Volume 10 Supplement 1
Alternative treatment option for high risk surgical candidates after previous cardiac surgery: The Scottish National TAVI Programme experience
© Giordano et al. 2015
Published: 16 December 2015
Patients that require aortic valve replacement, having previously undergone cardiac surgery, have a higher morbidity and mortality with increased risks of mediastinal injury during re-operation.
In the era of TAVI for high risk surgical candidates, we analysed our experience with redo conventional surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and compared these results with those from patients who had undergone TAVI as a second heart operation.
A retrospective, observational, comparative study was performed in the national centre offering TAVI. 149 consecutive patients underwent redo operation with SAVR (n = 59) or TAVI (n = 90) between October 2012 and February 2015. In the SAVR group patients with concomitant procedures (n = 8) or endocarditis (n = 8) were excluded from the analysis.
Previous Cardiac Surgery
AVR + CABG
TAVI access was transfemoral (65.5%), transapical (6.7%), or trans-aortic (27.8%).
Despite a higher incidence of MACE (major adverse cardiac events) in SAVR patients, results indicated no significant differences between two groups in terms of all-cause and cardiovascular related mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction.
In details, hospital mortality was higher in SAVR group (5.1%) compared to TAVI group (2.2%), although it did not reach statistical significance.
There was a higher incidence of CVA in the SAVR versus TAVI group (6.8% vs. 2.2%; p = 0.385).
Patients were found to require permanent pacemaker insertion more often after TAVI (10% vs 3.4%; p = 0.2).
Finally, average length of post-operative hospital stay was significantly shorter in TAVI than SAVR group (5.4 vs 10.4 days ; p < 0.00001).
This retrospective analysis suggests that TAVI is preferable to SAVR in this high risk group of patients. Redo-SAVR remains a valid option for younger patients in whom long-term durability of the prosthetic valve is a concern.
This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.