Results Of Aortic Root Replacement Research Articles

Midterm follow-up of composite graft replacement of the aortic root (30-year experience)—remarkably safe, effective, and durable

ObjectivesContemporary operative choices for aortic root disease include aortic root replacement (ARR) and a variety of valve-sparing and aortic root-repair procedures. We evaluate ultra-long-term outcomes of ARR, focusing on survival, freedom from late reoperation, and adverse events. MethodsProspectively kept records were used to accomplish long-term follow-up of patients who underwent ARR (4-pronged Yale survival assessment paradigm). ResultsBetween 1990 and 2020, 564 patients underwent ARR (mean 56 years, 84% male). A modified Cabrol procedure (Dacron coronary graft) was employed in 9.0% (51/564) and concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting in 9.4% (53/564). There were 12.8% (72/564) urgent/emergent and 7.4% (42/564) redo procedures. Operative mortality occurred in 12 patients (2.1%) overall, or 1.4% (8/554) of nondissection and 1.3% (6/468) of elective first-time operations. Six of the 12 deaths presented with acute type A dissection, urgent operation, or reoperative states. Operative mortality dropped to 0.6% during the past 10 years. In total, 11 patients developed endocarditis. Stroke occurred in 11 of 564 patients (2.0%), 4 of whom had presented with type A dissection. Late events included bleeding in 2.8% (16/564), thromboembolism in 1.4% (8/564), and reoperation of the root in 5 of 564 (0.9%) at 15 years and more distal aortic segments in 16/564 (2.8%). Survival was no different from age/sex-matched controls. ConclusionsThis ultra-long-term experience finds ARR to be extraordinarily safe, effective, and durable, with minimal long-term bleeding, thromboembolism, or graft failure. This experience provides a standard of durability for ARR against which ultra-long-term outcomes with alternate procedures (valve-sparing, Ross, other) may be compared.

The mid-term outcomes of aortic root replacement after surgical repair for CHD.

The purpose of this study is to assess the mid-term outcomes of aortic root replacement after repair of CHDs. This is a single-institutional retrospective, cohort study with consecutive patients undergoing aortic root replacement after surgical repair of CHDs between 1999 and 2022. Operative indications included aortic root dilatation with/without aortic insufficiency, sinus of Valsalva rupture, or aortic dissection involving the root. Forty-four patients (36 male and 8 female) were enrolled. Mean age at the root replacement was 36.6 ± 11.9 years. The most frequent primary diagnosis was congenital aortic stenosis (n = 10) and ventricular septal defect (n = 10). Mean time from the surgical repair to aortic root replacement was 26.6 ± 13.0 years. Operative indications were aortic root enlargement with or without aortic valve aetiology (n = 40), sinus of Valsalva rupture (n = 2), and aortic dissection (n = 2). Forty-two patients underwent valve-replacing aortic root replacement, and two patients underwent valve-sparing, with 40 concomitant procedures. The median follow-up was 3.5 (1.3-7.6) years. There were one early and five late mortalities and five cardiovascular-related reoperations. Actuarial survival at 5-10 years after root replacement was 81.0 ± 6.6%. The cumulative incidence of cardiovascular-related reoperation and aortic root or valve-related reoperation at 5 years after root replacement was 11.9% and 5.6%, respectively. The early and mid-term outcomes of aortic root replacement for patients with a history of repair of CHDs were favourable in terms of survival and aortic root or valve-related reoperation.

Discussion to: Outcomes of aortic root replacement with tricuspid aortic valve reimplantation in patients with residual aortic regurgitation

Discussion to: Outcomes of aortic root replacement with tricuspid aortic valve reimplantation in patients with residual aortic regurgitation

Outcomes of aortic root replacement with tricuspid aortic valve reimplantation in patients with residual aortic regurgitation

