Open Access
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2025; 73(04): 279-287
DOI: 10.1055/a-2281-1897
Original Cardiovascular

Recent Outcomes of Surgical Redo Aortic Valve Replacement in Prosthetic Valve Failure

Yoonjin Kang*
1   Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
,
Nazla Amanda Soehartono*
2   Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Jongno-gu, Seoul, Republic of Korea
,
Jae Woong Choi
1   Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
,
1   Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
,
Ho Young Hwang
1   Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
,
Joon Bum Kim
3   Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
,
Hong Rae Kim
3   Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
,
Seung Hyun Lee
4   Division of Cardiovascular Surgery, Severance Cardiovascular Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Republic of Korea
,
Yang Hyun Cho
5   Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Heart Stroke Vascular Institute, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
› Institutsangaben
Preview

Abstract

Background As redo surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR) is relatively high risk, valve-in-valve transcatheter AVR has emerged as an alternative for failed prostheses. However, the majority of studies are outdated. This study assessed the current clinical outcomes of redo AVR.

Methods and Results This study enrolled 324 patients who underwent redo AVR due to prosthetic valve failure from 2010 to 2021 in four tertiary centers. The primary outcome was operative mortality. The secondary outcomes were overall survival, cardiac death, and aortic valve-related events. Logistic regression analysis, clustered Cox proportional hazards models, and competing risk analysis were used to evaluate the independent risk factors. Redo AVR was performed in 242 patients without endocarditis and 82 patients with endocarditis. Overall operative mortality was 4.6% (15 deaths). Excluding patients with endocarditis, the operative mortality of redo AVR decreased to 2.5%. Multivariate analyses demonstrated that endocarditis (hazard ratio [HR]: 3.990, p = 0.014), longer cardiopulmonary bypass time (HR: 1.006, p = 0.037), and lower left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (HR: 0.956, p = 0.034) were risk factors of operative mortality. Endocarditis and lower LVEF were independent predictors of overall survival.

Conclusion The relatively high risk of redo AVR was due to reoperation for prosthetic valve endocarditis. The outcomes of redo AVR for nonendocarditis are excellent. Our findings suggest that patients without endocarditis, especially with acceptable LVEF, can be treated safely with redo AVR.

Data Availability Statement

Data available on request.


Authors' Contribution

Y.K. contributed to conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, project administration, supervision, validation, visualization, writing-original draft, writing-review and editing. N.A.S. contributed to : conceptualization, data curation, writing-original draft. J.W.C. contributed to conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, project administration, supervision, validation, visualization, writing-original draft, writing-review and editing. K.H.K. contributed to formal analysis, investigation, supervision, validation, writing-review and editing. H.Y.H. contributed to conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, project administration, validation, visualization, writing-review and editing. J.B.K. contributed to conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, project administration, supervision, validation, visualization, writing-original draft, writing-review and editing. H.R.K. contributed to conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, project administration, supervision, validation, visualization, writing-original draft, writing-review and editing. S.H.L. contributed to conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, project administration, supervision, validation, visualization, writing-original draft, writing-review and editing; Y.H.C. contributed to conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, project administration, supervision, validation, visualization, writing-original draft, writing-review and editing.


* These authors contributed as co-first author of the manuscript.


Supplementary Material



Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 24. September 2023

Angenommen: 27. Februar 2024

Accepted Manuscript online:
05. März 2024

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
16. April 2024

© 2024. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany