Late results of aortic valve repair for isolated severe aortic regurgitation

ObjectivesThe objectives were to analyze the long-term outcomes of tricuspid aortic valve repair for isolated severe aortic regurgitation and the impact of different annuloplasty techniques.MethodsThe study cohort consists of 127 consecutive patients who received aortic valve repair for isolated severe aortic regurgitation in the tricuspid aortic valve between 1996 and 2019 in our institution. Exclusion criteria were aorta dilatation (≥45 mm), connective tissue disease, active endocarditis, type A dissection, and rheumatic disease. Mean age of patients was 55.6 ± 16 years, and 80% were male. Median follow-up was 6.4 years. Time-to-event analysis was performed, as well as risk of death, reoperation, and aortic regurgitation recurrence.ResultsCusp repair was performed in 117 patients (92%), and annuloplasty was performed in 126 patients (99%) with Cabrol stitch (73%), reimplantation technique (19.7%), or ring annuloplasty (6.3%). There was no hospital mortality. At 10 and 14 years, overall survival was 81% ± 5% and 71% ± 6%, respectively, and freedom from reoperation was 80% ± 5% and 73% ± 6%, respectively. Age and left coronary cusp repair were independent predictors of reoperation. Freedom from recurrent severe aortic regurgitation (>2+) was 73% ± 5% and 66% ± 7% at 10 and 12 years, respectively. Age, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter, and patch repair were independent predictors of recurrent aortic regurgitation. Type of annuloplasty had no impact on survival or reoperation.ConclusionsAortic valve repair for isolated severe aortic regurgitation in the tricuspid aortic valve is a safe procedure, and durability at 14 years is acceptable. In this study, the annuloplasty technique did not influence repair durability as was found in bicuspid aortic valve repair or aortic valve–sparing surgery. Severity of cusp pathology seems to be the main determinant of repair durability.     

Improved Outcomes of Reimplantation vs Remodeling in Marfan Syndrome: A Propensity-Matched Study

BackgroundValve-sparing root replacement (VSRR) has excellent outcomes when performed in experienced centers in well-selected patients. It is suggested that reimplantation of the aortic valve may have better durability than remodeling in patients with Marfan syndrome (MFS), although long-term comparative data are limited.MethodsBetween 1988 and 2018, 194 patients with MFS underwent VSRR at our institution. From these, we derived a propensity-matched cohort of 68 patients (44 who underwent reimplantation and 24 who had remodeling). Early outcomes included death and perioperative complications. Late outcomes were survival, probability of aortic insufficiency, and reintervention up to 20 years of follow-up. Median follow-up was 17.8 years (interquartile range, 12.0-20.6 years) for the entire matched cohort.ResultsBaseline variables were similar between reimplantation and remodeling patients after matching: age (39 ± 12 vs 40 ± 13 years, P = .75) and male sex (28 [64%] vs 15 [63%], P = 1.0). Similar 20-year survival was observed after reimplantation compared with remodeling (82% vs 72%, P = .20), whereas the probability of developing greater than mild aortic insufficiency at 20 years was increased after remodeling (5.8% vs 13%, P = .013). More patients underwent reoperation on the aortic valve after a remodeling procedure than after reimplantation of the aortic valve (18% vs 0%, P = .018).ConclusionsVSRR provides excellent long-term survival and freedom from valve-related complications outcomes in patients with MFS. Reimplantation of the aortic valve was associated with a lower risk of aortic valve reoperation and aortic insufficiency than the remodeling procedure after 2 decades of follow-up.     

Biological versus mechanical prostheses for aortic valve replacement

ObjectivesLong-term real-world outcomes are critical for informing decisions about biological (Bio) or mechanical (Mech) prostheses for aortic valve replacement, particularly in patients aged between 50 and 65 years. The objective was to compare long-term survival and major adverse cardiac and cardiovascular events (ie, stroke, reoperation, and major bleeding) within this population.MethodsThis was a multicenter observational study including all patients aged between 50 and 65 years who underwent an aortic valve replacement because of severe isolated aortic stenosis between the years 2000 and 2018. A total of 5215 patients from 27 Spanish hospitals were registered with a follow-up of 15 years. Multivariable analyses, including a 2:1 propensity score matching (1822 Mech and 911 Bio) and competing risks analyses were applied.ResultsBio prostheses were implanted in 19% of patients (n = 992). No significant differences were observed between matched groups in long-term survival (hazard ratio [HR], 1.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.88-1.47; P = .33). Stroke rates were higher for Mech prostheses, but not significant (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.50-1.03; P = .07). Finally, higher rates of major bleeding were found in the Mech group (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.49-0.87; P = .004), whereas reoperation was more frequent among the Bio group (HR, 3.04; 95% CI, 1.80-5.14; P < .001). Bio prostheses increased from 13% in the period from 2000 to 2008 to 24% in 2009 to 2018.ConclusionsLong-term survival was comparable among groups in patients between 50 and 65 years of age. Mech prostheses were associated with a higher risk of major bleeding, whereas Bio prostheses entailed higher reoperation rates. Bio prostheses seem a reasonable choice for patients between 50 and 65 years in Spain.     

