In patients with concomitant aortic and mitral valve disease is aortic valve replacement with mitral valve repair superior to double valve replacement?

Marian Urban, Jan Pirk, Daniel Turek, Ivan Netuka

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

A best evidence topic in cardiac surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was: in patients with concomitant aortic and mitral valve disease is aortic valve replacement with mitral valve plasty (MVP) superior to double valve replacement (DVR) in terms of improved long-term survival? Altogether 156 papers were found using the reported search, of which seven represented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The authors, journal, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes and results of these papers are tabulated. Out of seven papers, that simultaneously compare these two treatment modalities, three favor MVP combined with aortic valve replacement (AVR) over DVR, two papers advocate the opposite and two failed to find any significant difference in long-term survival, freedom from reoperation and thromboembolic and bleeding complications between these two surgical options. All data presented derive from level 2b evidence. Critical appraisal of these studies is constricted by the large heterogeneity of the patients, diversity in treatment protocols and inherent selection bias. We conclude that currently the available evidence is insufficient to prove that AVR with MVP is superior to DVR in patients with double valve disease.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)238-242
Number of pages5
JournalInteractive cardiovascular and thoracic surgery
Volume12
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 1 2011

Fingerprint

Aortic Valve
Mitral Valve
Survival
Selection Bias
Clinical Protocols
Reoperation
Thoracic Surgery
Publications
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Hemorrhage
Therapeutics

Keywords

  • Aortic valve replacement
  • Double valve replacement
  • Mitral valve repair
  • Rheumatic heart disease

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

In patients with concomitant aortic and mitral valve disease is aortic valve replacement with mitral valve repair superior to double valve replacement? / Urban, Marian; Pirk, Jan; Turek, Daniel; Netuka, Ivan.

In: Interactive cardiovascular and thoracic surgery, Vol. 12, No. 2, 01.02.2011, p. 238-242.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{45153bef2d144ceab1275de0ce77e9b6,
title = "In patients with concomitant aortic and mitral valve disease is aortic valve replacement with mitral valve repair superior to double valve replacement?",
abstract = "A best evidence topic in cardiac surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was: in patients with concomitant aortic and mitral valve disease is aortic valve replacement with mitral valve plasty (MVP) superior to double valve replacement (DVR) in terms of improved long-term survival? Altogether 156 papers were found using the reported search, of which seven represented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The authors, journal, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes and results of these papers are tabulated. Out of seven papers, that simultaneously compare these two treatment modalities, three favor MVP combined with aortic valve replacement (AVR) over DVR, two papers advocate the opposite and two failed to find any significant difference in long-term survival, freedom from reoperation and thromboembolic and bleeding complications between these two surgical options. All data presented derive from level 2b evidence. Critical appraisal of these studies is constricted by the large heterogeneity of the patients, diversity in treatment protocols and inherent selection bias. We conclude that currently the available evidence is insufficient to prove that AVR with MVP is superior to DVR in patients with double valve disease.",
keywords = "Aortic valve replacement, Double valve replacement, Mitral valve repair, Rheumatic heart disease",
author = "Marian Urban and Jan Pirk and Daniel Turek and Ivan Netuka",
year = "2011",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1510/icvts.2010.251876",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "12",
pages = "238--242",
journal = "Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery",
issn = "1569-9293",
publisher = "European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - In patients with concomitant aortic and mitral valve disease is aortic valve replacement with mitral valve repair superior to double valve replacement?

AU - Urban, Marian

AU - Pirk, Jan

AU - Turek, Daniel

AU - Netuka, Ivan

PY - 2011/2/1

Y1 - 2011/2/1

N2 - A best evidence topic in cardiac surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was: in patients with concomitant aortic and mitral valve disease is aortic valve replacement with mitral valve plasty (MVP) superior to double valve replacement (DVR) in terms of improved long-term survival? Altogether 156 papers were found using the reported search, of which seven represented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The authors, journal, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes and results of these papers are tabulated. Out of seven papers, that simultaneously compare these two treatment modalities, three favor MVP combined with aortic valve replacement (AVR) over DVR, two papers advocate the opposite and two failed to find any significant difference in long-term survival, freedom from reoperation and thromboembolic and bleeding complications between these two surgical options. All data presented derive from level 2b evidence. Critical appraisal of these studies is constricted by the large heterogeneity of the patients, diversity in treatment protocols and inherent selection bias. We conclude that currently the available evidence is insufficient to prove that AVR with MVP is superior to DVR in patients with double valve disease.

AB - A best evidence topic in cardiac surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was: in patients with concomitant aortic and mitral valve disease is aortic valve replacement with mitral valve plasty (MVP) superior to double valve replacement (DVR) in terms of improved long-term survival? Altogether 156 papers were found using the reported search, of which seven represented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The authors, journal, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes and results of these papers are tabulated. Out of seven papers, that simultaneously compare these two treatment modalities, three favor MVP combined with aortic valve replacement (AVR) over DVR, two papers advocate the opposite and two failed to find any significant difference in long-term survival, freedom from reoperation and thromboembolic and bleeding complications between these two surgical options. All data presented derive from level 2b evidence. Critical appraisal of these studies is constricted by the large heterogeneity of the patients, diversity in treatment protocols and inherent selection bias. We conclude that currently the available evidence is insufficient to prove that AVR with MVP is superior to DVR in patients with double valve disease.

KW - Aortic valve replacement

KW - Double valve replacement

KW - Mitral valve repair

KW - Rheumatic heart disease

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79551582909&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79551582909&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1510/icvts.2010.251876

DO - 10.1510/icvts.2010.251876

M3 - Article

C2 - 21081554

AN - SCOPUS:79551582909

VL - 12

SP - 238

EP - 242

JO - Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery

JF - Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery

SN - 1569-9293

IS - 2

ER -