Qualitätsparameter für den Aortenklappenersatz

Zusammenfassung

Die Vor- und Nachteile von mechanischen und biologischen Herzklappenprothesen ebenso wie die Komplikationen im Verlaufe von Langzeitstudien sind verantwortlich für die Qualität eines Aortenklappenersatzes. Die anatomischen Gegebenheiten wie enge Aortenwurzel, gleichzeitiges Vorhandensein einer koronaren Herzerkrankung oder reduzierte linksventrikuläre Funktion beeinträchtigen die relativ guten Operationsergebnisse und erfordern eine chirurgische Intervention oder die Verwendung von gerüstfreien Klappenprothesen.

Summary

Advantages and disadvantages of mechanical or biological heart valve prostheses in combination with complications during long-term follow-up are responsible for the quality of aortic valve replacement. Anatomical conditions like narrow aortic root, concomitant coronary artery disease or reduced left ventricular function impair the quite good surgical results necessitating surgical intervention or the use of stentless valve implants.

Aortenklappenersatz - Prothesen-Patienten-Mismatch - Herzchirurgie - stentless-Klappen - Qualitätssicherung

aortic valve replacement - prosthesis-patient mismatch - cardiac surgery - stentless prosthesis - quality management

Literatur

• 1 Akins C W, Miller D C, Turina M I. et al . Guidelines for reporting mortality and morbidity after cardiac valve interventions.  Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2008;  33 523-528
• 2 Borger M A, Ivanov J, Armstrong S, Christie-Hrybinsky D, Feindel C M, David T E. Twenty-year results of the Hancock II bioprosthesis.  J Heart Valve Dis. 2006;  15 49-55
• 3 Connolly H M, Oh J K, Schaff H V. et al . Severe aortic stenosis with low transvalvular gradient and severe left ventricular dysfunction: result of aortic valve replacement in 52 patients.  Circulation. 2000;  101 1940-1946
• 4 David T E, Pollick C, Bos J. Aortic valve replacement with stentless porcine aortic bioprosthesis.  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1990;  99 113-118
• 5 David T E, Armstrong S, Maganti M, Butany J, Feindel D M, Bos J. Postimplantation morphologic changes of glutaraldehyde-fixed porcine aortic roots and risk of aneurysm and rupture.  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2009;  137 94-100
• 6 Edmunds Jr L H, Cohn L H, Weisel R D. Guidelines for reporting mortality and morbidity after cardiac valvular operations.  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1988;  96 351-353
• 7 Edmunds Jr L H, Clark R E, Cohn L H, Grunkemeier G L, Miller D C, Weisel R D. Guidelines for reporting morbidity and mortality after cardiac valvular operations.  Ann Thorac Surg. 1996;  62 932-935
• 8 Edwards F H, Peterson E D, Coombs L P. et al . Prediction of operative mortality after valve replacement surgery.  J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001;  37 885-892
• 9 Emery R W, Krogh C C, Arom K V. et al . The St. Jude Medical cardiac valve prosthesis: A 25-year experience with single valve replacement.  Ann Thorac Surg. 2005;  79 776-783
• 10 Ennker J, Rosendahl U, Albert A, Dumlu E, Ennker I C, Florath I. Stentless bioprostheses in small aortic roots: Impact of patient-prosthesis mismatch on survival and quality of life.  J Heart Valve Dis. 2005;  14 523-530
• 11 Eslami M, Rahimtoola S H. Prophylactic aortic valve replacement in older patients for mild aortic stenosis during coronary bypass surgery.  Am J Geriatr Cardiol. 2003;  12 197-200
• 12 Florath I, Albert A, Rosendahl U, Ennker I C, Ennker J. Impact of valve prosthesis-patient mismatch estimated by echocardiographic-determined effective orifice area on long-term outcome after aortic valve replacement.  Am Heart J. 2008;  155 1135-1142
• 13 Gao G, Wu Y, Grunkemeier G L, Furnary A P, Starr A. Forty-year survival with the Starr-Edwards heart valve prosthesis.  J Heart Valve Dis. 2004;  13 91-96
• 14 Gödje O L, Fischlein T, Adelhard K, Nollert G, Klinner W, Reichart B. Thirty-year results of Starr-Edwards prostheses in the aortic and mitral position.  Ann Thorac Surg. 1997;  63 613-619
• 15 Grunkemeier G L, Li H H, Naftel D C, Starr A, Rahimtoola S H. Long-term performance of heart valve prostheses.  Curr Probl Cardiol. 2000;  25 73-154
• 16 He G -W, Grunkemeier G L, Gately H L, Furnary A P, Starr A. Up to thirty-year survival after aortic valve replacement in the small aortic root.  Ann Thorac Surg. 1995;  59 1056-1062
• 17 Mykén P S, Bech-Hansen O. A 20-year experience of 1712 patients with Biocar porcine bioprosthesis.  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2009;  137 76-81
• 18 O’Brien M F, Hancock S, Stafford E G. The homograft aortic valve: a 29-year, 99.3 % follow-up of 1,022 valve replacements.  J Heart Valve Dis. 2001;  10 334-344
• 19 Orszulak T A, Schaff H V, Puga F J. et al . Event status of the Starr-Edwards aortic valve to 20 years: a benchmark for comparison.  Ann Thorac Surg. 1997;  63 620-626
• 20 Pepper J R. Interventions on the aortic valve. In: Treasure T, Hunt I, Keogh B, Pagano D, editors The evidence for cardiothoracic surgery. Shrewsbury; tfm Publishing Ltd 2005: 221-230
• 21 Rahimtoola S H. The problem of valve prosthesis-patient mismatch.  Circulation. 1978;  58 20-24
• 22 Sievers H H, Hanke T, Stierle U. et al . A critical reappraisal of the Ross operation. Renaissance of the subcoronary implantation technique?.  Circulation. 2006;  (1 Suppl) 114 I504-511
• 23 Vetter H O, Krupa W, Nerlich A. et al . New morphological aspects of explanted Hancock Extracorporeal pericardial bioprostheses.  J Heart Valve Dis. 1994;  3 335-343
• 24 Walley V M, Keon C A, Khalili M, Moher D, Campagna M, Keon W J. Ionescu-Shiley valve failure. I: Experience with 125 standard-profile explants.  Ann Thorac Surg. 1992;  54 111-116