ObjectiveTo characterize residual aortic regurgitation (AR), identify its risk factors, and evaluate outcomes following aortic root replacement with aortic valve reimplantation. MethodsFrom 2002 to 2020, 756 patients with a tricuspid aortic valve underwent elective reimplantation for aortic root aneurysm. AR on transthoracic echocardiograms before hospital discharge was graded as mild or greater. Machine learning was used to identify risk factors for residual AR and subsequent aortic valve reoperation. ResultsSixty-five patients (8.6%) had mild (58 [7.7%]) or moderate (7 [0.93%]) residual postoperative AR. They had more severe preoperative AR (38% vs 12%; P < .0001), thickened cusps (7.7% vs 2.2%; P = .008), aortic valve repair (38% vs 23%; P = .004), and multiple returns to cardiopulmonary bypass for additional repair (11% vs 3.3%; P = .003) than those without AR. Predictors of residual AR were severe preoperative AR, smaller aortic root graft, and concomitant cusp repair. At 10 years, patients with versus without residual AR had more moderate or severe AR (48% vs 7.0%; P < .0001) and freedom from reoperation was worse (89% vs 98%; P < .0001). Residual AR was a risk factor for early reoperation. Concomitant coronary bypass, lower body mass index, and lower ejection fraction were risk factors for late reoperation. Ten-year survival was similar among patients with and without residual AR (97% vs 93%; P = .43). ConclusionsResidual AR after elective reimplantation of a tricuspid aortic valve for aortic root aneurysm is uncommon. Patients with severe preoperative AR and those who undergo valve repair have higher risk for residual AR, which can progress and increase risk of aortic valve reoperation.

Outcomes of aortic root replacement in patients with Marfan syndrome: the role of valve-sparing and valve-replacing approaches.

Marfan syndrome (MFS) is a heritable thoracic aortic disease with pervasive cardiovascular effects, including commonly, a dilated aortic root. Traditionally, the root is replaced using a mechanical composite valve graft (CVG); however, this valve-replacing (VR) approach necessitates a lifelong regimen of anticoagulation with a potential for late bleeding complications. In time, valve-sparing (VS) approaches were developed. Today, several options for aortic root replacement (ARR) exist; each has advantages and disadvantages that helps inform choice. The Aortic Valve Operative Outcomes in Marfan Patients (AVOMP) is a multi-center international registry to analyze clinical outcomes of ARR in MFS patients using either VR or VS techniques to better elucidate choice. We summarize outcomes of AVOMP and present our own experience. We performed 223 consecutive elective ARR [1991-2023] in patients with MFS; 15 such repairs were included in AVOMP. Repairs included 113 (51%) using a mechanical CVG, 62 (28%) using a VS approach, and 48 (22%) using a bioprosthetic root. Many patients underwent aortic arch repair (30% to 54% by type). The median patient age was 38 [29-52] years. In comparing VS and VR groups, patients were similar in age and rates of major comorbidities and symptoms. Patients with VR repair had a more complex aortic history. The rate of redo sternotomy was 24% (n=54). Operative death was uncommon [4% overall (10/223); ranging from 2% to 8% by type], and stroke was rare [1/223 (<1%)]. Late survival and reoperation differed by operative approach; survival was improved in patients who underwent VS repair. We found that repair in patients with MFS undergoing ARR resulted in low operative risk. Our late results were similar to those of AVOMP in that patients undergoing VS repair tended to experience greater rates of valvular-structural deterioration, although this did not appear to impact survival.

Early and midterm outcomes of a bentall operation using an all-biological valved BioConduit™

ObjectivesTo analyze the midterm results of aortic root replacement using the valved, all biological, No React®, BioConduit™.MethodsFrom 2017 to 2020, we prospectively followed 91 consecutive patients who underwent a Bentall procedure with a BioConduit™ valved graft in our institution. The primary outcomes were aortic bioprosthetic valve dysfunction and mortality according to Valve Academic Research Consortium 3 (VARC3).ResultsMean age was 70 ± 10 years and 67 patients (74%) were men. Ascending aortic aneurysm (72%), aortic valve regurgitation (51%) or stenosis (20%) and acute endocarditis (14%) were the main indications for surgery. Seventy-four patients (81.3%) were followed up at 1 year. The perioperative mortality was 8% (n = 8), the early, 1 year, mortality was 2% (n = 2) and the midterm mortality, at 4 years of follow up, was 4% (n = 3). Ten patients fulfilled the criteria for hemodynamic valve deterioration at 1 year (13%) and 14 for a bioprosthetic valve failure during the entire follow-up (17%).ConclusionsWe are reporting early and midterm results of Bentall procedures with the all-biological, valved, No-React® BioConduit™. To our knowledge, this is the first study reporting an early and midterm unexpectedly high rate of non-structural prosthetic hemodynamic deterioration. The rate of endocarditis and atrioventricular disconnections remain similar to previous studies.

