Impact of preoperative atrial fibrillation on mortality and cardiovascular outcomes of mechanical mitral valve replacement for rheumatic mitral valve disease

Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Changhai Hospital, Shanghai, China.
European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery: official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery (Impact Factor: 3.3). 05/2012; 43(3). DOI: 10.1093/ejcts/ezs213
Source: PubMed


OBJECTIVES: The prognostic significance of preoperative atrial fibrillation on mitral valve replacement remains unclear. The aim of this study was to explore the effects of the presence of preoperative atrial fibrillation on mortality and cardiovascular outcomes of mitral valve replacement for rheumatic valve disease. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed on a total of 793 patients who underwent mitral valve replacement with or without tricuspid valve repair in our hospital. The patients selected were divided into two groups according to preoperative rhythm status. Patients with preoperative atrial fibrillation were assigned to the AF group, while patients in preoperative sinus rhythm were assigned to the SR group. Postoperative follow-up was performed by outpatient visits, as well as by telephone and written correspondence. Data gathered included survivorship, postoperative complications, left ventricular function and tricuspid regurgitation. RESULTS: For patients with atrial fibrillation vs. those in sinus rhythm, there was no difference in postoperative mortality and morbidity. Follow-up was a mean of 8.6 ± 2.4 years. For patients with preoperative atrial fibrillation, 10-year survival from a Kaplan-Meier curve was 88.7%, compared with 96.6% in patients with preoperative sinus rhythm (P = 0.002). Multivariate analysis identified low left ventricular ejection fraction, older age, large left atrium and preoperative atrial fibrillation as significant adverse predictors for overall survival. Freedom from thromboembolism complications at 13 years was lower for patients with preoperative atrial fibrillation without maze procedure and left atrial appendage ligation, compared with that for patients with preoperative sinus rhythm without maze procedure and left atrial appendage ligation, and patients with concomitant maze procedure and left atrial appendage ligation (76.3 vs. 94.8 vs. 94.0%, respectively; P = 0.001). On echocardiography, the proportion of patients with significant tricuspid regurgitation was 38.7% (atrial fibrillation patients) vs. 25.4% (patients in sinus rhythm; P < 0.001). Left ventricular ejection fraction measured 5 years after surgery increased by an average of 1.2% in the AF group, while it increased by 5.3% in the SR group (P = 0.028). CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative atrial fibrillation is a risk factor for long-term mortality, thromboembolism complications and tricuspid regurgitation, and it also has an adverse effect on the degree of improvement when considering left ventricular function.

Full-text preview

Available from:

  • Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery 04/2013; 16(4):494. DOI:10.1093/icvts/ivt044 · 1.16 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with less favorable outcomes in patients undergoing mitral valve and tricuspid valve surgery. Despite growing evidence on the potential benefits of surgical ablation for AF there is significant variability among surgeons in treatment of AF. The purpose of our study was to assess the effect of the Cox-maze procedure on operative and follow-up outcomes. In our prospective study, patients who underwent isolated mitral valve or mitral valve+tricuspid valve surgery without history of AF (n = 506), with untreated AF (n = 75), or with Cox-maze procedure (n = 236) were included (N = 817). Sinus rhythm was captured according to Heart Rhythm Society guidelines. Patients who underwent the Cox-maze procedure were propensity score matched to patients without history of AF resulting in 208 pairs of patients. Operative outcomes were comparable after propensity score matching (Cox-maze procedure vs no AF) stroke/transient ischemic attack (0.5% vs 0.5%; P = 1.00), renal failure (2.9% vs 1.4%; P = .34), and operative mortality (1.4% vs 1.4%; P = 1.00). High return to sinus rhythm was documented at 6, 12, and 24 months (92%, 91%, and 86%, respectively) as well as sinus rhythm off antiarrhythmic drugs (79%, 84%, and 82%, respectively). Incidence of embolic stroke in patients who underwent Cox-maze procedure was 1.7% (4 out of 232 patients) and 5.1 cases per 1000 person-years. No difference in 4-year cumulative survival between propensity score-matched groups (91.9% vs 86.9%; log rank, 1.67; P = .20), but higher for patients who underwent Cox-maze procedure versus patients with untreated AF (hazard ratio, 2.47; P = .048). Higher additive European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation (odds ratio, 1.40; P < .001) and limited surgeon experience with Cox-maze procedure (odds ratio, 3.60; P < .001) were significant predictors for failure to perform Cox-maze procedure. In our center, 76% of patients undergoing mitral valve or mitral valve+tricuspid valve surgery experiencing AF underwent concomitant Cox-maze procedure, which is considerably higher than the national average. No increased morbidity was associated with the Cox-maze procedure with the benefit of very low thromboembolic rate. These results suggest the need for performance-based education for AF surgical ablation to achieve optimal outcomes.
    The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery 09/2013; 146(6). DOI:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2013.08.013 · 4.17 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: It remains unclear whether concomitant radiofrequency ablation procedure in valvular surgery could offer additional benefits to patients with rheumatic valvular disease. We designed a prospective and randomized control study to evaluate the efficacy of surgical radiofrequency ablation in patients with rheumatic heart disease. From June 2008 to July 2011, 210 patients with chronic atrial fibrillation and rheumatic heart disease were randomized: (1) control group, patients underwent only valve replacement followed by amiodarone for rhythm control, (2) left atrial group (LA group), patients underwent valve replacement and left atrial mono-polar radiofrequency ablation, (3) bi-atrial group (BA group), patients underwent valve replacement and bi-atrial mono-polar radiofrequency ablation. The primary endpoints included: cardiac death, stroke, and recurrent AF after discharge. There was no perioperative death. One patient died 4months after MVR in BA group. In univariate Cox analysis, the two ablation groups were associated with less AF (BA group vs control group: P<0.001; LA group vs control group: P<0.001) as well as atrial tachycardia arrhythmia (AF/AT/AFL) recurrent (BA group vs control group: P<0.001; LA group vs control group: P=0.02). The comparison between BA and LA groups revealed no differences in terms of AF (P=0.06) or AF/AT/AFL (P=0.09). Atrial transport function restoration rate 12months after operation was 31.4% in LA group, 32.9% in BA group, and 8.6% in control group respectively (P<0.01). Radiofrequency ablation concurring with valvular surgery can bring a higher sinus rhythm restoration rate when compared with medical anti-arrhythmic drug therapy in low-medium risk rheumatic heart disease. The trial was registered on (registry number NCT01013688).
    International journal of cardiology 03/2014; 174(3). DOI:10.1016/j.ijcard.2014.03.153 · 4.04 Impact Factor
Show more