Reoperation of Left Heart Valve Bioprostheses According to Age at Implantation

Aortic Valve Insufficiency in the Teenager and Young Adult

The contents of this article were presented in the session “Aortic insufficiency in the teenager” at the congenital parallel symposium of the 2013 Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) annual meeting. The accompanying articles detail the approaches of aortic valve repair and the Ross procedure.1,2 The current article focuses on prosthetic valve replacement. For many young patients requiring aortic valve surgery, either aortic valve repair or a Ross procedure provides a good option. The advantages include avoidance of anticoagulation and potential for growth. In other patients, a prosthetic valve is an appropriate alternative. This article discusses the current state of knowledge regarding mechanical and bioprosthetic valve prostheses and their specific advantages relative to valve repair or a Ross procedure. In current practice, young patients requiring aortic valve surgery frequently undergo valve replacement with a prosthetic valve. In STS adult cardiac database, among patients ≤30 years of age undergoing aortic valve surgery, 34% had placement of a mechanical valve, 51% had placement of a bioprosthetic valve, 9% had aortic valve repair, and 2% had a Ross procedure. In the STS congenital database, among patients 12 to 30 years of age undergoing aortic valve surgery, 21% had placement of a mechanical valve, 18% had placement of a bioprosthetic valve, 30% had aortic valve repair, and 24% had a Ross procedure. In the future, the balance among these options may be altered by design improvements in prosthetic valves, alternatives to warfarin, the development of new patch materials for valve repair, and techniques to avoid Ross autograft failure.

Mitral valve surgery in elderly patients with mitral regurgitation: repair or replacement with tissue valve?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The fastest growing demographic in North America is the elderly. Significant mitral regurgitation is present in more than 10% of this population. There are sparse clinical data to inform decisions regarding the optimal timing of operation and the appropriate operative intervention for this large population of patients with severe mitral regurgitation.

RECENT FINDINGS

Mitral valve surgery can be safely performed in most elderly patients with severe mitral regurgitation. The best outcomes occur when operative intervention is performed early, before advanced symptoms of heart failure develop. In elderly patients with mitral regurgitation, mitral valve repair is associated with superior early and late results compared with replacement. Survival after mitral valve repair among elderly patients is equivalent to a normal age-matched population.

SUMMARY

Elderly patients with severe mitral regurgitation should be referred for operation before significant symptoms develop. Mitral valve repair is favoured over replacement whenever feasible and is associated with satisfactory early and long-term results. If repair is impossible or the likelihood of durable repair seems low, valve replacement with a bioprosthetic valve should be performed. Further prospective clinical trials are essential to define the role of screening for this prevalent condition and to identify which subgroups of elderly patients will benefit most from early surgical intervention.

Use of transcatheter heart valves for a valve-in-valve implantation in patients with degenerated aortic bioprosthesis: technical considerations and results

OBJECTIVE

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation has been used to treat high-risk patients with bioprosthetic valve degeneration (valve-in-valve). We report our experience with transcatheter aortic valve implantation in the treatment of degenerated biologic aortic valve prostheses and discuss factors that can influence the outcome.

METHODS

From February 2009 to October 2011, 278 patients underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation, of whom 23 underwent a valve-in-valve procedure with the Edwards Sapien valve to treat a failing bioprostheses in the aortic position. Eight of these valves were stentless bioprostheses. Thirteen patients had valve failure resulting predominantly from stenosis, and the remaining resulting from regurgitation.

RESULTS

Mean age was 76.9 ± 14.4 years. The mean logistic EuroSCORE was 31.8% ± 20.3% and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 7.6% ± 5.4%. All patients were New York Heart Association class III or IV. The majority of the operations (21/23) were performed via the transapical route. Procedural success was 100%, although 1 patient with a degenerated homograft needed immediate placement of a second valve because of low placement of the first. The reduction in the mean gradient was 31.2 ± 17.06 mm Hg to 9.13 ± 4.9 mm Hg. In those patients with predominant aortic regurgitation (9/23), reduction in aortic regurgitation was achieved in all. The median length of stay was 11.7 days (range, 3-44 days). In-hospital and/or 30-day mortality was 0%.

CONCLUSIONS

Valve-in-valve is a safe and feasible alternative to treat high-risk patients with failing aortic bioprostheses. The early results are excellent, with improvement seen in hemodynamics.

First clinical results with the new sinus prosthesis used for valve-sparing aortic root replacement

OBJECTIVES

Sinuses of Valsalva are important in assuring the physiological function of the aortic valve. This study evaluates short-term clinical results of the reimplantation technique for aortic valve-sparing root replacement using a new prosthesis with three separate sinuses of Valsalva (sinus prosthesis).

METHODS

Between February 2009 and February 2011, a total of 23 patients (20 m/3 f; mean age 52 ± 14.8 years; range 24-70 years) with aortic root aneurysm underwent aortic valve-sparing procedures according to the David reimplantation technique using the new sinus prosthesis. Eighteen patients had tricuspid and five patients bicuspid aortic valves. All patients received clinical as well as echocardiographic examinations postoperatively (mean 13 ± 9.3 months; 0.3-28 months).

RESULTS

There was no death and no reoperation of the aortic valve. At latest follow-up, most patients were in New York Heart Association class I (n = 22; 95.7%). In 95.7% aortic valve regurgitation (AR) was 0 or 1+; one patient had AR 2+. Pressure gradients were between the normal range (mean pressure gradient 4.7 ± 1.9 mmHg). Echocardiographic images demonstrate physiological aortic root dimensions and configuration with three separate sinuses of Valsalva without systolic contact of leaflets to the wall.

CONCLUSIONS

The new sinus prosthesis provides near normal root geometry and hemodynamics in valve-sparing aortic root replacement using the reimplantation technique, applicable for tricuspid and also bicuspid aortic valves.