Surgery pp 1621-1668 | Cite as

Adult Heart Disease

  • Todd K. Rosengart
  • William de Bois
  • Edgar Chedrawy
  • Malica Vukovic


The surgical treatment of acquired cardiac diseases has become increasingly sophisticated in the past two decades—the expected mortality of most cardiac operations in adults has been reduced to extremely low levels—despite the fact that increasingly higher-risk patients are now candidates for surgery.1, 2, 3 In this regard, it is important to recognize that 75% of patients undergoing coronary bypass surgery in the Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS) in the late 1970s had an ejection fraction that was greater than 50%, and all patients were younger than 65 years of age, while in the Society of Thoracic Surgery (STS) database for coronary artery bypass in 2002, the average patient age was 67 years, and the average ejection fraction was 45%. Despite the reality of increasingly higher-risk patients undergoing coronary bypass surgery, the observed operative mortality for coronary bypass surgery in the 2002 STS database was 2.8%. Similarly, morbidity associated with coronary bypass surgery was found to have decreased from 1986 to 1994 in a series of nearly 8000 patients reported from the Cleveland Clinic, despite a significant rise in the patient risk profile in this series.3 Similar trends can be described for most facets of adult cardiac surgery.


Mitral Valve Left Anterior Descend Aortic Stenosis Left Atrial Right Coronary Artery 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute Coronary Artery Surgery Study. Principal investigators of CASS and their associates. Circulation 1981;63:11–181.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Edwards FH, Grover FL, Shroyer LW, Schwartz M, Bero J. The society of thoracic surgeons national cardiac surgery database: current risk assessment. Ann Thorac Surg 1997;63:903–908.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Estafanous FG, Loop FD, Higgins TL, et al. Increased risk and decreased morbidity of coronary bypass grafting between 1986 and 1994. Ann Thorac Surg 1998;65:383–389.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gold JP, Charlson ME, Williams-Russo P, et al. Improvement of outcomes after coronary artery bypass: a randomized trial comparing intraoperative high versus low mean arterial pressure. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1995;110:1302–1304.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bigelow WG, Callahan JC, Hopps JA. General hypothermia for experimental intracardiac surgery. Ann Thorac Surg 1950;33:52–59.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Woodcock TE, Murkin JM, Farrar JK, et al. Pharmacologic EEG suppression during cardiopulmonary bypass: cerebral haemodynamic and metabolic effects of thiopental or isofurane during hypothermia and normothermia. Anesthesiology 1987;67:218–224.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Yamashita C, Nakamura H, Nishikawa Y, Yamamoto S, Okada M, Nakamura K. Retrograde cerebral perfusion with circulatory arrest in aortic arch aneurysm. Ann Thorac Surg 1992;54:566–568.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Franke UF, et al. Intermittent antegrade warm myocardial protection compared to intermittent cold blood cardioplegia in elective coronary surgery—do we have to change? Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2003;23:341–346.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Martin TC, Craver JM, Gott JP, et al. Prospective randomized trial of retrograde warm blood cardioplegia: myocardial benefit and neurologic threat. Ann Thorac Surg 1994;57:298–304.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Stephan H, Weyland A, Kazmaier A, et al. Acid-base management during hypothermic cardiopulmonary bypass does not affect cerebral metabolism but does affect blood flow and neurological outcome. Br J Anaesth 1992;69:51–57.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jonas RA, Bellinger DC, Rappaport LA, et al. Relation of pH strategy and developmental outcome after hypothermic circulatory arrest. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1993;106:362–368.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fang WC, Helm RE, Krieger KH, et al. Impact of minimum hematocrit during cardiopulmonary bypass on mortality in patients undergoing coronary artery surgery. Circulation 1997;96:194–199.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rosengart TK, Krieger K, Lang S, et al. Reoperative coronary artery bypass surgery: improved preservation of myocardial function with retrograde cardioplegia. Circulation 1993;88:330–335.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    De Paulis R, et al. Troponin I release after CABG surgery using two different strategies of myocardial protection and systemic perfusion. J Cardiovasc Surg 2002;43:153–161.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Salerno TA, Christakis GT, Abel J, et al. Technique and pitfalls of retrograde continuous warm blood cardioplegia. Ann Thorac Surg 1991;51:1023–1025.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mangano CM, et al. The multicenter Study of Perioperative Ishemia Research Group: renal disfunction after myocardial revascularization. Ann Intern Med 1998;128:194.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Raimondo A, et al. On-pump versus off-pump coronary revascularization: evaluation or renal function. Ann Thorac Surg 1999;68:493–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Newman MF, et al. Longitudinal assessment of neurocognitive function after CABG. N Engl J Med 2001;344:395–402.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    McKhann GM, Goldsborough MA, Borowicz LM, et al. Cognitive outcome after coronary artery bypass: a 1 year prospective study. Ann Thorac Surg 1997;63:510–515.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ola A, et al. Cognitive changes with CAD: a prospective study of CABG and nonsurgical controls. Ann Thorac Surg 2003;75:1377–1382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 20a.