Long-term survival after xenograft versus homograft aortic root replacement: Results from a prospective randomized trial

ObjectiveThe study objective was to investigate the long-term survival of patients undergoing xenograft versus homograft full root aortic valve replacement.MethodsA total of 166 patients requiring aortic valve surgery were randomized to undergo the Freestyle (Medtronic Inc, Minneapolis, Minn) bioprosthesis (N = 90) or a homograft (N = 76) full root aortic valve replacement between 1997 and 2005 in a single institution. Six patients randomly assigned to the homograft crossed over to the Freestyle bioprosthesis because of the unavailability of suitably sized homografts. All surgeons were required to adhere to the standard surgical technique for homograft root implantation previously described. Follow-up was 98.5% complete.ResultsThe mean age of the study population was 65 ± 8 years. Coronary artery bypass grafting was associated with root aortic valve replacement in 76 of 166 patients (46%, P = not significant between groups), and overall hospital mortality was 4.8% (8/166, P = not significant between groups). Median follow-up was 13.8 years (range, 0-21.8 years; 2033 patient-years). The Kaplan–Meier survival analysis showed that there was no significant difference in overall survival between the 2 arms at 5, 10, and 15 years. Twenty-year survival was 28.3% ± 5% for the Freestyle group versus 25.1% ± 5.7% for the homograft group (P = .90), which was comparable to the age- and sex-matched UK general population. The freedom from aortic valve reoperation at 20 years was comparable for the Freestyle group versus the homograft group (67.9% ± 8.8% vs 67.2% ± 10.3%, respectively; P = .74).ConclusionsThis is the first study to investigate the long-term survival of xenograft versus homograft full root aortic valve replacement from a prospective randomized trial. The observed 20-year overall survival and freedom from aortic valve reoperation serve as a benchmark for future studies on interventions for aortic valve disease in the elderly.     

Congenital aortic and truncal valve reconstruction using the Ozaki technique: Short-term clinical results

ObjectivesAortic valve reconstruction (AVRec) with neocuspidization or the Ozaki procedure with complete cusp replacement for aortic valve disease has excellent mid-term results in adults. Limited results of AVRec in pediatric patients have been reported. We report our early outcomes of the Ozaki procedure for congenital aortic and truncal valve disease.MethodsA retrospective analysis was performed on all 57 patients with congenital aortic and truncal valve disease who had a 3-leaflet Ozaki procedure at a single institution from August 2015 to February 2019. Outcome measures included mortality, surgical or catheter-based reinterventions, and echocardiographic measurements.ResultsTwenty-four patients had aortic regurgitation (AR), 6 had aortic stenosis (AS), and 27 patients had AS/AR. Two patients had quadricuspid valves, 26 had tricuspid, 20 had bicuspid, and 9 had unicusp aortic valves. Four patients had truncus arteriosus. Thirty-four patients had previous aortic valve repairs and 5 had replacements. Preoperative echocardiography mean annular diameter was 20.90 ± 4.98 cm and peak gradient for patients with AS/AR was 53.62 ± 22.20 mm Hg. Autologous, Photofix, and CardioCel bovine pericardia were used in 20, 35, and 2 patients. Eight patients required aortic root enlargement and 20 had sinus enlargement. Fifty-one patients had concomitant procedures. Median intensive care unit and hospital length of stay were 1.87 and 6.38 days. There were no hospital mortalities or early conversions to valve replacement. At discharge, 98% of patients had mild or less regurgitation and peak aortic gradient was 16.9 ± 9.5 mm Hg. Two patients underwent aortic valve replacement. At median follow-up of 8.1 months, 96% and 91% of patients had less than moderate regurgitation and stenosis, respectively.ConclusionsThe AVRec procedure has acceptable short-term results and should be considered for valve reconstruction in pediatric patients with congenital aortic and truncal valve disease. Longer-term follow-up is necessary to determine the optimal patch material and late valve function and continued annular growth.     

The fate of aortic valve after rheumatic mitral valve surgery

ObjectiveDeterioration of the native aortic valve function by a late progression of rheumatic disease is not infrequent in patients who underwent rheumatic mitral valve surgery; however, this phenomenon has not been clearly quantified.MethodsA total of 1155 consecutive patients (age 52.0 ± 12.9 years; 807 female) who underwent rheumatic mitral valve surgery without concomitant aortic valve surgery from 1997 to 2015 were enrolled. The primary end point was the composite of progression to severe aortic valve dysfunction or a requirement of subsequent aortic valve replacements during follow-up. To determine the risk factors of the primary outcome, we performed the generalized linear mixed model.ResultsThe baseline severities of aortic valve were none to trivial in 880 patients (76.2%), mild in 256 patients (22.2%), and moderate in 19 patients (1.6%). The latest 1062 echocardiographic assessments (91.9%; median, 81.2 postoperative months; interquartile range, 37.3-132.1 months) demonstrated 26 cases (0.33%/patient-year) meeting the primary end point during follow-up. Cumulative incidence of the primary end point at 10 years was 0.4% ± 0.3% and 7.4% ± 2.5% depending on the presence of mild or greater aortic valve dysfunction at baseline (P < .01). In multivariable analyses, aortic valve peak pressure gradient (odds ratio, 1.14; 95% confidence interval, 1.10-1.20), aortic regurgitation degree (mild over none: odds ratio, 3.26; 95% confidence interval, 1.15-9.23), and time (odds ratio, 1.30; 95% confidence interval 1.19-1.41) were significantly associated with the occurrence of the primary end point.ConclusionsProgression of severe aortic valve dysfunction and the need for aortic valve replacement are uncommon in patients undergoing rheumatic mitral valve surgery. However, such events were relatively common among those with mild or greater aortic valve dysfunction at the time of mitral valve surgery.     

Clinical impact of the heart team on the outcomes of surgical aortic valve replacement among octogenarians

ObjectivesThe effectiveness of a multidisciplinary heart team in the management of patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis is unknown. This study evaluated the impact of a heart team on the outcomes of surgical aortic valve replacement in octogenarians.MethodsBetween May 2007 and January 2016, 528 patients aged 80 years or more were referred to our institutional heart team for a transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Among these, 101 were redirected to surgical aortic valve replacement (heart team group). These patients were compared with a surgical aortic valve replacement cohort (n = 506) without prior heart team screening (non-heart team group), taken from the same time period. Propensity score matching with bootstrap analysis was performed; 76 heart team patients were matched to 76 non-heart team patients. Early and late outcomes including survival and readmission for cardiovascular causes were compared.ResultsMatched subgroups were largely comparable; congestive heart failure and echocardiographic pulmonary hypertension were more prevalent in the heart team group. In-hospital mortality was significantly lower in the matched heart team group (0% vs 6.0%, bootstrap mean difference 6.0%, 95% confidence interval, 2.2-9.8). The risk of stroke, low cardiac output state, reexploration for bleeding, pneumonia, and prolonged ventilation was also significantly lower in the heart team group. There was no significant between-group difference regarding late survival (hazard ratio, 0.86, 95% confidence interval, 0.55-1.33, P = .49) or readmission for cardiovascular reasons (hazard ratio, 0.70, 95% confidence interval, 0.41-1.20, P = .19).ConclusionsPreoperative multidisciplinary assessment of octogenarians by a heart team was associated with lower in-hospital mortality and adverse events after surgical aortic valve replacement.     

Endovascular treatment of complicated versus uncomplicated acute type B aortic dissection

