Troca valvar aórtica com diferentes próteses: existem diferenças nos resultados da fase hospitalar? Aortic valve replacement with different types of prosthesis: are there differences in the outcomes during hospital phase?

Abstract

OBJETIVOS: Analisar dados intra-operatórios e possíveis diferenças na evolução clínica da fase hospitalar de pós-operatório da troca valvar aórtica com diferentes próteses. MÉTODOS: Análise de 60 pacientes, divididos em três grupos: os submetidos a troca valvar por prótese biológica (20); por prótese mecânica (20); e finalmente, por valva homóloga (20). A média da idade foi de 51,1 anos; 60% eram do sexo masculino e 40% do feminino; 86,7% estavam em NYHA II ou III; 63,3% eram hipertensos, 18,3% diabéticos; a etiologia valvar foi degenerativa em 39%, reumática em 36% e endocardite em 15%. RESULTADOS: A mortalidade hospitalar foi de 5%; não houve diferenças entre os grupos na incidência de choque séptico ou cardiogênico, insuficiência renal aguda, arritmias no centro cirúrgico e na unidade de terapia intensiva (UTI), assim como para o tempo de internação na UTI e tempo de ventilação mecânica. Houve diferença estatística nos tempos de circulação extracorpórea (P=0,02) e pinçamento aórtico (POBJECTIVE: To analyze intraoperative data and possible differences in clinical evolution during postoperative hospital phase for aortic valve replacement surgery using different types of prosthesis. METHODS: Analysis of 60 patients divided into three groups. Valve replacement with bioprosthesis (20), mechanical prosthesis (20) and homologous valve (20). The mean age was 51.1, 60% were male and 40% female patients; 86.7 % were in NYHA II or III; 63.3% presented arterial hypertension and 18.3% had diabetes. Aetiology of valve disease was degenerative for 39%, rheumatic for 36% and endocardits for 15%. RESULTS: The hospital mortality was 5%; there were no differences in the incidence of septical or cardiogenic shock, acute renal failure, rhythms disorders during surgery or intensive care, neither for total time in intensive care and mechanical ventilation. However, there was statistical differences as regards the cardiopulmonary bypass total time (P=0.02) and the aortic clamping time (P<0.0001) unfavorable to homograft valve group. The ward admission time was greater for mechanical valve group (P=0.05) as well as for total admission time, but without statistical significance. It was observed that patients with preoperative hematocrit smaller than 38.1% used 2.73 units of blood components, and with postoperative hematocrit smaller than 32% used 1,79 units of blood components. Echocardiography control showed minimal evolutional differences. CONCLUSION: The use of different types of prosthesis for this study does not cause differences in the results of postoperative hospital phase. The use of homograft valve is a feasible option with good clinical applicability.

Keywords

• Doenças das valvas cardíacas
• Valva aórtica
• Transplante homólogo
• Procedimentos cirúrgicos cardíacos
• Heart valve diseases
• Aortic valve
• Transplantation, homologous
• Cardiac surgical procedures