    Rosengart T, Sweet J, Finnin E, Wolfe P, Cashy J, Hahn E, Marymont J, Sanborn T. Stable cognition after coronary bypass: comparisons to percutaneous interventions and normal controls. Ann Thorac Surg. 2006;82:597–607PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 21.
    Diederik VD, et al. Cognitive outcome after off-pump CABG: a randomized trial. JAMA 2002;287:1405–1411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 22.
    Lawhorne TW, Davis WL, Smith GW. General surgical complications after cardiac surgery. Am J Surg 1978;136:254–260.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 23.
    Mueller RL, Rosengart TK, Isom OW. The history of surgery for ischemic heart disease. Ann Thorac Surg 1997;63:869–878.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 24.
    Budoff MJ, Georgiou D, Brody A, et al. Ultrafast computed tomography as a diagnostic modality in the detection of coronary artery disease: a multicenter study. Circulation 1996;93:898–904.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 25.
    European Cooperative Study for Streptokinase Treatment in Acute Myocardial Infarction. Streptokinase in acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1979;301:797–802.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 26.
    The ISAM Study Group. A prospective trial of Intravenous Streptokinase in Acute Myocardial Infarction (ISAM): mortality, morbidity, and infarct size at 21 days. N Engl J Med 1986;314:1465–1471.Google Scholar
  28. 27.
    Dalen JE, Gore JM, Braunwald E, et al. Six and 12 month follow-up of the phase I Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) trial: the TIMI investigators. Am J Cardiol 1988;62:179–185.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 28.
    The European Myocardial Infarction Project. Prehospital thrombolytic therapy in patients with suspected acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1993;329:383–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 29.
    Landau C, Lange RA, Hillis RD. Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. N Engl J Med 1994;330:981–993.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 30.
    Laham RJ, Ho KKL, Bairn DS, Kuntz RE, Cohen DJ, Carozza JP. Multivessel Palmaz-Schatz stenting: early results and 1 year outcome. J Am Coll Cardiol 1997;30:180–185.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 31.
    Fishman DL, Leon MB, Bairn DS, et al. A randomized comparison of coronary-stent placement and balloon angioplasty in the treatment of coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 1994;331:496–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 32.
    Grines CL, Browne KE, Marco J, et al. for the Primary Angioplasty in Myocardial Infarction Study Group. A comparison of immediate angioplasty with thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1993;328:673–679.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 33.
    Zijlstra F, deBoer MJ, Hoorntje JC, Reiffers S, Reiber JH, Surypantra H. A comparison of immediate angioplasty with intravenous streptokinase in acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1993;328:680–684.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 34.
    Abizaid at al. CABG vs. PTCA with stent implantation in patients with MVD(the Stent or Surgery Trial): a randomized controlled trial; Lancet 2002;360:956–962.Google Scholar
  36. 35.
    Serruys at al. for the ARTS group. Comparison of CABG and stenting for the MV disease. N Engl J Med 2001;344:1117–1122.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 36.
    Legrand at al. Three year outcome after stenting versus bypass surgery for treatment of CAD. Circulation 2004;109:1114–1121.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 37.
    The Veterans Administration Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery Cooperative Study Group. Eleven year survival in the Veterans Administration randomized trial of coronary bypass surgery for stable angina. N Engl J Med 1984;311:333–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 38.
    European Coronary Surgery Study Group. Long-term results of prospective randomised study of coronary artery bypass surgery in stable angina pectoris. Lancet 1982;2:1173–1180.Google Scholar
  40. 39.
    Deter K, Peduzzi P, Murphy M, et al. Effect of bypass surgery on survival in patients in low-and high-risk subgroups delineated by the use of simple clinical variables. Circulation 1981;63:1329–1338.Google Scholar
  41. 40.
    Gibbons RJ, et al. ACC/AHA 2002 guideline update for the management of patients with chronic stable angina-summary article. Circulation 2003;107:149–156.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 41.
    The Writing Group for the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) Investigators. Five year clinical and functional outcome comparing bypass surgery and angioplasty in patients with multivessel coronary disease. JAMA 1997;277:715–721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 42.
    Serruys at al. for the ARTS group. Comparison of CABG and stenting for the MV disease. N Engl J Med 2001;344:1117–1122.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 43.
    Hlatky MA, Rogers WJ, Johnstone I, et al. Medical care costs and quality of life after randomization to coronary angioplasty or coronary bypass surgery. N Engl J Med 1997;336:92–99.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 44.
