Objectives: This study evaluates operative approach and contemporary surgical outcomes in the management of left ventricular outflow tract obstruction by a single surgeon at a high-volume, specialized hypertrophic cardiomyopathy center.Methods: This is a retrospective review of 1559 consecutive operations for left ventricular outflow tract obstruction from 2005 to 2015. Demographic profiles, echocardiogram-derived ventricular morphology and hemodynamics, operative data, and in-hospital outcomes were analyzed.Results: Of the 1559 operations, 586 were isolated septal myectomies, 522 were myectomies with mitral valve or subvalvular apparatus intervention, 422 were myectomies with another concomitant procedure, and 29 were isolated mitral valve interventions without myectomy. Common mitral valve interventions included anterior leaflet shortening (16%), chordae tendineae resection (9.8%), papillary muscle resection (7.2%), and papillary muscle reorientation (7.5%). Ninety-two patients underwent mitral valve replacement, 42 for left ventricular outflow tract obstruction and 50 for intrinsic mitral valve pathology. Patients undergoing mitral interventions had thinner septums (18 AE 0.4 mm vs 22 AE 0.5 mm, P<.001) and less myocardium removed (6.2 AE 3.5 g vs 8.8 AE 3.8 g, P<.001) than patients without a mitral intervention. Prevalence of in-hospital permanent pacemaker insertion was 4.2% (n ¼ 1334) for complete heart block and 1.1% (n ¼ 464) for isolated septal myectomy with normal preoperative conduction. Overall, there were 2 postoperative ventricular septal defects (0.13%) and none for isolated myectomies. Operative mortality was 0.38%.Conclusions: Septal myectomy can be performed safely with excellent outcomes when the procedure is performed by a highly experienced surgeon in a high-volume, specialized center. A mitral valve intervention is a useful adjunct in patients with moderate hypertrophy.

Background The bimodular femoral neck implant (modularity in the neck section and prosthetic head) offers several implant advantages to the surgeon performing THAs, however, there have been reports of failure of bimodular femoral implants involving neck fractures or adverse tissue reaction to metal debris. We aimed to assess the results of the bimodular implants used in the THAs we performed. Questions/purposes We asked: (1) What is the survivorship of the PROFEMUR 1 bimodular femoral neck stems? (2) What are the modes of failure of this bimodular femoral neck implant? (3) What are the major risk factors for the major modes of failure of this device?Methods Between 2003 and 2009, we used one family of bimodular femoral neck stems for all primary THAs (PRO-FEMUR 1 Z and PROFEMUR 1 E). During this period, 277 THAs (in 242 patients) were performed with these implants. One hundred seventy were done with the bimodular PROFE-MUR 1 E (all are accounted for here), and when that implant was suspected of having a high risk of failure, the bimodular PROFEMUR 1 Z was used instead. One hundred seven THAs were performed using this implant (all are accounted for in this study). All bearing combinations, including metal-on-metal, metal-on-polyethylene, and ceramic-on-ceramic, are included here. Data for the cohort included patient demographics, BMI, implant dimensions, type of articular surface, length of followup, and C-reactive protein serum level. We assessed survivorship of the two stems using Kaplan-Meier curves and determined the frequency of the different modes of stem failure. For each of the major modes of failure, we performed binary logistic regression to identify associated risk factors. Results Survivorship of the stems, using aseptic revision as the endpoint, was 85% for the patients with the PROFE-MUR 1 E stems with a mean followup of 50 months (range, 1-125 months) and 85% for the PROFEMUR 1 Z with a mean followup of 50 months (range, 1-125 months)(95% CI, 74-87 months). The most common modes of failure were loosening (9% for the PROFEMUR 1 E), neck fracture (6% for the PROFEMUR 1 Z and 0.6% for the PROFEMUR 1 E), metallosis (1%), and periprosthetic fracture (1%). Only the bimodular PROFEMUR 1 E was associated with femoral stem loosening (odds ratio [OR] =1.1; 95% CI, 1.04-1.140; p = 0.032). Larger head (OR = 3.2; 95% CI, 0.7-14; p = 0.096), BMI (OR = 1.19; 95% CI, 1-1.4; p = 0.038) and total offset (OR = 1.83; 95% CI, 1.13-2.9; p = 0.039) were associated with neck fracture.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract