Valve-Sparing Root Replacement Compared With Composite Valve Graft Procedures in Patients With Aortic Root Dilation
- PMID: 27765186
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2016.07.767
Valve-Sparing Root Replacement Compared With Composite Valve Graft Procedures in Patients With Aortic Root Dilation
Abstract
Background: Although aortic valve-sparing (AVS) operations are established alternatives to composite valve graft (CVG) procedures for patients with aortic root aneurysms, comparative long-term outcomes are lacking.
Objectives: This study sought to compare the results of patients undergoing AVS procedures with those undergoing CVG operations.
Methods: From 1990 to 2010, a total of 616 patients age <70 years and without aortic stenosis underwent elective aortic root surgery (AVS, n = 253; CVG with a bioprosthesis [bio-CVG], n = 180; CVG with a mechanical prosthesis [m-CVG], n = 183). A propensity score was used as a covariate to adjust for unbalanced variables in group comparisons. Mean age was 46 ± 14 years, 83.3% were male, and mean follow-up was 9.8 ± 5.3 years.
Results: Patients undergoing AVS had higher rates of Marfan syndrome and lower rates of bicuspid aortic valve than those undergoing bio-CVG or m-CVG procedures. In-hospital mortality (0.3%) and stroke rate (1.3%) were similar among groups. After adjusting for clinical covariates, both bio-CVG and m-CVG procedures were associated with increased long-term major adverse valve-related events compared with patients undergoing AVS (hazard ratio [HR]: 3.4, p = 0.005; and HR: 5.2, p < 0.001, respectively). They were also associated with increased cardiac mortality (HR: 7.0, p = 0.001; and HR: 6.4, p = 0.003). Furthermore, bio-CVG procedures were associated with increased risk of reoperations (HR: 6.9; p = 0.003), and m-CVG procedures were associated with increased risk of anticoagulant-related hemorrhage (HR: 5.6; p = 0.008) compared with AVS procedures.
Conclusions: This comparative study showed that AVS procedures were associated with reduced cardiac mortality and valve-related complications when compared with bio-CVG and m-CVG. AVS is the treatment of choice for young patients with aortic root aneurysm and normal or near-normal aortic cusps.
Keywords: aortic root aneurysms; outcomes; surgery.
Copyright © 2016 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Comment in
-
Aortic Valve-Sparing Surgery: Yes, But Not for Every Patient and Select the Center Very Carefully.J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016 Oct 25;68(17):1848-1850. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2016.08.020. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016. PMID: 27765187 No abstract available.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