    Sim I, Gupta M, McDonald K, Bourassa MG, Hlatky MA. A meta-analysis of randomized trials comparing coronary artery bypass grafting with percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty in multivessel coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol 1995;76:1025–1029.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 45.
    King SB, et al. Eight year mortality in the Emory Angioplasty versus Surgery trial (EAST). J Am Coll Cardiol 2000;35:1116–1122.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 46.
    Jones RH, Kesler K, Phillips HR, et al. Long-term survival benefits of coronary artery bypass grafting and percutaneous transluminal angioplasty in patients with coronary artery disease. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1996;111:1013–1025.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 47.
    Favaloro RG. Critical analysis of coronary artery bypass graft surgery: a 30-year journey. J Am Coll Cardiol 1998;31(suppl B):1B–6B.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 48.
    Ryan TJ. Revascularization: reflections of a clinician. J Am Coll Cardiol 1998;31:89B–96B.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 49.
    Mack MJ, et al. Current status and outcomes of coronary revascularization 1999–2002: 148,396 surgical and percutaneous procedures. Ann Thorac Surg 2004;77:761–767.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 50.
    DeWood MA, Notske RN, Berg R, et al. Medical and surgical management of early Q-wave myocardial infarction: effects of surgical reperfusion on survival, recurrent myocardial infarction, sudden death and functional class at 10 or more years of follow-up. J Am Coll Cardiol 1989;14:65–77.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 51.
    Spencer FC. Emergency coronary bypass for acute infarction: an unproved clinical experiment [editorial]. Circulation 1983;68(suppl II):II17–II19.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 52.
    Cannon CP, McCabe CH, Stone PH, et al. The electrocardiogram predicts 1 year outcome of patients with unstable angina and non-Q wave myocardial infarction: results of the TIMI III registry ECG ancillary study. J Am Coll Cardiol 1997;30:133–140.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 53.
    Gibson RS. Management of acute non-Q-wave myocardial infarction: role of prophylactic pharmacotherapy and indications for predischarge coronary arteriography. Clin Cardiol 1989;12:III26–III32.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 54.
    Bosch X, Theroux P, Waters DD, Pelletier GB, Roy D. Early postinfarction ischemia: clinical, angiographic, and prognostic significance. Circulation 1987;75:988–995.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 55.
    van Dijk RA, Nierich AP, Jansen EW, et al. Early outcome after off-pump versus on-pump coronary bypass surgery. Circulation 2001;104:1761–1766.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 56.
    Khan NE, et al. A randomized comparison of off-pump and on-pump multivessel coronary-artery bypass surgery. N Engl J Med 2004;350:21–28.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 57.
    Straka Z, et al. Off-pump versus on-pump coronary surgery: final results from a prospective randomized study PRAGUE-4. Ann Thorac Surg 2004;73:789–796.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 58.
    Reichenspurner H, Gulielmos V, Wunderlich J, et al. Port-access coronary artery bypass grafting with the use of cardiopulmonary bypass and cardioplegic arrest. Ann Thorac Surg 1998;65:413–419.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 59.
    Machiraju VR. Redo Cardiac Surgery in Adults. CME Network, Southampton, NY; 1997.Google Scholar
  61. 60.
    Engelman RM, Rousou JA, Flack JE III, et al. Fast-track recovery of the coronary bypass patient. Ann Thorac Surg 1994;58:1742–1746.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 61.
    Eagle KA, et al. ACC/AHA 2004 guidelines update for coronary artery bypass graft surgery: summary article. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;44:1146–1154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 61a.
    Eagle KA, Guyton RA, et. al. ACC/AHA guidelines for coronary artery bypass graft surgery: executive summary and recommendations. Circulation. 1999;100:1464–1480.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. 62.
    Karkouti K, et al. A multivariable model for predicting the need for blood transfusion in patients undergoing first time elective CABG Transfusion 2001;41:1193–1199.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 63.
    Hattler BG, et al. Risk stratification using the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Program. Ann Thorac Surg 1994;58:1348–1355.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 64.
    Edwards FH, Clark RE, Schwartz M. Coronary artery bypass grafting: the Society of Thoracic Surgery national database experience. Ann Thorac Surg 1994;57:12–19.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 65.
    Disch DL, O’Connor GT, Birkmeyer JD, et al. Changes in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting: 1987–1990. Ann Thorac Surg 1994;57:416–423.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 66.
    New York State Department of Health. Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery in New York State. Albany: New York State Department of Health; 1997.Google Scholar
  69. 67.
    Ivanov J, et al. Fifteen year trends in risk severity and operative mortality in elderly patients undergoing CABG. Circulation 1998;97:673–679.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. 68.
