Effect Of Coronary Bypass And Valve Structure On Outcome In Isolated Valve Replacement For Aortic Stenosis

dc.contributor.utaustinauthorVowels, Travis Jamesen
dc.creatorRoberts, William Clifforden
dc.creatorRoberts, Carey Camilleen
dc.creatorVowels, Travis Jamesen
dc.creatorKo, Jong Mien
dc.creatorFilardo, Giovannien
dc.creatorHamman, Baron Lloyden
dc.creatorMatter, Gregory Johnen
dc.creatorHenry, Albert Carlen
dc.creatorHebeler, Robert Fredericken
dc.date.accessioned2015-09-09T15:51:42Zen
dc.date.available2015-09-09T15:51:42Zen
dc.date.issued2012-05en
dc.description.abstractReports differ regarding the effect of concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients who undergo aortic valve replacement (AVR) for aortic stenosis (AS), and no reports have described the effect of aortic valve structure in patients who undergo AVR for AS. A total of 871 patients aged 24 to 94 years (mean 70) whose AVR for AS was their first cardiac operation, with or without first concomitant CABG, were included. Patients who underwent mitral valve procedures were excluded. In comparison with the 443 patients (51%) who did not undergo CABG, the 428 (49%) who underwent concomitant CABG were significantly older, were more often male, had lower transvalvular peak systolic pressure gradients and larger valve areas, had lower frequencies of congenitally malformed aortic valves, had lighter valves by weight, had higher frequencies of systemic hypertension, and had longer stays in the hospital after AVR. Early and late (to 10 years) mortality were similar by propensity-adjusted analysis in patients who did and did not undergo concomitant CABG. Congenitally unicuspid or bicuspid valves occurred in approximately 90% of those aged 21 to 50, in nearly 70% in those aged 51 to 70 years, and in just over 30% in those aged 71 to 95 years. Unadjusted and adjusted survival was significantly higher in patients with unicuspid or bicuspid valves compared to those with tricuspid valves. In conclusion, although concomitant CABG had no effect on the adjusted probability of survival, the type of aortic valve (unicuspid or bicuspid vs tricuspid) significantly affected the unadjusted and adjusted probability of survival. (C) 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. (Am J Cardiol 2012;109:1334-1340)en
dc.description.departmentStatisticsen
dc.description.sponsorshipen
dc.identifier.citationWilliam Clifford Roberts, Carey Camille Roberts, Travis James Vowels, Jong Mi Ko, Giovanni Filardo, Baron Lloyd Hamman, Gregory John Matter, Albert Carl Henry III, Robert Frederick Hebeler Jr., Effect of Coronary Bypass and Valve Structure on Outcome in Isolated Valve Replacement for Aortic Stenosis. The American Journal of Cardiology, Volume 109, Issue 9, 1 May 2012, Pages 1334-1340, ISSN 0002-9149, DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2011.12.028en
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.amjcard.2011.12.028en
dc.identifier.issn0002-9149en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2152/31241en
dc.identifier.urlen
dc.language.isoEnglishen
dc.relation.ispartofserialAmerican Journal of Cardiologyen
dc.rightsAdministrative deposit of works to Texas ScholarWorks: This works author(s) is or was a University faculty member, student or staff member; this article is already available through open access or the publisher allows a PDF version of the article to be freely posted online. The library makes the deposit as a matter of fair use (for scholarly, educational, and research purposes), and to preserve the work and further secure public access to the works of the University.en
dc.rights.holderen
dc.subjectin-hospital mortalityen
dc.subjectimpacten
dc.subjectcabgen
dc.subjectcardiac & cardiovascular systemsen
dc.titleEffect Of Coronary Bypass And Valve Structure On Outcome In Isolated Valve Replacement For Aortic Stenosisen
dc.typeArticleen

Access full-text files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
EffectCoronaryBypass.pdf
Size:
1.06 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format