PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Alexander Kulik

Publications and source records attributed to Alexander Kulik.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2007

The "hybrid flip-over" technique for anterior leaflet prolapse repair.

Repair of the anterior mitral leaflet or bi-leaflet prolapse is technically more demanding than repair of the posterior mitral leaflet. Although several techniques have been proposed for the repair of anterior mitral leaflet prolapse during bi-leaflet repair, practical challenges remain, including the determination of the appropriate length for artificial chords. Herein we describe a novel and reproducible technique for bi-leaflet mitral valve repair, including those with extensive anterior mitral leaflet prolapse.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Mechanical versus bioprosthetic valve replacement in middle-aged patients.

OBJECTIVE: The current trend towards decreasing the age for selection of a tissue over a mechanical prosthesis has led to a dilemma for patients aged 50-65 years. This cohort study examines the long-term outcomes of mechanical versus bioprosthetic valves in middle-aged patients. METHODS: Patients (N = 659) aged between 50 and 65 years who had first-time aortic valve replacement (AVR) and/or mitral valve replacement (MVR) with contemporary prostheses were followed prospectively after surgery. The total follow-up was 3,402 patient-years (mean 5.1 +/- 4.1 years; maximum 18.3 years). Outcomes were examined with multivariate actuarial methods. A composite outcome of major adverse prosthesis-related events (MAPE) was defined as the occurrence of reoperation, endocarditis, major bleeding, or thromboembolism. RESULTS: Ten-year survival was 73.2 +/- 4.2% after mechanical AVR, 75.1 +/- 12.6% after bioprosthetic AVR, 74.1 +/- 4.6% after mechanical MVR, and 77.9 +/- 7.4% after bioprosthetic MVR (P=NS). Ten-year reoperation rates were 35.4% and 21.3% with aortic and mitral bioprostheses, respectively. Major bleeding occurred more often following mechanical MVR (hazard ratio [HR]: 3.3; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2, 9.0; P = 0.022), and the incidence of any thromboembolic event was more common after mechanical MVR (HR: 4.7; CI 1.4, 13.3; P = 0.01). Overall freedom from MAPE at 10 years was 70.2 +/- 4.1% for mechanical AVR patients, 41.0+/-30.3% for bioprosthetic AVR patients, 53.3 +/- 8.8% for mechanical MVR patients, and 61.2 +/- 9.2% for bioprosthetic MVR patients. Although a trend existed towards more MAPE amongst middle-age patients with tissue valves, multivariate analysis did not identify the presence of a bioprosthesis as an independent risk factor for MAPE (HR: 1.3; CI 0.9, 2.0; P = 0.22). CONCLUSIONS: In middle-aged patients, MAPE may occur more often in patients with bioprosthetic valves, but definitive conclusions necessitate the accumulation of additional follow-up. At present, these data do not support lowering the usual cutoff for implantation of a tissue valve below the age of 65.

Aged↗
PubMed2006

Natural history and predictors of outcome in patients with concomitant functional mitral regurgitation at the time of aortic valve replacement.

BACKGROUND: Concomitant functional mitral regurgitation (FMR) in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR) is frequently not corrected because it may improve after AVR; however, data supporting this assumption are sparse. We ascertained the impact of clinical and echocardiographic parameters on the outcome of patients with or without concomitant FMR at the time of AVR. METHODS AND RESULTS: Clinical and echocardiographic follow-up was performed on 848 patients who underwent AVR after 1990. Risk factors for mortality and a composite outcome of heart failure (CHF) symptoms, CHF death, or subsequent mitral repair or replacement, were examined with bootstrapped Cox proportional hazard models. Follow-up was 4591 patient-years (mean 5.4+/-3.4 years; maximum 14.2 years). FMR > or = 2+ had no independent adverse effect on survival in patients with aortic stenosis (AS) or insufficiency (AI). However, AS patients with FMR > or = 2+ and 1 additional risk factor (left atrial diameter >5 cm, preoperative peak aortic valve gradient <60 mm Hg, or atrial fibrillation) were at increased risk for the composite outcome (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.7; P=0.004). AI patients with FMR > or = 2+ and a left ventricular end-systolic diameter <45 mm were also at risk (HR: 4.0; P=0.02). Clinical risk factors in the AS and AI subgroups were associated with an increased likelihood of mitral regurgitation > or = 2+ at 18 months postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: AS patients with FMR > or = 2+ and a left atrial diameter >5 cm, preoperative peak aortic valve gradient <60 mm Hg, or atrial fibrillation have a significantly higher risk of CHF and persistent mitral regurgitation after AVR than other AS patients. AI patients with FMR > or = 2+ and a left ventricular end-systolic diameter <45 mm preoperatively are also at increased risk. Others fare well after AVR.

