{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.05455345358556973, 'fraction_numerical': 0.047074351077870655, 'mean_word_length': 4.801020408163265, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Contemporary Outcomes of Aortic and Mitral Valve Surgery for Rheumatic Heart Disease in Sub-Saharan Africa

OBJECTIVES
Rheumatic heart disease is endemic in sub-Saharan Africa. There is a paucity of data on the outcomes of valvular surgery for rheumatic heart disease in the developing world. The objective of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of aortic and mitral valve surgery for rheumatic heart disease in Ethiopia.


METHODS
Between 2009 and 2017, 240 consecutive patients with rheumatic heart disease underwent aortic and/or mitral surgery at the Cardiac Center of Ethiopia in Addis Ababa. These surgeries were performed in the context of 22 international humanitarian missions. Median follow-up was 2.3 (interquartile range, 0.5-4.0) years and 96% complete. Outcomes were compared between patients who underwent mechanical valve implantation (n = 90, 38%), bioprosthetic valve implantation (n = 58, 24%), and valve repair (n = 92, 38%).


RESULTS
Mean age of patients was 19 ± 8 years, and 136 patients (57%) were female. Operative mortality occurred in 5 patients (2.1%) and was not significantly different between the groups. Eleven additional patients (5%) died at follow-up, and 55 patients (23%) had at least 1 major adverse valve-related event. Propensity score-adjusted Cox regression analysis demonstrated higher rates of death in the bioprosthetic group compared with the mechanical group (hazard ratio, 8.82; 95% confidence interval, 1.64-47.39; P = .011). Survival was not significantly different between the repair and mechanical groups (hazard ratio, 1.09; 95% confidence interval, 0.17-7.16; P = .93). Likewise, rates of major adverse valve-related event were higher in the bioprosthetic group compared with the mechanical group (hazard ratio, 2.71; 995% confidence interval, 1.13-6.49; P = .025), but not significantly different between the repair and mechanical groups (hazard ratio, 1.98; 95% confidence interval, 0.89-4.39; P = .092).


CONCLUSIONS
Left-sided valve surgery for rheumatic heart disease in sub-Saharan Africa is associated with acceptable perioperative outcomes, but a high incidence of major adverse valve-related event at follow-up. The use of bioprosthetic valves is associated with poor outcomes in this patient population.