The impact of concomitant mitral valve intervention on outcomes of aortic root replacement.

To investigate the impact of concomitant mitral valve repair (MVr) or replacement (MVR) at the time of aortic root replacement (ARR). We queried our aortic database for consecutive patients undergoing ARR in combination with MVr or MVR from 1997 to 2021. Patients undergoing valve sparing root replacement (VSRR) were excluded. We compared operative mortality (OM) and a composite of major adverse events (MAE) in those undergoing CVG both with (Group 2) and without a concomitant MV procedure (Group 1). We also analyzed outcomes between patients undergoing MV repair versus MV replacement. Sixty-one patients underwent ARR with concomitant MVr (29/47.5%) or MVR (32/52.5%). Compared to patients in Group 2 (n = 955), those in Group 1 presented with worse NYHA class, lower ejection fraction, higher rate of connective tissue disease, and underwent more frequently urgent/emergent procedures. Group 1 had higher incidence of postoperative MAE (8/61(13%) vs 51/955(5%), p = .03). There was no difference in operative mortality between the two groups (0/61(0%)vs. 3/955(0.3%), p = 1). Compared to the ARR + MVR subgroup, the ARR + MVr subgroup had higher incidence of postoperative MAE (5/29(17.2%) vs. 3/32(9.4%), p = 0.02). Multivariate analysis identified MVr (OR 2.78, 95% confidence interval [CI] [1.03;7.48], p = 0.04) as an independent predictor of MAE. Operative mortality remained low in both groups. The addition of MVR/MVr to composite valve-graft replacement of the aortic root does not increase OM in experienced hands. The incidence of MAEs was higher in those undergoing MVr but may be a reflection of greater preoperative comorbidity rather than issues related to a more complex operation.

Long-term outcomes of aortic root replacement for endocarditis.

Infective endocarditis (IE) involving the aortic valve and root is associated with high risk requiring thoughtful surgical decision-making. The impact of valve and conduit choices and patient factors on long-term outcomes in this patient population is poorly documented. From January 1976 to December 2013, 485 patients underwent aortic root and valve replacement at a single institution. Cox's proportional hazard model identified predictors of long-term survival and cumulative incidence functions were compared to assess need for reoperation with death as a competing risk. Median age at time of operation was 56.6 years (interquartile range: 23.1) with the indication for operation being endocarditis in 14.6% (n = 71). Stentless root replacement was used in 70% IE versus 34% non-IE (p < .001). Endocarditis at time of root replacement did not have a significant impact on survival through 15 years (IE: 37.3% vs. non-IE: 42.5%; log-rank; p = .13). After multivariable adjustment, survival was similar between patients with and without endocarditis (hazard ratio: 1.1; 95% confidence interval: [0.77, 1.62]; p = .57). Freedom from reoperation at 15 years did not vary significantly by endocarditis status (IE: 95.9% vs. non-IE: 73.6%; p = .07). Among endocarditis patients, freedom from reoperation at 10 years was similar between homograft and stentless bioprosthetic conduits (95.3% vs. 88.5%; log-rank; K-sample; p = .46). In a sample with frequent use of stentless prostheses, aortic root replacement for infective endocarditis had acceptable risk and long-term survival similar to root replacement for other indications. In the setting of endocarditis, root replacement with homograft or stentless bioprosthetic root has excellent durability through 15 years.

Chronic kidney disease stage stratifies short- and long-term outcomes after aortic root replacement.