Aged↗
PubMed2006

Long-term outcomes after valve replacement for low-gradient aortic stenosis: impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch.

BACKGROUND: The long-term outcomes of patients with low-gradient aortic stenosis (LGAS) after aortic valve replacement (AVR) are poorly defined. The purpose of this study was to define the long-term outcomes of LGAS patients after AVR and to evaluate the potential impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) in these patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: A cohort of 664 patients undergoing AVR for aortic stenosis after 1990 were followed-up prospectively with annual clinical assessment and echocardiography (total follow-up 3447 patient-years; mean follow-up 5.2+/-3.3 years). LGAS was defined as an aortic valve area <1.2 cm2, a mean transvalvular pressure gradient <40 mm Hg, and a left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction <50%, and was present in 79 patients. Rates and correlates of survival, freedom from congestive heart failure (CHF), and LV mass regression after AVR were determined using multivariate regression methods. Ten-year survival and freedom from CHF after AVR were 72.7+/-7.5% and 68.2+/-9.5%, respectively, for patients with LGAS, compared with 89.6+/-1.8% and 84.1+/-4.2% for patients without LGAS (hazard ratio [HR] for death and postoperative CHF, 3.1+/-1.1 and 2.7+/-0.9, respectively; P<0.01). In LGAS patients, PPM, defined as an indexed effective orifice area < or = 0.85 cm2/m2, was independently associated with increased rates of CHF (HR, 3.6+/-2.2; P=0.039), impaired LV mass regression (P=0.037), and a trend toward increased late mortality (HR, 3.0+/-1.9; P=0.084). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with LGAS have worse long-term outcomes after AVR compared with patients without LGAS. PPM adversely affects the long-term outcomes of LGAS patients and should be avoided in this population.

Aged↗
PubMed2006

Subacute tricuspid valve rupture after traumatic cardiac and pulmonary contusions.

Tricuspid valve rupture is a rare complication after blunt chest trauma. We report the unusual presentation of a patient that suffered traumatic cardiac and pulmonary contusions, contributing to the rupture of the posterior papillary muscle of the tricuspid valve 24 hours after presentation. We believe that this is the first reported case of subacute tricuspid valve rupture after a normal echocardiogram at admission after blunt chest trauma.

Accidents, Traffic↗
PubMed2006

Early postoperative anticoagulation after mechanical valve replacement: a systematic review.

The optimal approach to early postoperative anticoagulation after mechanical valve implantation remains controversial. This review article examines the pathogenesis of thrombus formation and the different strategies for early postoperative anticoagulation. The most commonly reported anticoagulation regimens had the after estimates of early postoperative thromboembolism and hemorrhage: oral anticoagulation alone (0.9%, 3.3%); oral anticoagulation with intravenous unfractionated heparin (1.1%, 7.2%); and oral anticoagulation with low molecular weight heparin (0.6%, 4.8%). Although intravenous heparin may be associated with a higher incidence of hemorrhage, a randomized trial is needed to provide the best evidence regarding early postoperative anticoagulation after mechanical valve implantation. Nearly four decades have passed since the first mechanical prosthetic valves were implanted. Frequent thromboembolic complications with the first mechanical valves led to recommendations of universal anticoagulation for these patients. Since then, several design changes and modifications have been made to improve the longevity, hemodynamics, and thrombogenicity of newer generation mechanical valves. With improved blood flow, less stasis, and less thrombogenic materials, lower rates of thromboembolism have been reported. Despite these advances however, thromboembolism and anticoagulant-related bleeding continue to account for 75% of all complications after mechanical valve replacement. Occurring most commonly within six months after implantation, these complications can adversely affect mortality and quality of life. Furthermore, the threat of their occurrence creates a psychological burden for each patient with a mechanical valve. The need for life-long anticoagulation in patients with mechanical valves is not in dispute, and the perioperative management of anticoagulation during non-cardiac surgery has been reviewed extensively. However, the approach to early postoperative anticoagulation after mechanical valve implantation is still a matter of debate. The optimal intensity and timing of anticoagulation to prevent early thromboembolism after valve replacement surgery without postoperative bleeding complications is unknown. Hence, many anticoagulation protocols have been proposed, but a lack of consensus remains. The objectives of this study were (1) to reexamine the pathogenesis of thrombus formation and the need for anticoagulation; (2) to critically review the literature on early postoperative anticoagulation strategies; and (3) provide an estimate of the incidence of bleeding and thromboembolism for each approach to early postoperative anticoagulation.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed2006

Prosthesis-patient mismatch after aortic valve replacement predominantly affects patients with preexisting left ventricular dysfunction: effect on survival, freedom from heart failure, and left ventricular mass regression.