ObjectiveThe study objective was to analyze the outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair performed for complicated and uncomplicated acute type B aortic dissections.MethodsPatients from WL Gore's Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment who underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair for acute type B aortic dissections were included, and data were retrospectively analyzed.ResultsOf 5014 patients enrolled in the Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment, 172 underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair for acute type B aortic dissections. Of these repairs, 102 were for complicated acute type B aortic dissections and 70 were for uncomplicated acute type B aortic dissections. There were 46 (45.1%) procedures related to aortic branch vessels versus 15 (21.4%) in complicated type B aortic dissections and uncomplicated type B aortic dissections (P = .002). The mean length of stay was 14.3 ± 10.6 days (median, 11; range, 2-75) versus 9.8 ± 7.9 days (median, 8; range, 0-42) in those with complicated type B aortic dissections versus those with uncomplicated acute type B aortic dissections (P < .001). Thirty-day mortality was not different between groups (complicated type B aortic dissections 2.9% vs uncomplicated acute type B aortic dissections 1.4%, P = .647), as well as aortic complications (8.8% vs 5.7%, P = .449). Aortic event-free survival was 62.9% ± 37.1% versus 70.6% ± 29.3% at 3 years (P = .696).ConclusionsIn the Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment, thoracic endovascular aortic repair results for complicated type B aortic dissections versus uncomplicated acute type B aortic dissections showed that 30-day mortality and perioperative complications were equally low for both. The midterm outcome was positive. These data confirm that thoracic endovascular aortic repair as the first-line strategy for treating complicated type B dissections is associated with a low risk of complications. Further studies with longer follow-up are necessary to define the role of thoracic endovascular aortic repair in uncomplicated acute type B dissections compared with medical therapy. However, in the absence of level A evidence from randomized trials, results of the uncomplicated acute type B aortic dissection patient cohort treated with thoracic endovascular aortic repair from registries are important to understand the related risk and benefit.     

The fate of aortic root and aortic regurgitation after supracoronary ascending aortic replacement for acute type A aortic dissection

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to evaluate the fate of the preserved aortic root after supracoronary aortic replacement for acute type A aortic dissection.MethodsBetween October 1999 and March 2018, 339 patients underwent supracoronary aortic replacement for acute type A aortic dissection at our institution. Late outcomes were evaluated, including overall survival, aortic-related death, and aortic root–related reoperation. The median follow-up was 3.7 years (1.4-8.4 years).ResultsOperative mortality was 46 patients (13.6%). The cumulative incidences at 5 years for aortic root–related reoperation, aortic-related death, and non–aortic related death were 2.5%, 14.5% and 12.4%, respectively. Multivariable Cox hazard regression analysis demonstrated greater sinus of Valsalva diameter and number of commissural detachments to be significant risk factors for a composite outcome consisting of aortic-related death or aortic root–related reoperation. Mixed-effects regression demonstrated that sinus of Valsalva diameter significantly increased with time (P < .001), and aortic regurgitation significantly worsened (P < .001).ConclusionsSinus of Valsalva diameter and commissural detachment were independent predictors of unfavorable outcomes after supracoronary aortic replacement. Close follow-up is particularly necessary for these patients, and aortic root replacement at the time of initial operation may lead to more favorable late outcomes.     

Ministernotomy compared with right anterior minithoracotomy for aortic valve surgery

ObjectivesMinisternotomy and right anterior minithoracotomy are the 2 main techniques applied for minimally invasive aortic valve replacement. The goal of this study is to compare early and long-term outcomes of both techniques.MethodsThe data of 2419 patients undergoing isolated minimally invasive aortic valve replacement between 1999 and 2019 were prospectively collected. Retrospectively, patients were divided into the ministernotomy group (n = 1352) and the minithoracotomy group (n = 1067).ResultsAfter propensity score matching, 986 patients remained in each group. Operation time and rate of conversion to full sternotomy were significantly higher in the minithoracotomy group than in the ministernotomy group (184.6 ± 45.2 vs 241.3 ± 68.6, relative risk, 2.54, P = .005 and .09 vs .23, relative risk, 1.45, P = .013, respectively). The 30-day mortality, excluding cardiac death, was lower in the ministernotomy group than in the minithoracotomy group (0.012 vs 0.028, relative risk, 1.41, P = .011, respectively); the intensive care unit length of stay (12.4 vs 16.5, relative risk, 1.62, P = .037, respectively) and hospital length of stay (5.4 vs 8.7, relative risk, 1.74 P = .028, respectively) were significantly longer in the minithoracotomy group. The minithoracotomy surgical approach was the strongest independent predictor of early mortality (odds ratio, 4.24 [1.67-7.35], P = .002). The actuarial survival by Kaplan–Meier analysis at 1, 3, 5, 10, and 20 years was significantly better in the ministernotomy group than in the minithoracotomy group (P = .0001). Actuarial freedom from reoperation at 5 years was 97.3% ± 4.4% in the ministernotomy group versus 95.8% ± 5.2% in the minithoracotomy group (P = .087).ConclusionsMinimally invasive aortic valve replacement using ministernotomy is associated with reduced operative time, intensive care unit stay, hospital length of stay, and postoperative morbidities and incisional pain, and improves early and long-term mortality.     