    Yau TM, et al. Predictors of operative risk for CABG in patients with left ventricular dysfunction. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1999;118:1006–1011.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 69.
    Elefertiades JA, Tolis G, Levi E, Mills LK, Zaret BL. Coronary artery bypass grafting with severe left ventricular dysfunction: excellent survival with improved ejection fraction and functional state. J Am Coll Cardiol 1993;22:1411–1417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 70.
    Shapira I, Isakov A, Yakirevich W, Topilsky M. Long-term results of coronary bypass surgery in patients with severely depressed left ventricular dysfunction. Chest 1995;108:1546–1550.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 71.
    Morrison DA, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus repeat CABG for patients with medically refractory myocardial ischemia. AWESOME randomized trial and registry experience with post-CABG patients. J Am Coll Cardiol 2002;40:1951–1956.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 72.
    Leavitt BJ, et al. Use of the internal mammary artery graft and in hospital mortality and other adverse outcomes associated with CABG. Circulation 2001;103:507–512.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. 73.
    Loop FD, et al. Influence of the internal mammary artery graft on 10 year survival and other cardiac events. N Engl J Med 1986;314:1–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. 74.
    Cameron A, et al. CABG surgery with internal-thoracic artery grafts. Effects on survival over a 15 year period. N Engl J Med 1996;334:216–222.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 75.
    Lytle BW, et al. Two internal thoracic arteries are better than one. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1999;117:855–861.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 76.
    Ioannidis JP, et al. Early mortality and morbidity of bilateral versus single internal thoracic artery revascularization: propensity and risk modeling. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001;37:521–527.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 77.
    Puskas JD, et al. Off-pump CABG provides complete revascularisation with reduced myocardial injury, transfusion requirements and length of stay. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2003;125:797–802.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 78.
    Carrier M, et al. Randomized trial comparing off-pump coronary bypass grafting in high risk patients. Heart Surgery Forum 2003;6:E89–E92.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. 79.
    Stamou SC, et al. Operative mortality after conventional versus coronary revascularisation without cardiopulmonary bypass. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2004;26:549–555.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 80.
    Bourassa MG, Enjalbert M, Campeau L, Lesperance J. Progression of atherosclerosis in coronary arteries and bypass grafts: 10 years later. Am J Cardiol 1984;53:102C–107C.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 81.
    Grondin CM, Campeau L, Lesperance J, et al. Comparison of late changes in internal mammary artery and saphenous vein grafts in two consecutive series of patients 10 years after operation. Circulation 1984;70(suppl 1):208–212.Google Scholar
  84. 82.
    Berger PB, et al. for the International Multicenter Aprotinin Graft Patency Experience (IMAGE) Investigators. Frequency of early occlusion and stenosis in a left internal mammary artery to left descending artery bypass graft: benchmark for minimally invasive direct CABG. Circulation 1999;100:2353–2357.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. 83.
    Ura M, et al. Analysis by early angiography of right internal thoracic artery graft via the transverse sinus: predictors of graft failure. Circulation 2000;101:640–646.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. 84.
    Loop FD, Lytle BW, Cosgrove DM, et al. Influence of the internal mammary artery graft on 10 year survival and other cardiac events. N Engl J Med 1986;314:1–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. 85.
    Carrel T, Horber P, Turina MI. Operation for two-vessel coronary artery disease: midterm results of bilateral ITA grafting versus unilateral ITA and saphenous vein grafting. Ann Thorac Surg 1996;62:1289–1294.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 86.
    Huddleston CB, Stoney WS, Alford WC, et al. Internal mammary artery crafts: technical factors influencing patency. Ann Thorac Surg 1986;42:5–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 87.
    Taggart DP, et al. Effects of arterial revascularisation on survival systematic review of studies comparing bilateral and single internal mammary arteries. Lancet 2001;358:870–877.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 88.
    Acar C, Jebara VA, Portoghese M, et al. Revival of the radial artery for coronary artery bypass grafting. Ann Thorac Surg 1992;54:652–659.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 89.
    Muneretto C, et al. Safety and usefulness of composite grafts for total arterial myocardial revascularization: a prospective randomized evaluation. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2003;125:82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 90.
    Schachner T, et al. Local application of rapamycin inhibits neointimal hyperplasia in experimental vein grafts. Ann Thorac Surg 2004;77:1580–1588.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 91.
    Mann MJ, et al. Ex-vivo gene therapy of human vascular bypass grafts with E2F decoy: the PREVENT single center randomized, controlled trial. Lancet 1999;354:1493–1499.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 92.