OBJECTIVE: The effect of prosthesis-patient mismatch on clinical outcome and left ventricular mass regression after aortic valve replacement remains controversial. Data on whether the clinical effect of prosthesis-patient mismatch depends on left ventricular function at the time of aortic valve replacement are lacking. This study examined the long-term clinical and echocardiographic effects of prosthesis-patient mismatch in patients with and without left ventricular systolic dysfunction at the time of aortic valve replacement. METHODS: Preoperative and serial postoperative echocardiograms were performed in 805 adults who underwent aortic valve replacement between 1990 and 2003 and who were subsequently followed up in a dedicated valve clinic (follow-up, mean +/- SD, 5.5 +/- 3.5 years; maximum, 14.2 years). Preoperative left ventricular function was defined as normal (ejection fraction > or =50%) in 548 patients and impaired (ejection fraction <50%) in 257 patients. RESULTS: Patients with impaired preoperative left ventricular function and prosthesis-patient mismatch (indexed effective orifice area < or =0.85 cm2/m2) had a decreased overall late survival (hazard ratio, 2.8; P = .03), decreased freedom from heart failure symptoms or heart failure death (odds ratio of 5.1 at 3 years after aortic valve replacement; P = .009), and diminished left ventricular mass regression compared with patients with impaired preoperative left ventricular function and no prosthesis-patient mismatch. These effects of prosthesis-patient mismatch were not observed in patients with normal preoperative left ventricular function. CONCLUSIONS: Prosthesis-patient mismatch at an indexed effective orifice area of 0.85 cm2/m2 or less after aortic valve replacement primarily affects patients with impaired preoperative left ventricular function and results in decreased survival, lower freedom from heart failure, and incomplete left ventricular mass regression. Patients with impaired left ventricular function represent a critical population in whom prosthesis-patient mismatch should be avoided at the time of aortic valve replacement.

Aged↗
PubMed2006

Combined atrial fibrillation ablation with mitral valve surgery.

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: The study aim was to evaluate the efficacy and outcome of radiofrequency (RF) atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation in patients undergoing mitral valve (MV) surgery. METHODS: Between March 2002 and December 2004, 61 patients (mean age 65.4 +/- 10 years) underwent isolated endo-left atrial AF ablation using a unipolar RF device (Cardioblate; Medtronic, USA) in conjunction with 34 MV repairs and 27 MV replacements. AF was paroxysmal in 13 patients (21%), and permanent in 48 (79%), with a mean duration of 3.6 +/- 3.5 years. The etiology was degenerative in 35 patients (57%), rheumatic in 17 (28%), and ischemic in nine (17%). All patients received amiodarone postoperatively. RESULTS: No patients died during the study, and there were no thromboembolic complications. All patients had intraoperative conversion. Forty-one patients (67%) presented with postoperative relapse; definitive conversion was achieved in 34 (83%) cases within three months. The overall success rate was 75.4% at 14 +/- 8.8 months; success was greater in the MV repair group (85%) than in the MV replacement group (66.7%), though not significantly so (p = 0.09). Factors associated with definitive conversion included smaller left atrial size (p = 0.007), decreased left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (p = 0.04), and NYHA class I (p = 0.05). Age, AF duration and etiology were not associated with conversion, but associated coronary artery bypass grafting showed a strong trend towards significance (p = 0.07). In these patients, AF duration did not predict conversion to sinus rhythm. CONCLUSION: Combined AF ablation with MV surgery is safe and effective. Although AF ablation seems more beneficial with MV repair, the success rate may vary significantly according to patient characteristics.

Aged↗
PubMed2006

Early postoperative anticoagulation after mechanical valve replacement: a Canadian survey.