Valve-sparing root replacement in patients with bicuspid aortopathy: An analysis of cusp repair strategy and valve durability

ObjectiveValve-sparing root replacement using reimplantation techniques is increasingly applied to bicuspid aortopathy. Long-term durability of cusp repair is unclear. We analyze midterm results using a conservative approach to cusp repair.MethodsFrom 2006 to 2018, 327 patients underwent valve-sparing reimplantation, 66 with bicuspid valves. Leaflets were analyzed after reimplantation. A majority (51/66) required no cusp repair. Fifteen patients had cusp repair limited to closure of unfused raphe or central plication. Patients were followed by echocardiography.ResultsMean age of patients was 44.7 ± 12.3 years. The cusp repair group had a higher incidence of preoperative moderate (10% vs 40%) or severe (4% vs 33.3%) aortic insufficiency (P < .001). There was no operative mortality or major complication. Mean follow-up was 51.6 ± 40.8 months. On postoperative echocardiography, incidence of none, trace, or mild aortic insufficiency was 41.3% (19/46), 43.5% (20/46), and 15.2% (7/46) in the no cusp repair group and 40% (6/15), 40% (6/15), and 20% (3/15) in the cusp repair group, respectively (P = .907). Few patients progressed in degree of aortic insufficiency. No patients required reoperation. At 5 years, freedom from any aortic insufficiency was 46.9% versus 15.8% (P = .013), and freedom from greater than trace aortic insufficiency was 59.1% versus 36.9% (P = .002) due to the higher rate of postoperative trace and mild aortic insufficiency with cusp repair. There was no difference in freedom from greater than mild aortic insufficiency (92.1% vs 100%; P = .33).ConclusionsValve-sparing root replacement is reliably performed with bicuspid aortic valves whether or not cusp reconstruction is necessary. Few patients progress to greater than mild aortic insufficiency. Need for reoperation is rare in midterm follow-up.     

Lessons from reoperations for mitral stenosis after mitral valve repair

BackgroundThe durability of mitral valve repair (MVr) is usually defined by the absence of recurrent significant mitral regurgitation. Postrepair mitral stenosis (MS) is a less frequent and less studied mode of failure of MVr. We analyzed our experience in patients who underwent reoperation for postrepair MS to characterize mechanisms resulting in MS and to summarize reoperative surgical strategies and mid-term outcomes.MethodsUsing a prospective database, we retrospectively analyzed data on 35 consecutive patients who underwent reoperation for symptomatic moderate to severe MS between January 1, 2011, and February 1, 2020.ResultsThe mean patient age was 61.4 ± 11.4 years, and 69% were female. The median annuloplasty ring size used at the initial repair was 28 mm (interquartile range, 26-30 mm). Additional repair techniques at the initial operation included leaflet resection in 12 patients (34%) and commissuroplasty or edge-to-edge repair in 6 patients (18%). At reoperation, the most common mechanism of MS was pannus ingrowth in 20 patients (57%), leaflet calcification in 12 (34%), commissural fusion in 5 (14%), and tunnel effect (functional MS) in 3 (9%). Twenty-two patients (63%) underwent valve replacement, and 13 (37%) underwent valve re-repair. In patients who underwent re-repair, annuloplasty revision was performed in all patients, with 6 patients (46%) converted from complete ring to band, 4 (11%) converted from ring to pericardial annuloplasty, 2 (6%) converted to no annuloplasty, and 1 (8%) with annuloplasty ring upsizing. There were no in-hospital or 1-year mortalities. Survival at the 5-year follow-up was 93.9%.ConclusionsMS causing late failure of MVr is frequently associated with smaller ring sizes and inflammatory or calcific changes in the valve. Highly selected patients may be good candidates for mitral valve re-repair.     

Is hemiarch replacement adequate in acute type A aortic dissection repair in patients with arch branch vessel dissection without cerebral malperfusion?