    Yusuf S, Zucker D, Peduzzi P, et al. Effect of coronary artery bypass graft surgery on survival: overview of 10-year results from randomised trials by the Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery Trialists Collaboration. Lancet 1994;344:563–570.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 93.
    Emond M, Mock MB, Davis KB, et al. Long-term survival of medically treated patients in the Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS) registry. Circulation 1994;90:2645–2657.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  96. 94.
    Mack CA, Patel SR, Rosengart TK. Myocardial angiogenesis as a possible mechanism for TMLR efficacy. J Clin Laser Med Surg 1997;15:275–279.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  97. 95.
    Schofield PM, et al. Transmyocardial laser revascularisation in patients with refractory angina: a randomized controlled trial. Lancet 1999;252:515–521.Google Scholar
  98. 96.
    Allen KB. Comparison of transmyocardial revascularization with medical therapy in patients with refractory angina. N Engl J Med 1999;341:1029–1035.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. 97.
    Frazier OH, et al. Transmyocardial Carbon Dioxide Laser Revascularization Study Group. N Engl J Med 1999;341:1021–1027.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 98.
    Simons M, Banno RO, Chronos N, et al. Clinical trials in coronary angiogenesis: issues, problems, consensus. Circulation 2000;102:E73–E86.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  101. 99.
    Rosengart TK. The era of cardiac biointerventions. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2003;15:217–221.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. 100.
    Imran IS, Sanborn TA, Rosengart TK. Therapeutic angiogenesis: a biologic bypass. Cardiology 2004;101:131–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. 101.
    David TE. Surgery for postinfarction rupture of the free wall of the ventricle. In: David TE. Mechanical Complications of Myocardial Infarction, Landes, Austin; 1993.Google Scholar
  104. 102.
    Cooley DA. Ventricular endoaneurysmorrhaphy: a simplified repair for extensive post infarction aneurysm. J Cardiac Surg 1989;4:200–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. 103.
    Jatene AD. Left ventricular aneurysmectomy: resection or reconstruction. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1985;89:321–331.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  106. 104.
    Dor V. Left ventricular aneurysms: the endoventricular circular path plasty. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1997;9:123–130.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  107. 105.
    Menicanti L, et al. The Dor procedure: what has changed after 15 years of clinical practice? J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2002;124:886–892.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. 106.
    Madsen JC, Daggett WM. Postinfarction ventricular septal defect repair. In: Cox JL, Sundt, TM IE, eds. Operative Techniques in Cardiac and Thoracic Surgery, 1997;2:161–169.Google Scholar
  109. 107.
    Cooley DA. Postinfarction ventricular septal rupture. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1998;10:100–104.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  110. 108.
    David TE. Repair of postinfarction ventricular septal defect. In: Cox JL, Sundt TM III, eds. Operative Techniques in Cardiac and Thoracic Surgery, 1997;2:170–178.Google Scholar
  111. 109.
    David TE. Techniques and results of mitral valve repair for ischemic mitral regurgitation. J Card Surg 1994;9:274–277.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. 110.
    Allman KC, Shaw LJ, Hachamovitch R, et al. Myocardial viability testing and impact of revascularization on prognosis in patients with CAD and LV dysfunction: a meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2002;39:1151–1157.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. 111.
    Schinkel, et al. Why do patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and a substantial amount of viable myocardium not always recover in function after revascularisation? J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2004;127:385–392.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. 112.
    Dor V, Saab M, Coste P, et al. Endoventricular patch plasties with septal exclusion for repair of ischemic left ventricle: technique, results and indications from series of 781 cases. Jpn J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1998;46:389–395.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  115. 113.
    Chizner MA, Pearle DL, deLeon AC Jr. The natural history of aortic stenosis in adults. Am Heart J 1980;99:419–425.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. 114.
    Bonow RO, et al. ACC/AHA 2006 guidelines for management of patients with valvular heart disease. Circulation 2006;114:e84–e231.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. 115.
    Oleson KH. The natural history of 271 patients with mitral stenosis under medical treatment. Br Heart J 1962;24:349–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. 116.
    Fischl SJ, Gorlin R, Herman MW. Cardiac shape and function in aortic valvular disease: physiologic and clinical implications. Am J Cardiol 1977;39:170–177.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. 117.
    Bonow RO, Rosing DR, Kent KM, et al. Timing of operation for chronic aortic regurgitation. Am J Cardiol 1982;50:325–336.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. 118.
    Duran CMG, Pomar JI, Colman T, Figueroa A, Revuelta JM, Ubago JI. Is tricuspid valve repair necessary? J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1980;80:849–855.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  121. 119.
    Turi ZG, Reyes VP, Raju BS, et al. Percutaneous balloon valvuloplasty versus closed commissurotomy for mitral stenosis: a prospective, randomized trial. Circulation 1991;83:1179–1185.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  122. 120.