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is prevalent in patients undergoing cardiovascular surgery, and it negatively impacts procedural outcomes; however, its influence on the outcomes of aortic surgery has not been well studied. This study aims to elucidate the importance of CKD on the outcomes of aortic root replacement (ARR). Patients who underwent ARR between 2005 and 2019 were retrospectively reviewed (n = 882). Patients were divided into 3 groups based on the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes criteria: Group 1 [estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≥ 60 ml/min/1.73 m2, n = 421); Group 2 (eGFR = 30-59 ml/min/1.73 m2, n = 424); and Group 3 (eGFR < 30 ml/min/1.73 m2, n = 37). To reduce potential confounding, a propensity score matching was also performed between Group 1 and the combined group of Group 2 and Group 3. The primary end point was 10-year survival. Secondary end points were in-hospital mortality and perioperative morbidity. Severe CKD patients presented with more advanced overall chronic and acute illnesses. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed a significant correlation between CKD stage and 10-year survival (log-rank P < 0.001). The number of events for Group 1 was 15, Group 2 was 49 and Group 3 was 11 in 10 years. Group 3 had significantly higher in-hospital mortality (13.5% vs 3.5% in Group 2 vs 0.7% in Group 1, P < 0.001) and stroke (8.1% vs 7.1% vs 1.2%, P < 0.001) as well as introduction to new dialysis (27.0% vs 5.4% vs 1.7%, P < 0.001). eGFR was shown to be an independent predictor of mortality (hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% confidence interval, 0.96-0.99). Comparison between propensity matched groups showed similar postoperative outcomes, and eGFR was still identified as a predictor of mortality (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.95-0.99). Higher stage in CKD negatively impacts the long-term survival in patients who are undergoing ARR.

Impact of aortic valve disease on outcomes of aortic root replacement.

Aortic stenosis (AS) has been associated with higher mortality in patients undergoing aortic root replacement (ARR). In this analysis, we compare the outcomes among patients with moderate to severe AS or aortic insufficiency (AI) undergoing ARR in a tertiary aortic center. A total of 889 patients underwent ARR from 1997 to 2020, of whom 798 had AI and 91 had AS. We excluded valve-sparing procedures. The primary endpoint consisted of major adverse events (MAEs), including operative mortality, myocardial infarction, tracheostomy, new dialysis, and cerebrovascular accidents. All patients had either a mechanical or biologic composite valve-graft implanted using button and exclusion techniques. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to compare outcomes. Long-term survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Patients with AI had a higher incidence of connective tissue disorder (8.0% vs. 0.0%; p = .01) and were more likely to be classified as having an urgent or emergent procedure (22.4% vs. 8.8%; p = .004). PSM achieved a good balance between the groups. There was no difference in MAE rates, postoperatively (AI vs. AS, 1.6% vs. 1.6%; p = .85). Long-term survival was similar at 5 years in the matched cohorts (AI vs. AS, 75.9% vs. 95.5%; p = .36). In patients undergoing ARR, the presence of moderate to severe AI or AS does not impact operative outcomes. ARR can be carried out with excellent outcomes and low operative mortality when performed in specialized centers.

Aortic root replacement with bicuspid valve reimplantation: Are outcomes and valve durability comparable to those of tricuspid valve reimplantation?

ObjectivesTo assess intermediate-term outcomes of aortic root replacement with valve-sparing reimplantation of bicuspid aortic valves (BAV), compared with tricuspid aortic valves (TAV). MethodsFrom January 2002 to July 2017, 92 adults underwent aortic root replacement with BAV reimplantation and 515 with TAV reimplantation at the Cleveland Clinic. Balancing-score matching based on 28 preoperative variables yielded 71 well-matched BAV and TAV pairs (77% of possible pairs) for comparison of postoperative mortality and morbidity, longitudinal echocardiogram data, aortic valve reoperation, and survival. ResultsIn the BAV group, 1 hospital death occurred (1.1%); mortality among all reimplantations was 0.2%. Among matched patients, procedural morbidity was low and similar between BAV and TAV groups (1 stroke in TAV group; renal failure requiring dialysis, 1 patient each; red cell transfusion, 25% each). Five-year results: Severe aortic regurgitation was present in 7.4% of the BAV group and 2.9% of the TAV group (P = .7); 39% of BAV and 65% of TAV patients had none. Higher mean gradients (10 vs 7.4 mm Hg; P = .001) and left ventricular mass index (111 vs 101 g/m2; P = .5) were present in BAV patients. Freedom from aortic valve reoperation was 94% in the BAV group and 98% in the TAV group (P = .10), and survival was 100% and 95%, respectively (P = .07). ConclusionsBoth BAV and TAV reimplantations can be performed with equal safety and good midterm outcomes; however, the constellation of higher gradients, less ventricular reverse remodeling, and more aortic valve reoperations with BAV reimplantations raises concerns requiring continued long-term surveillance.