ObjectiveThe study objective was to determine if hemiarch replacement is an adequate arch management strategy for patients with acute type A aortic dissection and arch branch vessel dissection but no cerebral malperfusion.MethodsFrom January 2008 to August 2019, 479 patients underwent open acute type A aortic dissection repair. After excluding those with aggressive arch replacement (n = 168), cerebral malperfusion syndrome (n = 34), and indeterminable arch branch vessel dissection (n = 1), 276 patients with an acute type A aortic dissection without cerebral malperfusion syndrome who underwent hemiarch replacement comprised this study. Patients were then divided into those with arch branch vessel dissection (n = 133) and those with no arch branch vessel dissection (n = 143).ResultsThe median age of the entire cohort was 62 years, with the arch branch vessel dissection group being younger (60 vs 62 years, P = .048). Both groups had similar aortic arch and descending thoracic aortic diameters, with significantly more DeBakey type I dissections (100% vs 80%) in the arch branch vessel dissection group. The arch branch vessel dissection group had more aortic root replacement (36% vs 27%, P = .0035) and longer aortic crossclamp times (153 vs 128 minutes, P = .007). Postoperative outcomes were similar between the arch branch vessel dissection and no arch branch vessel dissection groups, including stroke (10% vs 5%, P = .12) and operative morality (7% vs 5%, P = .51). The arch branch vessel dissection group had a significantly greater cumulative incidence of reoperation (8-year: 19% vs 4%, P = .04) with a hazard ratio of 2.89 (95% confidence interval, 1.01-8.27; P = .048), which was similar between groups among only DeBakey type I dissections (8-year: 19% vs 5%, P = .11). The 8-year survival was similar between the arch branch vessel dissection and no arch branch vessel dissection groups (76% vs 74%, P = .30).ConclusionsHemiarch replacement was adequate for patients with acute type A aortic dissection with arch branch vessel dissection without cerebral malperfusion syndrome, but carried a higher risk of late reoperation.     

Durability and clinical experience using a bovine pericardial prosthetic aortic valve

ObjectivesTo report the implant experience and long-term outcomes from a large tertiary care referral center on surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) with a contemporary stented pericardial bioprosthesis with anticalcification treatment.MethodsPatients underwent SAVR using the Trifecta valve at a single institution. Endpoints included procedural outcomes, adverse events, prosthesis–patient mismatch (PPM), long-term survival, and valve durability. Follow-up included 30-day, 6-month, and annual assessments. Treatment for structural valve deterioration (SVD) included surgical explant and valve-in-valve (V-in-V) transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).ResultsSAVR was performed in 1241 patients (median age, 73.5 ± 6.4 years; 54% male; median logistic EuroSCORE, 7.8) with concomitant procedures in 713 cases (57.5%). Intraprocedural mortality was 1.4%, and 30-day mortality was 6.0%. At hospital discharge, 68 patients (5.5%) had moderate PPM, and no patients had severe PPM. Adverse events included cardiac arrhythmias (44.7%, mostly atrial fibrillation), respiratory failure (22.9%), acute renal failure requiring temporary renal replacement therapy (12.9%), and low cardiac output syndrome (3.3%). Follow-up data were available over a total of 5469 patient-years (median duration of follow-up, 4.7 years). Freedom at 8 years from all-cause mortality, valve-related mortality, reoperation for SVD (redo SAVR or V-in-V TAVI), and endocarditis were 78.4%, 98.0%, 93.3%, and 96.5%, respectively. Of the 30 patients with SVD, 17 were treated by V-in-V TAVI and 13 underwent surgical explant.ConclusionsOutcomes from this large single-center cohort at increased surgical risk demonstrate excellent long-term durability of the Trifecta valve for SAVR and feasibility of treating SVD by V-in-V TAVI.     

Outcomes of open repairs of chronic distal aortic dissection anatomically amenable to endovascular repairs