    Smerida NG, Ports TA, Merrick SH, Rankin DS. Balloon aortic valvuloplast as a bridge to aortic valve replacement in critically ill patients. Ann Thorac Surg 1993;55:914–918.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. 121.
    Hejjer JJ, Wann LS, Weyman AE, Dillon JC, Feigenbaum H. Long term changes in mitral valve area after successful mitral commissurotomy. Circulation 1979;59:443–448.Google Scholar
  124. 122.
    Autschbach R, et al. Prospectively randomized comparison of different mechanical aortic valves. Circulation 2000;102(19 suppl 3):III1–III4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  125. 123.
    Magilligan DJ Jr, Lewis JW Jr, Stein P, Alam M. The porcine bioprosthetic valve: experience at 15 years. Ann Thorac Surg 1989;48:324–329.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. 124.
    Auport MR, Sirinelli AL, Diermont FF, et al. The last generation of pericardial valves in the aortic position: ten year follow-up in 589 patients. Ann Thorac Surg 1996;61:615–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. 125.
    Sensky PR, et al. Does the type of prosthesis influence early left ventricular mass reflection after aortic valve replacement? Assessment with magnetic resonance imaging. Am Heart J 2003;146:E13–E19.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. 126.
    Carpentier A. Cardiac valve surgery: the “French correction.” J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1983;86:323–337.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  129. 127.
    Deloche A, Jebara VA, Relland JYM, et al. Valve repair with Carpentier techniques: the second decade. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1990;99:990–1002.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  130. 128.
    Carpentier AF, Lessana A, Relland JYM, et al. The “Physio-Ring”: an advanced concept in mitral valve annuloplasty. Ann Thorac Surg 1993;55:860–863.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  131. 129.
    Cosgrove DM, Arcidi JM, Rodriguez L, Stewart WJ, Powell K, Thomas JD. Initial experience with the Cosgrove-Edwards annuloplasty system. Ann Thorac Surg 1995;60:499–504.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. 130.
    David TE, Omran A, Armstrong, et al. Long-term results of mitral valve repair for myxomatous disease with and without chordal replacement with expanded polytetrafluorothylene. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1998;115:1279–1286.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. 131.
    Lillehei CW, Levy MJ, Bonnabeau RC. Mitral valve replacement with preservation of papillary muscles and chordae tendinae. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1964;47:532–543.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  134. 132.
    Yun KL, et al. Randomized trail comparing partial versus complete chordal sparing mitral valve replacement: effects on left ventricular volume and function. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2002;123:707–711.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. 133.
    Elkins RC. Pulmonary autograft: the optimal substitute for the aortic valve. N Engl J Med 1994;330:59–60.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. 134.
    Puvimanasinghe JP, et al. Prognosis after aortic valve replacement with a bioprosthesis: prediction based on meta analysis and microsimulation. Circulation 2001;103:1535–1540.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  137. 135.
    Remadi JP, et al. Isolated mitral valve replacement with St. Jude medical prosthesis: long term results: a follow up of 19 years. Circulation 2001;103:1542–1548.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  138. 136.
    Edmunds LH Jr. Thromboembolic complications of current cardiac valve prostheses. Ann Thorac Surg 1981;34:96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. 137.
    David TE, Bos J, Christakis GT, Brofman PR, Wong D, Feindel CM. Heart valve operations in patients with active endocarditis. Ann Thorac Surg 1990;49:701.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. 138.
    Christakis GT, Weisel RD, David TE, et al. Factors of operative survival after valve replacement. Circulation 1988;78(suppl I):I25–I30.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  141. 139.
    Klodas E, Enriquez-Sarano M, Tajik AJ, et al. Optimizing timing of surgical correction in patients with severe aortic regurgitation: role of symptoms. J Am Coll Cardiol 1997;30:746–752.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  142. 140.
    Blackstone EH, Kirklin JW. Death and other time-related events after valve replacement. Circulation 1985;72:753–758.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  143. 141.
    Duarte IG, Murphy CO, Kosinski AS, et al. Late survival after valve operation in patients with left ventricular dysfunction. Ann Thorac Surg 1997;64:1089–1095.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  144. 142.
    Grossi EA, Galloway AC, Miller JS, et al. Valve repair versus replacement for mitral insufficiency: when is a mechanical valve still indicated? J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1998;115:389–396.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  145. 143.
    Auport MR, Sirinelli AL, Diermont FF, et al. The last generation of pericardial valves in the aortic position: 10 year follow-up in 589 patients. Ann Thorac Surg 1996;61:615–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  146. 144.
    Gillinov MA, Cosgrove DM, Lytle BW, et al. Reoperation for failure of mitral valve repair. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1997;113:467–475.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  147. 145.
