Background-The aim of this prospectively randomized study was to evaluate left ventricular hypertrophy and its regression after stentless versus conventional biological aortic valve replacement. Methods and Results-From March 1996 through April 1998, 180 patients were prospectively selected; 106 patients received a stentless aortic valve (SAV), and 74 received a conventional stented bioprosthesis (CSB). Of these patients, 95% and 96%, respectively, had aortic stenosis. Their mean age was 72.3 and 74.8 years, and there were no significant differences in left ventricular function, preoperative pressure gradients, and NYHA functional status. Aortic annulus diameter indexes were comparable at 13.46 (SAV) versus 13.55 (CSB) mm (PϭNS). Larger SAVs were implanted because of the oversizing technique. In-hospital mortality (nϭ3 and 1 for SAV and CSB) was not valve related. At follow-up, all patients were in NYHA class 1 or 2. Baseline end-diastolic left ventricular posterior wall thickness was 15.6 (SAV) and 14.8(CSB) mm (PϭNS) and decreased to 11.8 (SAV) and 13.2 (CSB) mm (PϽ0.05) at 6 months. Left ventricular mass index was 213 and 202 g/m 2 at baseline (PϭNS), whereas after 6 months, it was 141 (SAV) and 170 (CSB) g/m 2 (PϽ0.05). Conclusions-Regression of left ventricular hypertrophy occurs in all patients after aortic valve replacement but is significantly enhanced after SAV implantation. This possibly is due to improved transvalvular hemodynamics.

Renal failure requiring dialysis remains a serious complication, particularly in patients with pulmonary hypertension and previous renal dysfunction. Our logistic risk model allows the prediction of renal failure requiring dialysis, based on the individual presentation of risk factors and, therefore, helps to determine the perioperative risk in cardiac surgery patients.

With a worsening in the risk profile of patients undergoing cardiac surgery, an increasing number of patients develop major complications leading to increased length of stay and mortality, which is correlated to the number and severity of these complications. Our predictive model based on preoperative and postoperative variables allowed us to determine with accuracy the perioperative mortality in critically ill patients after cardiac surgery.

No abstract

In contrast to the results of previous studies, recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) failed to show a benefit of prophylactic aortic counterpulsation in high-risk patients undergoing cardiac surgery. The present analysis aims to redefine the effects of this treatment modality in the light of this new evidence. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL/CCTR, Google Scholar and reference lists of relevant articles were searched for full-text articles of RCTs in English or German. Assessments for eligibility, relevance, study validity and data extraction were performed by two reviewers independently using prespecified criteria. The primary outcome was hospital mortality. A total of nine eligible RCTs with 1171 patients were identified: 577 patients were treated preoperatively with intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) and 594 patients served as controls. The pooled odds ratio (OR) for hospital mortality (22 hospital deaths in the intervention arm, 54 in the control group) was 0.381 (95% CI 0.230-0.629; P < 0.001). The pooled analyses of five RCTs including only patients undergoing isolated on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (n[IABP] = 348, n[control] = 347) also showed a statistically significant improvement in mortality for preoperative IABP implantation (fixed-effects model: OR 0.267, 95% CI 0.129-0.552, P < 0.001). The pooled OR for hospital mortality from two randomized off-pump trials was 0.556 (fixed-effects model, 95% CI 0.207-1.493, P = 0.226). Preoperative aortic counterpulsation was associated with a significant reduction in low cardiac output syndrome (LCOS) in the total population (fixed-effects model: OR 0.330, 95% CI 0.214-0.508, P < 0.001) as well as in the subgroup of CAGB patients (fixed-effects model: OR 0.113, 95% CI 0.056-0.226, P < 0.001), whereas there was no benefit in the off-pump population (fixed-effects model: OR 0.555, 95% CI 0.209-1.474, P = 0.238). Preoperative IABP implantation was associated with a reduction of intensive care unit (ICU) stay in all investigated populations with a greater effect in the total population [fixed-effects model: standard mean difference (SMD) -0.931 ± 0.198, P < 0.001] as well as in the subgroup of CAGB patients (fixed-effects model: SMD -1.240 ± 0.156, P < 0.001), compared with the off-pump group (fixed-effects model: SMD -0.723 ± 0.128, P < 0.001). Despite contradictory results from recent trials, the present study confirms the findings of previous meta-analyses that prophylactic aortic counterpulsation reduces hospital mortality, incidence of LCOS and ICU requirement in high-risk patients undergoing on-pump cardiac surgery. However, owing to small sample sizes and the lack of a clear-cut definition of high-risk patients, an adequately powered, prospective RCT is necessary to find a definite answer to the question, if certain groups of patients undergoing cardiac surgery benefit from a prophylactic IABP insertion.