Search

Background: It remains unclear today whether risk scores created specifically to predict early mortality after cardiac operations for infective endocarditis (IE) outperform or not the European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II (EuroSCORE II)., Methods: Perioperative data and outcomes from a European multicenter series of patients undergoing surgery for definite IE were retrospectively reviewed. Only the cases with known pathogen and without missing values for all considered variables were retained for analyses. A comparative validation of EuroSCORE II and 5 specific risk scores for early mortality after surgery for IE-(1) STS-IE (Society of Thoracic Surgeons for IE); (2) PALSUSE (Prosthetic valve, Age ≥70, Large intracardiac destruction, Staphylococcus spp, Urgent surgery, Sex (female), EuroSCORE ≥10); (3) ANCLA (Anemia, New York Heart Association class IV, Critical state, Large intracardiac destruction, surgery on thoracic Aorta); (4) AEPEI II (Association pour l'Étude et la Prévention de l'Endocardite Infectieuse II); (5) APORTEI (Análisis de los factores PROnósticos en el Tratamiento quirúrgico de la Endocarditis Infecciosa)-was carried out using calibration plot and receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis. Areas under the curve (AUCs) were compared 1:1 according to the Hanley-McNeil's method. The agreement between APORTEI score and EuroSCORE II of the 30-day mortality prediction after surgery was also appraised., Results: A total of 1,012 patients from 5 European university-affiliated centers underwent 1,036 cardiac operations, with a 30-day mortality after surgery of 9.7%. All IE-specific risk scores considered achieved better results than EuroSCORE II in terms of calibration; AEPEI II and APORTEI score showed the best performances. Despite poor calibration, EuroSCORE II overcame in discrimination every specific risk score (AUC, 0.751 vs 0.693 or less, P = .01 or less). For a higher/lesser than 20% expected mortality, the agreement of prediction between APORTEI score and EuroSCORE II was 86%., Conclusion: EuroSCORE II discrimination for 30-day mortality after surgery for IE was higher than 5 established IE-specific risk scores. AEPEI II and APORTEI score showed the best results in terms of calibration., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest Dr. Giuseppe Gatti, Prof. Gianfranco Sinagra and Prof. Roberto Luzzati are three out of the ANCLA score creators. Dr. Giuseppe Gatti and Prof. Andrea Perrotti are two out of the AEPEI score I and II creators., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Isolated tricuspid valve (TV) surgery is a rare procedure generally considered at high risk for perioperative mortality and poor long-term outcomes. Surgical treatment can be performed with either an arrested heart (AH) or beating heart (BH) technique. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of isolated tricuspid surgery with 2 different approaches., Methods: The Surgical-Tricuspid Study is a multicenter international retrospective study enrolling adult patients who underwent isolated TV procedures (n = 406; age 56 ± 16 years; 56% female) at 13 international sites. The AH and BH strategies were performed in 253 and 153 patients, respectively. Propensity score-matched analysis was used to compare groups., Results: After matching, 129 pairs were obtained and analyzed. The 30-day mortality rate was 6.2% versus 5.0% in the AH and BH groups, respectively (P = .9). The rates of acute renal failure requiring replacement therapy (10% versus 3%; P = .02) and stroke (1.6% versus 0%; P = .08) were numerically higher in the AH group. The 6-year survival rate was 67% ± 6% versus 78% ± 5% in the AH and BH groups, respectively (P = .18), whereas freedom from cardiac death was 75% ± 5% versus 84% ± 4% (P = .21). The 6-year composite cardiac end point of cardiac death and reoperation rate was 60% ± 9% versus 86% ± 5% (P = .024) comparing AH-TV replacement and BH-TV repair groups., Conclusions: Isolated TV surgery performed with a BH strategy is a safe option and resulted in a trend of increased long-term survival and freedom from reoperation compared with the standard AH technique. Patients undergoing BH valve repair had the best long-term outcome., (Copyright © 2022 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)