EP01 5-YEARS FOLLOW-UP OF AORTIC PROSTHESIS ENDOCARDITIS TREATED USING BIOINTEGRAL CONDUIT: A SINGLE-CENTER EXPERIENCE

Objective: The treatment of complex prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE) with aortic root abscess remains a surgical challenge. The aim of this study was to analyze the mid-term results of aortic root replacement using the Bioconduit BioIntegral in patient with a complex prosthesis endocarditis. Methods: From June 2013 to April 2018, 15 patients underwent a Bentall procedure with-BioIntegral Surgical graft, due to endocarditis of previous aortic prosthesis, with peri-prosthetic abscess in all patients. Partial to total prosthetic detachment was present in 14 patient (93,3%). The mean age was 68 ± 22 years. Active endocarditis was present in 10 patients (66%) with acute cardiac failure in 7 patients (46,6%) The mean logistic EuroScore was 45,27% ± 33,54%. Patients were prospectively followed and the mean follow-up was 13,4 months (range 0–58 months). Results: There were 4 early deaths (26,6%) due to Multiple Organ Failure while the overall actuarial late survival was 64%. None of the patients required cardiac reoperation. 3 patients (20%) needed PMK implantation due to a third-degree AV-block. No major bleeding or stroke were observed. No recurrence of endocarditis was observed, neither early nor late. Conclusions: This mid-term follow-up after aortic root replacement with BioIntegral Bioconduit revealed a safe and effective performance of the graft with no evidence of infective dehiscence or need of further cardiac reoperation. Although this study needs further results to be confirmed, this surgical option seems to be potentially promising for complex Prosthetic Valve Endocarditis (PVE) and aortic root abscess in this high-risk patient cohort.

Clinical Outcomes of Root Reimplantation and Bentall Procedure: Propensity Score Matching Analysis

This study aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of aortic root replacement (ARR) surgery: Root reimplantation as valve-sparing root replacement (VSR) and the Bentall procedure. We retrospectively reviewed 216 patients who underwent ARR between 1995 and 2013 at Samsung Medical Center. Patients were divided into two groups, depending on the procedure they underwent: Bentall (n= 134) or VSR (n= 82). The mean follow-up duration was 100.9 ± 56.4 months. There were 2 early deaths in the Bentall group and none in the VSR group (p= 0.53). Early morbidities were not different between the groups. Overall mortality was significantly lower in the VSR group (HR= 0.12, p= 0.04). Despite the higher reoperation rate in the VSR group (p= 0.03), major adverse valve-related events (MAVRE) did not differ between the groups (p= 0.28). Bleeding events were significantly higher in the Bentall group during follow-up (10 in Bentall group, 0 in VSR group, p= 0.04). There were 6 thromboembolic events only in the Bentall group (p= 0.11). We performed a propensity score matching analysis comparing the groups (134 Bentall versus 43 VSR). Matched analysis gave similar results, namely, HR= 0.17, p= 0.10 for overall mortality and HR= 1.01, p= 0.99 for MAVRE. Although there was marginal significance in the propensity matched analysis, it is plausible to anticipate a survival benefit with VSR during long-term follow-up. Despite a higher reoperation for aortic valves, VSR can be a viable option in patients who decline life-long anticoagulation, especially the young or the patients in whom anticoagulation is contraindicated.

Long-term Results of Aortic Root Replacement for Aortic Regurgitation in Behçet's Disease

Purpose: Aortic root replacement (ARR) has been suggested as a surgical technique for aortic regurgitation (AR) in Behçet's disease to prevent valve detachment. We evaluated the long-term results of aortic root replacement for aortic regurgitation in Behçet's disease.