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: The optimal approach to anticoagulation during the early postoperative period after mechanical valve replacement, by which early thromboembolism is prevented without bleeding complications, is not yet known. The study aim was to examine the practice patterns of Canadian cardiac surgeons with regard to early postoperative anticoagulation after mechanical valve implantation. METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to 100 Canadian cardiac surgeons in July 2004, and 57 responses were received. Data were collected regarding the approaches to early postoperative anticoagulation following uncomplicated isolated mechanical aortic valve replacement (AVR) and mitral valve replacement (MVR). RESULTS: Heparin was administered routinely after AVR and MVR by 63% and 68% of surgeons, respectively. This was most commonly initiated on postoperative day (POD) 1, and given either subcutaneously (AVR, 28%; MVR, 25%) or intravenously (AVR, 33%; MVR, 42%). Alternatively, low-molecular-weight heparin was used by 21% and 23% of surgeons after AVR and MVR, respectively. Oral warfarin was usually started on POD 1 (72% and 68%, respectively), with 40% prescribing an initial dose between 2.5 and 5.0 mg, and 51% administering between 5.1 and 7.5 mg. When heparin was not used, oral anticoagulation was more often administered earlier (AVR, p = 0.003; MVR, p = 0.006), but not at higher doses (AVR, p = 0.07; MVR, p = 0.2). Following surgery, aspirin was prescribed by 61% and 65% of surgeons after AVR and MVR, respectively. CONCLUSION: The study results highlighted a significant variability in the management of early postoperative anticoagulation after mechanical valve implantation. The clinical impact of these findings is unknown, and can only be assessed through a prospective trial.

Anticoagulants↗
PubMed2005

The clopidogrel after surgery for coronary artery disease (CASCADE) randomized controlled trial: clopidogrel and aspirin versus aspirin alone after coronary bypass surgery [NCT00228423].

BACKGROUND: Saphenous vein graft disease remains a major limitation of coronary artery bypass graft surgery. The process of saphenous vein intimal hyperplasia begins just days after surgical revascularization, setting the stage for graft atherosclerotic disease and its sequalae. Clopidogrel improves outcomes in patients with atherosclerotic disease, and is effective at reducing intimal hyperplasia in animal models of thrombosis. Therefore, the goal of this study will be to evaluate the efficacy of clopidogrel and aspirin therapy versus aspirin alone in the prevention of saphenous vein graft intimal hyperplasia following coronary artery bypass surgery. METHODS: Patients undergoing multi-vessel coronary artery bypass grafting and in whom at least two saphenous vein grafts will be used are eligible for the study. Patients will be randomized to receive daily clopidogrel 75 mg or placebo, in addition to daily aspirin 162 mg, for a one year duration starting on the day of surgery (as soon as postoperative bleeding has been excluded). At the end of one year, all patients will undergo coronary angiography and intravascular ultrasound assessment of one saphenous vein graft as selected by randomization. The trial will be powered to test the hypothesis that clopidogrel and aspirin will reduce vein graft intimal hyperplasia by 20% compared to aspirin alone at one year following bypass surgery. DISCUSSION: This trial is the first prospective human study that will address the question of whether clopidogrel therapy improves outcomes and reduces saphenous vein graft intimal hyperplasia following cardiac surgery. Should the combination of clopidogrel and aspirin reduce the process of vein graft intimal hyperplasia, the results of this study will help redefine modern antiplatelet management of coronary artery bypass patients.

Journal Article↗
PubMed2004

Long-term outcomes of valve replacement with modern prostheses in young adults.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the multiple impacts of valve replacement on the lives of young adults. METHODS: Patients (N=500) between age 18 and 50 who had aortic valve replacement (AVR) and/or mitral valve replacement (MVR) with contemporary prostheses were followed annually. Events, functional status, and quality of life were examined with regression models. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 7.1+/-5.3 years (maximum 26.7 years). Five, 10, and 15-year survival was 92.7+/-1.7, 88.3+/-2.4 and 80.1+/-4.7% after AVR, and 93.1+/-2.3, 79.5+/-4.3 and 71.5+/-5.4% after MVR, respectively. Survival decreased with concomitant coronary disease (hazard ratio (HR): 4.5) and preoperative LV grade (HR: 2.0/grade increase) in AVR patients, and with atrial fibrillation (HR: 5.5), coronary disease (HR: 5.7), preoperative left atrial diameter (HR: 3.0/cm increase) and NYHA class (HR: 2.1/class increase) in MVR patients. Despite reoperation, late survival was equivalent between bioprostheses and mechanical valves in both implant positions. The ten-year cumulative incidence of embolic stroke was 6.3+/-2.4% for mechanical AVR patients, 6.4+/-2.9% for bioprosthetic AVR patients, 12.7+/-3.9% for mechanical MVR patients, and 3.1+/-3.1% for bioprosthetic MVR patients. Atrial fibrillation (HR: 2.8) and smoking (HR: 4.0) were risk factors for stroke in MVR patients. In AVR patients, SF-12 physical scores, freedom from recurrent heart failure, and freedom from disability were significantly higher in bioprosthetic than mechanical valve patients. Career or income limitations were more often subjectively linked to a mechanical prosthesis in both implant positions. CONCLUSIONS: Late outcomes of modern prosthetic valves in young adults remain suboptimal. Bioprostheses deserve consideration in the aortic position, as mechanical valves are associated with lower physical capacity, a higher prevalence of disability, and poorer disease perception. Early surgical referral and atrial fibrillation surgery may improve survival after MVR.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2004

Late incidence and determinants of reoperation in patients with prosthetic heart valves.