    Duran CG. Repair of anterior mitral leaflet chordal rupture or elongation (the flipover technique). J Cardiac Surg 1986;1:161–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  148. 146.
    Galloway AC, Colvin SB, Baumann FG, et al. A comparison of mitral valve reconstruction with mitral valve replacement: intermediate term results. Ann Thorac Surg 1989;47:655–661.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  149. 147.
    Spencer FC, Galloway AC, Gross EA, et al. Recent developments and evolving techniques of mitral valve reconstruction. Ann Thorac Surg 1998;65:307–313.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  150. 148.
    Bojar RM. Adult Cardiovascular Surgery. Cambridge, UK: Black-well Science; 1992.Google Scholar
  151. 149.
    Cohn LH. Coronary artery disease and the indications for coronary revascularization. In: Baue AE, Geha AS, Hammond, et al, eds. Glenn’s Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 5th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1991.Google Scholar
  152. 150.
    Callaghan JC, Wartak J. Open Heart Surgery: Theory and Practice. New York: Praeger; 1986.Google Scholar
  153. 151.
    Buckberg GD, Brazier JR, Nelson RL, Goldstein SM, McConnell DH, Cooper N. Studies of the effects of hypothermia on regional myocardial blood flow and metabolism during cardiopulmonary bypass. I. The adequately perfused beating, fibrillating, and arrested heart. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1977;73:87–94.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  154. 152.
    Reed CC, Stafford TB. Cardiopulmonary Bypass, 2nd ed. Houston: Texas Medical Press; 1985.Google Scholar
  155. 153.
    Partington MT, et al. Studies of retrograde cardioplegia. I. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1989;97:613.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  156. 154.
    Baue AE, Geha AS, et al., eds. Glenn’s Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 5th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1991.Google Scholar
  157. 155.
    Greenfield LO, et al. Surgery, 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven; 1977.Google Scholar
  158. 156.
    Glomset JA, Ross R. Atherosclerosis and the arterial smooth muscle cells. Science 1973;180:1332.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  159. 157.
    Cohn LH, et al. Decision Making in Cardiothoracic Surgery. Toronto: Decker; 1987.Google Scholar
  160. 158.
    Helm RE, Rosengart TK, Gomez M, et al. Comprehensive mul-timodality blood conservation: 100 consecutive CABG operations without transfusion. Ann Thorac Surg 1998;65:125–136.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  161. 159.
    Lopez-Sendon J, Gonzalez A, Lopez de Sa E, et al. Diagnosis of subacute ventricular wall rupture after acute myocardial infarction: sensitivity and specificity of clinical, hemodynamic and echocardiographic criteria. J Am Coll Cardiol 1992;19:1145–1153.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  162. 160.
    Schwarz CD, Punzengruber C, Ng CK, et al. Clinical presentation of rupture of the left ventricular free wall after myocardial infarction: report of five cases with successful surgical repair. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1996;44:71–75.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  163. 160a.
    Purcaro A, Costantini C, Ciampani N, et al. Diagnostic criteria and management of subacute ventricular free wall rupture complicating myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol 1997;80:397–405.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  164. 161.
    Komeda M and David TE. Surgical treatment of postinfarction false aneurysm of the left ventricle. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1993;106:1189–1191.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  165. 162.
    Csapo K, Voith L, Szuk T, et al. Postinfarction left ventricular pseudoaneurysm. Clin Cardiol 1997;20:898–903.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  166. 163.
    Frances C, Romero A and Grady D. Left ventricular pseudoaneurysm. J Am Coll Cardiol 1998;32:557–561.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  167. 164.
    Yeo TC, Malouf JF, Oh JK, et al. Clinical profile and outcome in 52 patients with cardiac pseudoaneurysm. Ann Intern Med 1998;128:299–305.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  168. 165.
    Cosgrove DM, Lytle BW, Taylor PC, et al. Ventricular aneurysm resection. Trends in surgical risk. Circulation 1989;79(suppl I):I97–I101.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  169. 166.
    Komeda M, David TE, Malik A, et al. Operative risks and long-term results of operation for left ventricular aneurysm. Ann Thorac Surg 1992;53:22–29.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  170. 167.
    Mickleborough LL, Maruyama H, Liu P, et al. Results of left ventricular aneurysmectomy with a tailored scar excision and primary closure technique. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1994;107:690–698.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  171. 168.
    Cooley DA. Management of left ventricular aneurysm by intracavitary repair. In: Cox JL, Seendt TM III, eds. Operative Techniques in Cardiac and Thoracic Surgery 1997;2:170–178.Google Scholar
  172. 169.
