Objective To evaluate the cardiovascular risk for non-cardiac thoracic surgery （NCTS） in elderly patients with dobutamine stress echocardiography and to decrease surgical risk for NCTS in the geriatrics. Methods Dobutamine stress echocardiography was used for cardiovascular evaluation in 32 NCTS candidates aged over 65 years. Patients with positive echocardiography underwent coronary angiography. Postoperative course and all complications were carefully recorded for the study. Results No serious cardiovascular events occurred during the test except for atrial or ventricular premature contracts in 5 cases. In 2 patients （6.7%,2/30） dobutamine test was positive and coronary artery occlusion was proved by further angiography. Thoracotomy was performed in 28 cases, including 2 cases with dubious result at dobutamine test. Cardiopulmonary complications occurred in 13 patients （46.4%,13/28） after surgery. Supraventricular tachyarrhythmia was the most common complication, occurred in 8 patients （28.6%,8/28）. One of the 2 patients with dubious result at dobutamine test developed definitive angina in the 5th postoperative day. The negative predictive value of dobutamine test was 100%. Conclusion Dobutamine stress echocardiography is a safe and effective method to evaluate major cardiovascular risk of NCTS in the geriatrics. But it is not predictive of tachyarrhythmia after surgery.
ObjectiveTo explore the effectiveness of levosimendan versus dobutamine for the patients with severe valvular disease in perioperative period. Methods A randomized, single-blind, and controlled study was conducted in 59 patients with severe valvular disease in perioperative period. There were 48 males and 11 females at average age of 51±14 years (ranged from 18 to 70 years). The patients received Swan-Ganz catheterization with pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP)≥15 mm Hg, cardiac index (CI)≤2.5 L/(min·m2), and hemodynamic stability. They were divided into a levosimendan group (n=25) and a dobutamine group (n=34) to receive levosimendan or dobutamine injection intravenously for 24 hours on base of anti-heart failure treatment by random digital table. ResultsIn the levosimendan group, the level of PCWP was lower than the baseline level with a statistical difference(12.51±8.76 mm Hg vs. 20.11±8.04 mm Hg, P < 0.01) after 24 hours' treatment, and the level of CI was higher than the baseline level with a statistical difference (2.58±0.72 L/(min·m2) vs. 2.01±0.54 L/(min·m2), P < 0.05) after 24 hours' treatment. In the levosimendan group, the changes of pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP), pulmonary arterial mean pressure (PAMP), sequential vascular response (SVR), and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) were more obvious compared with those in the dobutamine group with statistical differences (all P < 0.05) after 24 hours' treatment. The offline time and ICU stay in the levosimendan group reduced compared with those of the dobutamine group with statistical differences (47.3±10.4 h vs. 52.5±7.6 h, P < 0.05; 5.3±2.2 d vs. 6.8±3.5 d, P < 0.05). There was no statistical difference in the incidence of adverse events between the two groups (P > 0.05). ConclusionCompared with dobutamine, levosimendan can improve hemodynamic stability of patients with severe valvular disease in perioperative period with good tolerability and safety.
An 82-year-old male was hospitalized complaining of dyspnea for 1 year and aggravating for 2 weeks. He had been treated in other hospitals for several times due to such situation and his symptom could be relieved by diuretics. After admission, he was diagnosed as severe aortic stenosis with extremely low left ventricular contractile function; transthoracic echocardiography showed a left ventricular ejection fraction of only 16.1%. He was classified as a typical case of severe aortic stenosis with “low transaortic velocity and low transaortic gradient” since the transaortic velocity being 2.36 m/s and transaortic gradient being 22/14 mm Hg (1 mm Hg=0.133 kPa). Dobutamine-stress echocardiography suggested that the patient’s left ventricular reserve function was extremely poor and the potential benefits of valvular surgery were finite as the former data being 2.59 m/s and 27/16 mm Hg respectively. In consideration of progressive exacerbation of the patient’s symptoms, we eventually conducted transcatheter aortic valve replacement surgery with the support of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. His symptoms such as dyspnea disappeared after the surgery and clinical parameters had also got a significant improvement.
Objective To compare the effect of palliative mitral valve surgeries and medication therapies for secondary non-ischemic mitral regurgitation. Methods The clinical data of patients with non-ischemic functional mitral regurgitation treated in our hospital between 2009 and 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF)＜40% underwent a dobutamine stress test, and a positive result was determined when the LVEF improved by more than 15% compared to the baseline value. Positive patients were divided into a surgery group and a medication group. The surgery group underwent surgical mitral valve repair or replacement, while the medication group received simple medication treatment. Follow-up on survival and cardiac function status through outpatient or telephone visits every six months after surgery, and patients underwent cardiac ultrasound examination one year after surgery. The main research endpoint was a composite endpoint of all-cause death, heart failure readmission, and heart transplantation, and the differences in cardiac function and cardiac ultrasound parameters between the two groups were compared. ResultsUltimately 41 patients were collected, including 28 males and 13 females with an average age of 55.5±11.1 years. Twenty-five patients were in the surgery group and sixteen patients in the medication group. The median follow-up time was 16 months, ranging 1-96 months. The occurrence of all-cause death in the surgery group was lower than that in the medication group (HR=0.124, 95%CI 0.024-0.641, P=0.034). The difference between the two groups was not statistically significant in the composite endpoint (HR=0.499, 95%CI 0.523-1.631, P=0.229). The New York Heart Association (NYHA) grade of the surgery group was better (NYHA Ⅰ-Ⅱ accounted for 68.0% in the surgury group and 18.8% in the medication group, P<0.01) as well as the grade of mitral valve regurgitation (87.5% of the patients in the medication group had moderate or above regurgitation at follow-up, while all the patients in the surgery group had moderate below regurgitation, P<0.01). There was no statistical difference in preoperative and follow-up changes in echocardiograph parameters between the two groups (P＞0.05). Conclusion For non-ischemic functional mitral regurgitation, if the cardiac systolic function is well reserved, mitral valve surgery can improve survival and quality of life compare to simple medication therapy.