Valve-sparing aortic root replacement: Long-term variables significantly associated with mortality and morbidity

被引:4
作者
Sharma, Varun J. [1 ,2 ]
Kangarajah, Abbie [1 ]
Yang, Amy [1 ]
Kim, Michelle [1 ]
Seevayanagam, Siven [1 ,2 ]
Matalanis, George [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Austin Hlth, Brian F Buxton Dept Cardiac & Thorac Aort Surg, 145 Studley Rd, Melbourne, Vic 3084, Australia
[2] Univ Melbourne, Melbourne Med Sch, Dept Surg, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
关键词
aortic surgery; valve-sparing root replacement;
D O I
10.1016/j.jtcvs.2023.11.027
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objectives: In aortic root surgery, valve-sparing aortic root replacement is an attractive alternative by mitigating the risks inherent to prosthetic valves; however, little is known about the variables that impact its durability. We review our mid- to long-term outcomes after valve-sparing aortic root replacement and describe factors that impact survival and valve reintervention and insufficiency. Methods: A retrospective review of 284 consecutive patients undergoing valve sparing aortic root replacement between November 1999 and January 2022 at Austin Health, Melbourne, Australia, was undertaken, with a median follow-up of 6.43 +/- 4.83 years, but up to 22.0 years. Freedom from mortality, aortic reintervention, and insufficiency was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier methods, Cox proportional hazard models, and Fine-Gray analysis. Results: The median age of patients at intervention was 60.0 years (interquartile range, 48.0-67.0), of whom 68 (23.9%) had bicuspid aortic valve disease, 27 (9.5%) had Marfan syndrome, 119 (41.9%) had severe aortic root dilation (>50 mm), and 155 had (54.6%) severe aortic insufficiency at the time of intervention. The 30-day mortality was 1.8%, with freedom from mortality of 96.0% (95% CI, 92.6-97.8) at 5 years and 88.2% (95% CI, 81.4-92.6) at 10 years. Freedom from aortic reintervention was 92.2% (95% CI, 87.7-95.2) at 5 years and 79.8% (95% CI, 71.8-85.8) at 10 years. Factors associated with reintervention were concomitant leaflet repair (hazard ratio, 8.13, 95% CI, 1.07-61.7) and bicuspid valvulopathy (hazard ratio, 2.23, 95% CI, 1.07-4.68), with reintervention in the bicuspid aortic valve being more likely due to aortic stenosis and in the tricuspid aortic valve due to aortic insufficiency (chi-square P = .05). The freedom from aortic insufficiency was 89.1% (95% CI, 83.5-92.9), 84.9% (95% CI, 77.8-89.9) at 5 and 10 years, respectively, and 80.7% (95% CI, 71.0-87.4). Conclusions: Valve-sparing aortic root replacement has excellent long-term outcomes, with low mortality and reintervention rates. Concomitant leaflet repair and bicuspid valve disease are the only long-term factors associated with reintervention. (J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2025;169:68-77)
引用
收藏
页码:68 / 77
页数:10
相关论文
共 8 条
  • [1] ANZSCTS, 2017, ANZSCTS Data Definitions Manual Version 4.1 2017
  • [2] Long-term survival after composite mechanical aortic root replacement: A consecutive series of 448 cases
    Etz, Christian D.
    von Aspern, Konstantin
    Girrbach, Felix F.
    Battellini, Roberto R.
    Akhavuz, Oemuer
    Leontyev, Sergey
    Borger, Michael A.
    Dohmen, Pascal M.
    Mohr, Friedrich-Wilhelm
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY, 2013, 145 (03) : S41 - S47
  • [3] AORTIC ROOT REPLACEMENT - RISK FACTOR-ANALYSIS OF A 17-YEAR EXPERIENCE WITH 270 PATIENTS
    GOTT, VL
    GILLINOV, AM
    PYERITZ, RE
    CAMERON, DE
    REITZ, BA
    GREENE, PS
    STONE, CD
    FERRIS, RL
    ALEJO, DE
    MCKUSICK, VA
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY, 1995, 109 (03) : 536 - 545
  • [4] 2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines
    Isselbacher, Eric M.
    Preventza, Ourania
    Hamilton Black, James
    Augoustides, John G.
    Beck, Adam W.
    Bolen, Michael A.
    Braverman, Alan C.
    Bray, Bruce E.
    Brown-Zimmerman, Maya M.
    Chen, Edward P.
    Collins, Tyrone J.
    DeAnda, Abe
    Fanola, Christina L.
    Girardi, Leonard N.
    Hicks, Caitlin W.
    Hui, Dawn S.
    Schuyler Jones, William
    Kalahasti, Vidyasagar
    Kim, Karen M.
    Milewicz, Dianna M.
    Oderich, Gustavo S.
    Ogbechie, Laura
    Promes, Susan B.
    Gyang Ross, Elsie
    Schermerhorn, Marc L.
    Singleton Times, Sabrina
    Tseng, Elaine E.
    Wang, Grace J.
    Woo, Y. Joseph
    [J]. CIRCULATION, 2022, 146 (24) : E334 - E482
  • [5] Early and long-term outcomes of conventional and valve-sparing aortic root replacement
    Jahangiri, Marjan
    Mani, Krishna
    Acharya, Metesh
    Bilkhu, Rajdeep
    Quinton, Paul
    Schroeder, Frank
    Morgan, Robert
    Edsell, Mark
    [J]. HEART, 2022, 108 (23) : 1858 - 1863
  • [6] Valve-sparing aortic root replacement versus composite valve graft with bioprosthesis in patients under age 50
    Levine, Dov
    Patel, Parth
    Zhao, Yanling
    Chung, Megan
    Singh, Sameer
    Childress, Patra
    Chodisetty, Shreya
    Leshnower, Bradley
    Kurlansky, Paul
    Smith, Craig R.
    Chen, Edward
    Takayama, Hiroo
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY, 2024, 168 (04)
  • [7] 2020 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease: Executive Summary A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines
    Otto, Catherine M.
    Nishimura, Rick A.
    Bonow, Robert O.
    Carabello, Blase A.
    Erwin, John P., III
    Gentile, Federico
    Jneid, Hani
    Krieger, Eric, V
    Mack, Michael
    McLeod, Christopher
    O'Gara, Patrick T.
    Rigolin, Vera H.
    Sundt, Thoralf M., III
    Thompson, Annemarie
    Toly, Christopher
    [J]. CIRCULATION, 2021, 143 (05) : e35 - e71
  • [8] Valve-Sparing Root Replacement Compared With Composite Valve Graft Procedures in Patients With Aortic Root Dilation
    Ouzounian, Maral
    Rao, Vivek
    Manlhiot, Cedric
    Abraham, Nachum
    David, Carolyn
    Feindel, Christopher M.
    David, Tirone E.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY, 2016, 68 (17) : 1838 - 1847