OBJECTIVES: Reoperation is a relatively common event in patients with prosthetic heart valves, but its actual occurrence can vary widely from one patient to another. With a focus on bioprosthetic valves, this study examines risk factors for reoperation in a large patient cohort. METHODS: Patients (N=3233) who underwent a total of 3633 operations for aortic (AVR) or mitral valve replacement (MVR) between 1970 and 2002 were prospectively followed (total 21,179 patient-years; mean 6.6+/-5.0 years; maximum 32.4 years). The incidence of prosthetic valve reoperation and the impact of patient- and valve-related variables were determined with actual and actuarial methods. RESULTS: Fifteen-year actual freedom from all-cause reoperation was 94.1% for aortic mechanical valves, 61.4% for aortic bioprosthetic valves, 94.8% for mitral mechanical valves, and 63.3% for mitral bioprosthetic valves. In both aortic and mitral positions, current bioprosthesis models had significantly better durability than discontinued bioprostheses (15-year reoperation odds-ratio 0.11+/-0.04; P<0.01 for aortic, and 0.42+/-0.14; P=0.009 for mitral). Current bioprostheses were significantly more durable in the aortic position than in the mitral position (14.3+/-6.8% more freedom from 15-year reoperation; (P=0.018)). Older age was protective, but smoking was an independent risk factor for reoperation after bioprosthetic AVR and MVR (hazard ratio for smoking 2.58 and 1.78, respectively). In patients with aortic bioprostheses, persistent left ventricular hypertrophy at follow-up and smaller prosthesis size predicted an increased incidence of reoperation, while this was not observed in patients with mitral bioprostheses. CONCLUSIONS: These analyses indicate that current bioprostheses have significantly better durability than discontinued bioprostheses, reveal a detrimental impact for smoking after AVR and MVR, and indicate an increased reoperation risk in patients with a small aortic bioprosthesis or with persistent left ventricular hypertrophy after AVR.

Adult↗
PubMed2004

Postoperative naproxen after coronary artery bypass surgery: a double-blind randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are routinely used after coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG), yet their effects have seldom been evaluated in randomized controlled settings. The aim of this study was to examine the efficacy and safety of a commonly used NSAID, naproxen. We hypothesized that naproxen would reduce postoperative pain following CABG without increasing complications. METHODS: Patients (N=98) undergoing primary CABG were randomized to receive naproxen (500 mg q12hX5 doses via suppository started 1h after operation, followed by oral 250 mg q8hX6 doses) or placebo. Standard analgesic and anti-emetic regimens were available to both patient groups. Interventions were double-blinded. Primary end-points were postoperative pain measured before and after chest physiotherapy by visual analog scale and pulmonary slow vital capacity (SVC). RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were equivalent between the two groups. Over the first 4 postoperative days, naproxen decreased pain by 47+/-17% on average before chest physiotherapy (P=0.034), and 44+/-13% after chest physiotherapy (P=0.0092). Patients who received naproxen also had better preservation of SVC over the first 4 postoperative days (mean loss of SVC from baseline: 2.1+/-0.1 vs. 2.5+/-0.1l, naproxen vs. placebo, P=0.0032). This was concomitant with a lower white blood cell count observed in naproxen patients (9.2+/-0.3 vs. 12.7+/-1.5x10(9)/l, naproxen vs. placebo, P=0.03). Patients who received naproxen had more chest tube drainage after 4h postoperatively, but there was no difference in the incidence or amount of transfusions. There was no difference in medication use, length of stay, or in the incidence of atrial fibrillation, azotemia, and other complications. CONCLUSIONS: Naproxen is an effective and low-cost adjunct for optimization of pain control and lung recovery after CABG. Its use may result in increased chest tube drainage, but no apparent increase in other complications.

Analysis of Variance↗
PubMed2004

Aortovenous bypass graft to the posterior left ventricle in absence of an identifiable coronary artery.

We report the case of a 70-year-old woman with significant intermediate coronary artery stenosis who underwent a series of stent procedures, ultimately leading to compromise of the origin of the circumflex artery. Intraoperatively, identification of an obtuse marginal coronary artery was impossible due to a thick layer of epicardial fat, calcification of the posterior atrioventricular groove, and an adherent, thickened pericardium. Therefore, a saphenous vein graft to the posterior vein of the left ventricle was constructed with ligation of the vein cephalad. This uncommon approach to surgical revascularization effectively relieved the patient's angina and may be of use in other difficult cases.

Aged↗