Effect of Coronary Bypass and Valve Structure on Outcome in Isolated Valve Replacement for Aortic Stenosis

      Reports differ regarding the effect of concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients who undergo aortic valve replacement (AVR) for aortic stenosis (AS), and no reports have described the effect of aortic valve structure in patients who undergo AVR for AS. A total of 871 patients aged 24 to 94 years (mean 70) whose AVR for AS was their first cardiac operation, with or without first concomitant CABG, were included. Patients who underwent mitral valve procedures were excluded. In comparison with the 443 patients (51%) who did not undergo CABG, the 428 (49%) who underwent concomitant CABG were significantly older, were more often male, had lower transvalvular peak systolic pressure gradients and larger valve areas, had lower frequencies of congenitally malformed aortic valves, had lighter valves by weight, had higher frequencies of systemic hypertension, and had longer stays in the hospital after AVR. Early and late (to 10 years) mortality were similar by propensity-adjusted analysis in patients who did and did not undergo concomitant CABG. Congenitally unicuspid or bicuspid valves occurred in approximately 90% of those aged 21 to 50, in nearly 70% in those aged 51 to 70 years, and in just over 30% in those aged 71 to 95 years. Unadjusted and adjusted survival was significantly higher in patients with unicuspid or bicuspid valves compared to those with tricuspid valves. In conclusion, although concomitant CABG had no effect on the adjusted probability of survival, the type of aortic valve (unicuspid or bicuspid vs tricuspid) significantly affected the unadjusted and adjusted probability of survival.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to American Journal of Cardiology
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Harrell Jr, F.E.
        Regression Modeling Strategies: With Application to Linear Models, Logistic Regression, and Survival Analysis.
        Springer-Verlag, New York, New York2001
        • D'Agostino Jr, R.B.
        Propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment to a non-randomized control group.
        Stat Med. 1998; 17: 2265-2281
        • Filardo G.
        • Hamilton C.
        • Hamman B.
        • Ng H.K.
        • Grayburn P.
        Categorizing BMI may lead to biased results in studies investigating in-hospital mortality after isolated CABG.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 2007; 60: 1132-1139
        • Filardo G.
        • Hamilton C.
        • Hamman B.
        • Grayburn P.
        Obesity and stroke after cardiac surgery: the impact of grouping body mass index.
        Ann Thorac Surg. 2007; 84: 720-722
        • Grambsch P.M.
        • Therneau T.
        Proportional hazards tests and diagnostics based on weighted residuals.
        Biometrika. 1994; 81: 515-526
        • Jones E.L.
        • Weintraub W.S.
        • Craver J.M.
        • Guyton R.A.
        • Shen Y.
        Interaction of age and coronary disease after aortic valve replacement: implications for valve selection.
        Ann Thorac Surg. 1994; 58: 378-385
        • Akins C.W.
        Long-term results with the Medtronic-Hall valvular prosthesis.
        Ann Thorac Surg. 1996; 61: 806-813
        • Litmathe J.
        • Boeken U.
        • Feindt P.
        • Gams E.
        Concomitant CABG procedures in elderly patients undergoing aortic valve replacement.
        Z Kardiol. 2003; 92: 947-952
        • Gillinov A.M.
        • Garcia M.J.
        When is concomitant aortic valve replacement indicated in patients with mild to moderate stenosis undergoing coronary revascularization?.
        Curr Sci. 2005; 7: 101-104
        • Kuduvalli M.
        • Grayson A.D.
        • Au J.
        • Grotte G.
        • Bridgewater B.
        • Fabri B.M.
        A multi-centre additive and logistic risk model for in-hospital mortality following aortic valve replacement.
        Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2007; 31: 607-613
        • Kobayashi K.J.
        • Williams J.A.
        • Nwakanma L.
        • Gott V.L.
        • Baumgartner W.A.
        • Conte J.V.
        Aortic valve replacement and concomitant coronary artery bypass: assessing the impact of multiple grafts.
        Ann Thorac Surg. 2007; 83: 969-978
        • Gulbins H.
        • Malkoc A.
        • Ennker J.
        Combined cardiac surgincal procedures in octogenarians: operative outcome.
        Clin Res Cardiol. 2008; 97: 176-180
        • Likosky D.S.
        • Sorensen M.J.
        • Dacey L.J.
        • Baribeau Y.R.
        • Leavitt B.J.
        • DiScipio A.W.
        • Hernandez Jr, F.
        • Cochran R.P.
        • Quinn R.
        • Helm R.E.
        • Charlesworth D.C.
        • Clough R.A.
        • Malenka D.J.
        • Sisto D.A.
        • Sardella G.
        • Olmstead E.M.
        • Ross C.S.
        • O'Connor G.T.
        Long-term survival of the very elderly undergoing aortic valve surgery.
        Circulation. 2009; 120: 127-133
        • Roberts W.C.
        • Vowels T.J.
        • Ko J.M.
        Comparison of interpretations of valve structure between cardiac surgeon and cardiac pathologist among adults having isolated aortic valve replacement for aortic valve stenosis (± aortic regurgitation).
        Am J Cardiol. 2009; 103: 1139-1145