Valve-Sparing Aortic Root Replacement With Reimplantation vs Remodeling: A Meta-analysis

Aortic valve performance after remodelling versus reimplantation in a propensity-matched comparison

OBJECTIVES

Both aortic root remodelling and aortic valve (AV) reimplantation have been used for valve-sparing root replacement in patients with aortic root aneurysm with or without aortic regurgitation. There is no clear evidence to support one technique over the another. This study aimed to compare remodelling with basal ring annuloplasty versus reimplantation on a multicentre level with the use of propensity-score matching.

METHODS

This was a retrospective international multicentre study of patients undergoing remodelling or reimplantation between 2010 and 2021. Twenty-three preoperative covariates (including root dimensions and valve characteristics) were used for propensity-score matching. Perioperative outcomes were analysed along with longer-term freedom from AV reoperation/reintervention and other major valve-related events.

RESULTS

Throughout the study period, 297 patients underwent remodelling and 281 had reimplantation. Using propensity-score matching, 112 pairs were selected and further compared. We did not find a statistically significant difference in perioperative outcomes between the matched groups. Patients after remodelling had significantly higher reintervention risk than after reimplantation over the median follow-up of 6 years (P = 0.016). The remodelling technique (P = 0.02), need for decalcification (P = 0.03) and degree of immediate postoperative AV regurgitation (P < 0.001) were defined as independent risk factors for later AV reintervention. After exclusion of patients with worse than mild AV regurgitation immediately after repair, both techniques functioned comparably (P = 0.089).

CONCLUSIONS

AV reimplantation was associated with better valve function in longer-term postoperatively than remodelling. If optimal immediate repair outcome was achieved, both techniques provided comparable AV function.

Aortic Root Remodeling in the Tricuspid Aortic Valve

BACKGROUND

Aortic root remodeling is one of the principal forms of valve-preserving root replacement. Its value has been questioned by some, whereas others have achieved excellent valve durability. The purpose of this review is to summarize the existing information to determine which factors may have contributed both to failures and to successes.

METHODS

Publications on root remodeling for aneurysm or dissection with tricuspid aortic valves with >15 patients were reviewed for specific details of preoperative and intraoperative management.

RESULTS

The series were very heterogeneous. Most operations were performed for root aneurysm, and 10 publications included type A dissection. Connective tissue disease was present in 22% of patients. Mean patient age was 52 years, and 5-year survival varied between 58% and 100%. Most series did not include an annuloplasty. Importantly, no details on quantitative assessment of valve configuration were specified in most series, especially those with suboptimal valve function and durability. The introduction of the effective height concept to control valve configuration was associated with improved results and more frequent correction of cusp prolapse. Late freedom from aortic regurgitation and freedom from reoperation are good in the larger series.

CONCLUSIONS

Root remodeling can lead to excellent valve durability if quantitative intraoperative measurement of valve configuration is performed. The addition of an annuloplasty seems to improve aortic valve competence further, even though its effect on durability is not unequivocally proven. The long-term results of root remodeling are good, also in the second postoperative decade, and it is a valid form of valve-preserving root replacement.