ObjectiveTo review short-term outcomes and long-term survival and durability after open surgical repairs for chronic distal aortic dissections in patients whose anatomy was amenable to thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).MethodsBetween February 1991 and August 2017, we repaired chronic distal dissections in 697 patients. Of those patients, we enrolled 427 with anatomy amenable to TEVAR, which included 314 descending thoracic aortic aneurysms (DTAAs) and 105 extent I thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). One hundred eighty-five patients (44%) had a history of type A dissection, and 33 (7.9%) had a previous DTAA/TAAA repair. Variables were assessed with logistic regression for 30-day mortality and Cox regression for long-term mortality. Time-to-event analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier methods.ResultsThirty-day mortality was 8.4% (n = 36). In all, 22 patients (5.2%) developed motor deficit (paraplegia/paraparesis), and 17 (4.0%) experienced stroke. Multivariable analysis identified low estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR; <60 mL/min/1.73 m²), previous DTAA/TAAA repair, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) as associated with 30-day mortality. Patients without all 3 risk factors had a 30-day mortality rate of 2.6%. During a median follow-up of 6.5 years, 160 patients died. The survival rate was 81% at 1 year and 61% at 10 years. Cox regression analysis identified preoperative aortic rupture, eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m², previous DTAA/TAAA repair, COPD, and age >60 years as predictive of long-term mortality. Forty-five patients required subsequent aortic procedures, including 8 reinterventions to the treated segment. Freedom from any aortic procedures was 85% at 10 years, and aortic procedure-free survival was 45% at 10 years. Hereditary aortic disease was the sole predictor for any aortic interventions (hazard ratio, 3.2; P = .004).ConclusionsOpen surgical repair provided satisfactory low neurologic complication rates and durable repairs in chronic distal aortic dissection. Patients without low eGFR, redo, and COPD are the low-risk surgical candidates and may benefit from open surgical repair at centers with similar experience to ours. Patients with hereditary aortic disease warrant close surveillance.     

Intervention rates and outcomes in medically managed uncomplicated descending thoracic aortic dissections

ObjectiveTo evaluate the long-term incidence and outcome of aortic interventions for medically managed uncomplicated thoracic aortic dissections.MethodsBetween January 2012 and December 2018, 91 patients were discharged home with an uncomplicated, medically treated aortic dissection (involving the descending aorta with or without aortic arch involvement, no ascending involvement). After a median period of 4 (first quartile: 2, third quartile: 11) months, 30 patients (33%) required an aortic intervention. Patient characteristics, radiographic, treatment, and follow-up data were compared for patients with and without aortic interventions. A competing risk regression model was analyzed to identify independent predictors of aortic intervention and to predict the risk for intervention.ResultsPatients who underwent aortic interventions had significantly larger thoracic (P = .041) and abdominal (P = .015) aortic diameters, the dissection was significantly longer (P = .035), there were more communications between both lumina (P = .040), and the first communication was significantly closer to the left subclavian artery (P = .049). A descending thoracic aortic diameter exceeding 45 mm was predictive for an aortic intervention (P = .001; subdistribution hazard ratio: 3.51). The risk for aortic intervention was 27% ± 10% and 36% ± 11% after 1 and 3 years, respectively. Fourteen patients (47%) underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair, 11 patients (37%) thoracic endovascular aortic repair and left carotid to subclavian bypass, 3 patients (10%) total arch replacement with the frozen elephant trunk technique, and 2 patients (7%) thoracoabdominal aortic replacement. We observed no in-hospital mortality.ConclusionsThe need for secondary aortic interventions in patients with initially medically managed, uncomplicated descending aortic dissections is substantial. The full spectrum of aortic treatment options (endovascular, hybrid, conventional open surgical) is required in these patients.     

Sutureless versus conventional bioprostheses for aortic valve replacement in severe symptomatic aortic valve stenosis

ObjectiveSutureless aortic valves are a novel option for aortic valve replacement. We sought to demonstrate noninferiority of sutureless versus standard bioprostheses in severe symptomatic aortic stenosis.MethodsThe Perceval Sutureless Implant Versus Standard-Aortic Valve Replacement is a prospective, randomized, adaptive, open-label trial. Patients were randomized (March 2016 to September 2018) to aortic valve replacement with a sutureless or stented valve using conventional or minimally invasive approach. Primary outcome was freedom from major adverse cerebral and cardiovascular events (composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or valve reintervention) at 1 year.ResultsAt 47 centers (12 countries), 910 patients were randomized to sutureless (n = 453) or conventional stented (n = 457) valves; mean ages were 75.4 ± 5.6 and 75.0 ± 6.1 years, and 50.1% and 44.9% were female, respectively. Mean ± standard deviation Society of Thoracic Surgeons scores were 2.4 ± 1.7 and 2.1 ± 1.3, and a ministernotomy approach was used in 50.4% and 47.3%, respectively. Concomitant procedures were performed with similar rates in both groups. Noninferiority was demonstrated for major adverse cerebral and cardiovascular events at 1 year, whereas aortic valve hemodynamics improved equally in both groups. Use of sutureless valves significantly reduced surgical times (mean extracorporeal circulation times: 71.0 ± 34.1 minutes vs 87.8 ± 33.9 minutes; mean crossclamp times: 48.5 ± 24.7 vs 65.2 ± 23.6; both P < .0001), but resulted in a higher rate of pacemaker implantation (11.1% vs 3.6% at 1 year). Incidences of perivalvular and central leak were similar.ConclusionsSutureless valves were noninferior to stented valves with respect to major adverse cerebral and cardiovascular events at 1 year in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement (alone or with coronary artery bypass grafting). This suggests that sutureless valves should be considered as part of a comprehensive valve program.     

