4.0 Article

Outcomes of aortic valve repair according to valve morphology and surgical techniques

Journal

INTERACTIVE CARDIOVASCULAR AND THORACIC SURGERY
Volume 15, Issue 4, Pages 644-650

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/icvts/ivs195

Keywords

Aortic valve repair; Bicuspid aortic valve; Tricuspid aortic valve; Aortic annulus stabilization

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the impact of aortic valve morphology and different surgical aortic valve repair techniques on long-term clinical outcomes. METHODS: Between February 2003 and May 2010, 216 patients with aortic insufficiency underwent aortic valve repair in our institution. Ages ranged between 26 and 82 years (mean 53 15 years). Aortic valve dysfunctions, according to functional classification, were: type I in 55 patients (25.5%), type II in 126 (58.3%) and type III in 35 (16.2%). Sixty-six patients (27.7%) had a bicuspid valve. Aortic valve repair techniques included sub-commissural plasty in 138 patients, plication in 84, free-edge reinforcement in 80, resection of raphe plus re-suturing in 40 and the chordae technique in 52. Concomitant surgical procedures were CABG in 22 (10%) patients, mitral valve repair in 12 (5.5%), aortic valve-sparing re-implantation in 78 (36%) and ascending aorta replacement in 69 (32%). Mean follow-up was 42 +/- 16 months and was 100% complete. RESULTS: There were six early deaths (2.7%). Overall late survival was 91.5% (18 late deaths). There were 15 (6.9%) late cardiac-related deaths. NYHA functional class was <= II in all patients. At follow-up, 28 (14.5%) patients had recurrent aortic insufficiency >= grade II. The freedom from valve-related events was significantly different between bicuspid and tricuspid valve implantation (P < 0.01), between type I + II and type III (P < 0.001) dysfunction and between the chordae technique and plication, compared to free-edge reinforcement (P < 0.01). Statistically-significant differences were found between patients who underwent aortic valve repair plus root re-implantation, compared to those who underwent isolated aortic valve repair (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: aortic valve repair including aortic annulus stabilization is a safe surgical option with either tricuspid or bicuspid valves; even more so if associated with root re-implantation. Patients with calcified bicuspid valves have poor results.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available