Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2008; 56(8): 467-470
DOI: 10.1055/s-2008-1038840
Original Cardiovascular

© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Should the Aortic Valve Be Replaced in Patients with Mild Aortic Stenosis Admitted for Coronary Surgery?

A. Böning1 , S. Bürger2 , S. Fraund2 , T. Attmann2 , J. T. Cremer2 , J. Hedderich3 , G. Lutter2
  • 1Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, University Hospital Giessen, Giessen, Germany
  • 2Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, University Hospital Kiel, Kiel, Germany
  • 3Department of Biomathematics and Medical Statistics, University Hospital Kiel, Kiel, Germany
Further Information

Publication History

received March 11, 2008

Publication Date:
14 November 2008 (online)

Preview

Abstract

Background: The question whether the aortic valve in patients with mild aortic stenosis undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) should be replaced or left alone is still controversial.

Methods: Between 01/1995 and 03/2004, 38 patients (30 male, 8 female, mean age 70.9 ± 7.8 years) required redo AVR 7.1 ± 4.8 years after primary CABG, while 202 patients (125 male, 77 female, mean age 72.7 ± 7.8 years) underwent combined AVR and CABG (1.9 ± 0.8 grafts/patient). To evaluate the different approaches, the data of the redo-AVR group were compared with the data of a propensity-score matched group of AVR + CABG patients.

Results: All patients survived the procedure; the 30-day survival was 94.7 % in both groups. The 1- and 5-year survival rates were 94.7 % and 83.8 % in the AVR after CABG group, and 94.7 % and 86.9 % in the AVR + CABG group, respectively. The late mortality was 28.9 % in the AVR after CABG and 25 % in the AVR + CABG group. Statistically, significant differences regarding perioperative mortality and morbidity could not be detected, neither with nor without propensity score analysis.

Conclusion: Combined AVR and CABG in patients with coronary artery disease and mild to moderate aortic stenosis seems advisable in an institution with an equally low perioperative risk for both procedures, because the patient will need only one surgical procedure instead of undergoing surgery with all the associated risks twice.

References

Dr. MD, PHD Andreas Böning

University Hospital Giessen
Department of Cardiovascular Surgery

Rudolf-Buchheim-Str. 7

35385 Giessen

Germany

Phone: + 49 0 64 19 94 43 00

Email: andreas.boening@chiru.med.uni-giessen.de