Is anterior mitral valve leaflet length important in outcome of septal myectomy for obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy?

ObjectivesElongation of mitral valve leaflets is a phenotypic feature of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, and some surgeons advocate plication of the anterior leaflet at the time of septal myectomy. The present study investigates mitral valve leaflet length and outcomes of patients undergoing septal myectomy for obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.MethodsWe reviewed the records and echocardiograms of 564 patients who underwent transaortic septal myectomy for obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy between February 2015 and April 2018. Extended septal myectomy without plication of the anterior leaflet was the standard procedure. From intraoperative prebypass transesophageal echocardiograms, we measured anterior and posterior mitral valve leaflets and their coaptation length. For comparison, we performed these mitral valve leaflet measurements in 90 patients who underwent isolated coronary artery bypass grafting and 92 patients undergoing aortic valve replacement in the same period. Among patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy undergoing septal myectomy, we assessed left ventricular outflow tract gradient relief and 1-year survival in relation to leaflet length.ResultsMedian patient age (interquartile range) was 60.3 (50.2-67.7) years, and 54.1% were male. Concomitant mitral valve repair was performed in 36 patients (6.4%), and mitral valve replacement was performed in 8 patients (1.4%), primarily for intrinsic mitral valve disease. Patients in the hypertrophic cardiomyopathy cohort had significantly longer mitral valve leaflet measurements compared with patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting or aortic valve replacement (P < .001 for all 3 measurements). Preoperative resting left ventricular outflow tract gradients were not related to leaflet length (<30 mm, median 49 [21, 81.5] mm Hg vs ≥30 mm, 50.5 [21, 77] mm Hg; P = .76). Further, gradient reduction after myectomy was not related to leaflet length; patients with less than 30 mm anterior leaflet length had a median gradient reduction of 33 (69, 6) mm Hg compared with 36.5 (62, 6) mm Hg for patients with leaflet length 30 mm or more (P = .36). Anterior mitral valve leaflet length was not associated with increased 1-year mortality (P = .758).ConclusionsOur study confirms previous findings that patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy have slight (5 mm) elongation of mitral valve leaflets. In contrast to other reports, increased anterior mitral valve leaflet length was not associated with higher left ventricular outflow tract gradients. Importantly, we found no significant relationship between anterior mitral valve leaflet length and postoperative left ventricular outflow tract resting gradients or gradient relief. Thus, in the absence of intrinsic mitral valve disease, transaortic septal myectomy with focus on extending the excision beyond the point of septal contact is sufficient for almost all patients.     

Knowledge,attitudes, and practice preferences in the surgical threshold for ascending aortic aneurysm among Canadian cardiac surgeons

ObjectiveThe survey aimed to assess the practice patterns of Canadian cardiac surgeons on the size threshold at which patients with ascending aortic aneurysm would be offered surgery.MethodsA 18-question electronic survey was electronically distributed to 148 practicing cardiac surgeons in Canada via email from January to August 2020. Questions presented clinical scenarios focusing on modifying a single variable, and respondents were asked to identify their surgical size threshold for each of the clinical scenarios.ResultsThe individual response rate was 62.0% (91/148) and institutional response rate was 89.3% (25/29). For an incidental asymptomatic ascending aortic aneurysm in a 60-year-old otherwise-healthy male patient with a tricuspid aortic valve and bicuspid aortic valve of 1.9 m², 20.2% of the respondents would recommend surgery when the aneurysm was <5.5 cm. A significant number of surgeons modified their surgical threshold in response to changes to BSA, bicuspid aortic valve, growth rate, age, occupation, symptom, and family history (P < .01). Notably, if the patient had a bicuspid aortic valve, 41.0% of respondents lowered their threshold for surgery, with only 43.0% recommending surgery at ≥5.5 cm (P < .01).ConclusionsPractice variations exist in the current size threshold for surgery of ascending aortic aneurysms in Canada. These differences between surgeons are further accentuated in the context of bicuspid aortic valve, smaller body stature, younger age, low growth rate, family history, and for the performance of isometric exercise. These represent important areas where future prospective studies are required to inform best practice.