    Skillington PD, Lamb RK, Monro JL, et al. Surgical treatment for infarct related ventricular septal defects: improved early results combined with analysis of late functional status. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1990;99:798–808.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  173. 170.
    Muehrcke DD, Daggett WM Jr., Buckley MJ, et al. Postinfarct ventricular septal defect repair: effect of coronary artery bypass grafting. Ann Thorac Surg 1992;54:876–882.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  174. 171.
    David TE, Armstrong S. Surgical repair of postinfarction ventricular septal defect by infarct exclusion. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1998;10:105–110.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  175. 172.
    Dalrymple-Hay MJ, Monro, JL, Livesey SA, et al. Postinfarction ventricular septal rupture: the Wessex experience. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1998;10:111–116.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  176. 173.
    Panos A, Christakis GT, Liechtenstein SV, et al. Operation for acute postinfarction mitral insufficiency using continuous oxygenated blood cardioplegia. Ann Thorac Surg 1989;48:816–819.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  177. 174.
    Hendren WG, Nemec JJ, Lytle BW, et al. Mitral valve repair for ischemic mitral insufficiency. Ann Thorac Surg 1999;52:1246–1252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  178. 175.
    Horstkotte D, Schulte HD, Niehues R, et al. Diagnostic and therapeutic consideration in acute, severe mitral regurgitation: experience in 42 consecutive patients entering the intensive care unit with pulmonary edema. J Heart Valve Disease 1993;2:512–522.Google Scholar
  179. 176.
    David TE. Techniques and results of mitral valve repair for ischemic mitral regurgitation. J Card Surg 1994;9:274–277.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  180. 177.
    Hollingshead WH. The Heart, Abdomen, and Pelvis Anatomy for Surgeons. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1971.Google Scholar
  181. 178.
    Wilcox BR, Anderson RN. Surgical Anatomy of the Heart. New York: Raven Press; 1985.Google Scholar
  182. 179.
    Spotnitz JH, Sonnenblick FH, Spiro D. Relationship of ultra-structure to function in the intact heart: sarcomere structure relative to pressure volume curves of the intact left ventricles of dog and cat. Circ Res 1996;18:57.Google Scholar
  183. 180.
    Ross J Jr, Braunwald E. Aortic stenosis. Circulation 1968;38(suppl 5):61.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  184. 181.
    Starr A, Grunkemeier GL. The expected lifetime of porcine valves. Ann Thorac Surg 1989;48:317–318.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  185. 182.
    Jamieson WR. Bioprostheses are superior to mechanical prostheses. Z Kardiol 1986;75(suppl 2):258–271.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  186. 183.
    Jegaden O, Eker A, Delahaye F, Motagna P, Ossette J, Durand de Gevigney G, Mikaeloff PH. Thromboembolic risk and late survival after mitral valve replacement with the St. Jude Medical valve. Annals of Thoracic Surgery, Vol 58, 1721–1728.Google Scholar
  187. 184.
    Bernal JM, Rambasa JM, Gutierrez-Garcia F, Morales C, Nistal JF, Revuelta JM. The CarboMedics valve: experience with 1,049 implants. Ann Thorac Surg. 1998;65:137–143PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  188. 185.
    Jamieson WRE, Munro Al, Miyagishima RT, Allen P, Burr LH, Tyers GFO. Carpentier-Edwards standard porcine bioprosthesis: clinical performance to seventeen years. Ann Thorac Surg. 1995;60:999–006.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  189. 186.
    David TE, Ivanov J, Armstrong S, Feindel CM, Cohen G. Late results of heart valve replacement with the Hancock II biopros-thesis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2001;121:0268–0278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  190. 187.
    Deloche A, Jebara VA, Relland JYM, et al. Valve repair with Carpentier techniques: the second decade. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1990;99:990–1002.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  191. 188.
    David TE, Armstrong S, Sun Z, Daniel L. Late results of mitral valve repair for mitral regurgitation due to degenerative disease. Ann Thorac Surg 1993;56:7–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  192. 189.
    Hammermeister K, Sethi GK, Henderso WG, Grover FL, Oprian C, Rahimtoola SH. Outcomes 15 years after valvbe replacement with a mechanical versus a bioprosthetic valve: report of the Veterans Affairs randomized trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000;36:1152–1158.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Todd K. Rosengart
    • 1
  • William de Bois
    • 2
  • Edgar Chedrawy
    • 3
  • Malica Vukovic
    • 4
  1. 1.Stony Brook UniversityStony BrookUSA
  2. 2.Department of Surgery, Heart Center at Stony BrookStony Brook UniversityStony BrookUSA
  3. 3.Department of SurgeryUniversity of Illinois at ChicagoChicagoUSA
  4. 4.Department of MedicineEvanston HospitalEvanstonUSA

Personalised recommendations