Aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis with severe left ventricular dysfunction: Prognostic indicators

• Published in: Circulation (New York, N.Y.) N.Y.), 1997-05, Vol.95 (10), p.2395-2400
• Main Authors: CONNOLLY, H. M, OH, J. K, ORSZULAK, T. A, OSBORN, S. L, ROGER, V. L, HODGE, D. O, BAILEY, K. R, SEWARD, J. B, JAMIL TAJIK, A
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Aortic Valve Stenosis - complications; Aortic Valve Stenosis - mortality; Aortic Valve Stenosis - surgery; Biological and medical sciences; Cardiology. Vascular system; Endocardial and cardiac valvular diseases; Female; Heart; Heart Valve Prosthesis; Hospital Mortality; Humans; Male; Medical sciences; Middle Aged; Postoperative Period; Prognosis; Stroke Volume; Survival Analysis; Treatment Outcome; Ventricular Dysfunction, Left - complications; Ventricular Dysfunction, Left - physiopathology
• ISSN: 0009-7322; 1524-4539
• DOI: 10.1161/01.CIR.95.10.2395

Aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis (AS) carries an increased risk in the presence of left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction. Few data are available on the outcome of such patients. Between 1985 and 1992, 154 consecutive patients (107 men and 47 women) with LV systolic dysfunction (ejection fraction [EF] < or = 35%) underwent aortic valve replacement for AS. The mean preoperative characteristics included EF, 27 +/- 6%; aortic valve mean gradient, 44 +/- 18 mm Hg; aortic valve area, 0.6 +/- 0.2 cm2; and cardiac output, 4.1 +/- 1.5 L/min. Simultaneous coronary artery bypass graft surgery was performed in 78 patients (51%). Perioperative (30-day) mortality was 9% (14 of 154 patients). Fifty patients died during follow-up. Coronary artery disease (P = .002) and a reduced preoperative cardiac output (P = .03) were significantly related to reduced overall survival rate by multivariate analysis. Postoperative improvement occurred in most patients; 88% were New York Heart Association class III or IV before surgery versus 7% after surgery. Postoperative EF was assessed in 76% of survivors; 76% of these demonstrated improvement. By multivariate analysis, change in EF was inversely related to coronary disease (P = .002) and preoperative aortic valve area (P = .03). Despite LV dysfunction, the risk of aortic valve replacement for AS was acceptable and related to coronary artery disease and mean aortic gradient, and long-term survival was related to coronary disease and cardiac output. Improvement in symptoms and EF occurred in most patients.