Long-term follow-up after aortic root replacement with the Shelhigh® biological valved conduit: a word of caution!

The aim of this study was to analyse long-term results of aortic root replacement with the Shelhigh® NR-2000C conduit. From January 2001 to October 2005, 63 patients with a median age of 62 years underwent aortic root replacement with a Shelhigh® conduit. Aneurysm (27%), aortic valve endocarditis (30%) and acute type A aortic dissection (33%) were the predominant indications for the surgery. Fifty-four patients (86%) were entered in the follow-up study with the end-points of death, aortic root-related reoperation and endocarditis. The overall 30-day mortality rate was 8% (n = 5). The median follow-up was 9.5 years (range 0-14.2 years). In total, 13 (24%) deaths occurred during follow-up; of these, 4 were directly conduit-related. The overall estimated survival rates at 1, 5 and 10 years were 85 ± 5, 79 ± 6 and 71 ± 7%, respectively. Reoperation was necessary in 10 (19%) patients due to endocarditis (n = 5), aortic stenosis (n = 3), pseudoaneurysm due to detachment of the right coronary artery (n = 1) and detachment of the non-coronary leaflet (n = 1). The overall estimated rate of freedom from aortic root-related reoperation at 1, 5 and 10 years was 83 ± 5, 79 ± 6 and 64 ± 7%, respectively. Endocarditis of the prosthesis was reported in 9 (17%) patients; of whom, 5 patients required reoperation and 4 were treated medically. In 1 patient with endocarditis, a stroke was reported due to a thromboembolic event. The first long-term follow-up after aortic root replacement with the Shelhigh® BioConduit revealed a relatively high rate of death and very high rate of reoperations due to endocarditis, aorto-ventricular disconnection and structural valve failure. This may be potentially connected to the nature of the implanted valved conduit.

Outcomes of Aortic Root Replacement After Previous Aortic Root Replacement: The “True” Redo Root

Aortic reoperations are technically challenging. This study evaluated outcomes after "true" redo root replacement (previous full root replacement) stratified by cause of prosthesis failure. Data were compared for 793 patients who underwent a first-time sternotomy (de novo group) and 120 patients who had previously undergone full aortic root replacement (redo group), of which 76 underwent reoperation due to structural valve deterioration (degenerative group), and 44 due to endocarditis (infection group). Overall mortality was 4% (n = 28) in the de novo group and 5% (n = 6) in the redo group (p = 0.43) (degenerative group, 3%, infection group, 9%; p = 0.19). The infection group had an increased incidence of renal failure, sternal infection, prolonged ventilation, reoperation for bleeding, multisystem failure, and sepsis, and an increased hospital length of stay. The degenerative group and the de novo group had a similar risk of perioperative death and major complications. The 5-year survival was 86.3% ± 1.3% for the de novo group and 77.3% ± 4.6% for the redo group (p ≤ 0.01; degenerative, 86.3% ± 5%; infection, 65.3% ± 7.7%; p < 0.01; p = 0.98 for de novo vs degenerative). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that reoperation for degenerative failure did not increase the risk of perioperative or late death. Redo aortic root replacement can be performed with low perioperative morbidity and death. The presence of infection increases the risk of complications and worsens survival. However, redo root replacement for degenerative failure can be performed with similar short-term complication risk and midterm survival as de novo root replacement.

Mid-term results of aortic root replacement using a self-assembled biological composite graft.

