method: Surgical results for patients who underwent off-pump CABG (OPCAB) before the introduction of DES(n=298) were compared with those who underwent OPCAB after the introduction of DES (n=288) (Step 1). Postoperative 30-day and 1-year results were also compared between the patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using DES (n=220) and those who underwent OPCAB (n=255) (Step 2). Result: Since the introduction of DES, the ratio of CABG versus PCI decreased. In the CABG group, the number of high risk patients such as elderly patients (age 62 vs. 64, p=0.023), those with chronic renal failure (4% vs. 9%, p=0.021), calcification of the ascending aorta (9% vs. 15%, p=0.043), or frequency of urgent or emergent operations (12% vs. 22%, p=0.002) increased. However, there were no differences in the cardiac death and graft patency rates between the two groups (step 1). During the one-year follow up period, the rate of target vessel revascularization (12.3% vs. 2.4%, p<0.001) and major adverse cardiac events (MACE: death, myocardial infarct, TVR) were higher in the DES than the CABG group (13.6% vs 4.3%) (stage 2). Conclusion: Introduction of DES decreased the number of patients referred for surgery, and increased the comorbidity in patients who underwent CABG. DES increased the rate of target vessel revascularization, and the occurrence of MACE during the 1-year follow-up. However, there was no difference in the incidence of myocardial infarction and cardiac death between the two groups.