To report the mid-term results of aortic root replacement using a self-assembled biological composite graft, consisting of a vascular tube graft and a stented tissue valve. Between January 2005 and December 2011, 201 consecutive patients [median age 66 (interquartile range, IQR, 55-77) years, 31 female patients (15.4%), median logistic EuroSCORE 10 (IQR 6.8-23.2)] underwent aortic root replacement using a stented tissue valve for the following indications: annulo-aortic ectasia or ascending aortic aneurysm with aortic valve disease in 162 (76.8%) patients, active infective endocarditis in 18 (9.0%) and acute aortic dissection Stanford type A in 21 (10.4%). All patients underwent clinical and echocardiographic follow-up. We analysed survival and valve-related events. The overall in-hospital mortality rate was 4.5%. One- and 5-year cardiac-related mortality rates were 3 and 6%, and overall survival was 95 ± 1.5 and 75 ± 3.6%, respectively. The rate of freedom from structural valve failure was 99% and 97 ± 0.4% at the 1- and 5-year follow-up, respectively. The incidence rates of prosthetic valve endocarditis were 3 and 4%, respectively. During a median follow-up of 28 (IQR 14-51) months, only 2 (1%) patients required valve-related redo surgery due to prosthetic valvular endocarditis and none suffered from thromboembolic events. One percent of patients showed structural valve deterioration without any clinical symptoms; none of the patients suffered greater than mild aortic regurgitation. Aortic root replacement using a self-assembled biological composite graft is an interesting option. Haemodynamic results are excellent, with freedom from structured valve failure. Need for reoperation is extremely low, but long-term results are necessary to prove the durability of this concept.

Personalised external aortic root support (PEARS) in Marfan syndrome: analysis of 1–9 year outcomes by intention-to-treat in a cohort of the first 30 consecutive patients to receive a novel tissue and valve-conserving procedure, compared with the published results of aortic root replacement

ObjectiveAmong people with Marfan syndrome who have a typical aortic root aneurysm, dissection is a characteristic cause of premature death. To pre-empt Type A dissection, composite root replacement with a...

Long Term Outcomes of Aortic Root Replacement: 18 Years' Experience

BackgroundWe reviewed the long-term outcomes of aortic root replacement at Asan Medical Center and investigated the predictors affecting mortality.Materials and MethodsA retrospective analysis was performed on 225 consecutive adult patients undergoing aortic root replacement with mechanical conduits (n=169), porcine aortic root prosthesis (n=23), or aortic homografts (n=33) from January 1992 to September 2009. The median follow-up duration was 6.1 years (range, 0 to 18.0 years).ResultsThe porcine root group was older than the other groups (freestyle 55.9±14.3 years vs. mechanical 46.3±14.6 years, homograft 48.1±14.7 years; p=0.02). The mechanical group had the highest incidence of the Marfan syndrome (mechanical 22%, freestyle 4%, homograft 3%; p=0.01). Surgery performed for infective endocarditis was more frequent in the homograft group (mechanical 10%, freestyle 10%, homograft 40%; p<0.001). The overall 30-day mortality was 5.3% (12/225). Actuarial survival rates in the mechanical, porcine root, and homograft groups were 79.4%, 81.5%, and 83.5% at 5 years and 67%, 61.9%, and 61.1% at 10 years, respectively (p=0.73). By multivariate analysis, preoperative diabetes mellitus, older age, and longer cardiopulmonary bypass time were independent predictors of mortality. Incidence of postoperative complications, including infective endocarditis and thromboembolism were comparable in all of the groups.ConclusionAortic root replacement can be safely performed with different types of prostheses as the outcome was not affected by the choice of prosthesis. Further studies are required to assess the long-term durability of biological prostheses.

Long-Term Results of Modified Bentall Procedure Using Flanged Composite Aortic Prosthesis

We have been using the flanged composite aortic prosthesis and Carrel button technique to re-attach the coronary ostia in aortic root replacement procedures at our institution over the last twenty five years. Our objective was to evaluate the long-term results of aortic root replacement with this technique. A total of 73 patients from January 1984 to August 2010 were included in this study. The median age was 52.7 ± 14.4 years (range 28-80 years). There were 48 male and 25 female patients. 44 patients (60.3%) had annuloaortic ectasia, and 15 patients (20.5%) had acute type A aortic dissection. Marfan syndrome was recognized in 12 patients (16.5%). The early mortality rate was 5.5% (n = 4). Causes of death were multiple organ failures in two patients and sepsis in another two patients. The actuarial survival rate was 84.2% at 5 years, 64.3% at 15 years and 51.9% at 25 years. Only one patient with aortitis needed a reoperation because of coronary pseudoaneurysm after 23 years from the previous operation. This modified Bentall procedure is reliable and safe, with superior long-term survival and a low rate of aortic reoperation.