Outcomes of Aortic Valve-Sparing Operations in Marfan Syndrome

A Concise Review of Marfan Syndrome with a Congenital Cardiac Surgery Focus

Marfan syndrome is named after Antoine Marfan, who described a 5-year-old child with congenital elongation of the digits and other skeletal abnormalities in 1896. While Marfan syndrome is a systemic connective tissue disorder predominantly involving the skeletal, cardiovascular, and ocular systems, the cardiovascular system presents the most life-threatening complications. Most cardiovascular pathologies surround the left ventricular outflow tract and aorta, with aortic dissection requiring emergent surgical management to the progression of mitral regurgitation requiring elective surgery. Intensive care management, along with a tailored approach to the surgical management of a patient with Marfan syndrome, is critical to their survival. Current surgical operations for patients include aortic root surgery, valve-sparing root replacements, aortic root replacements with conduits, and mitral valve repairs. Further research is necessary to determine the molecular, endovascular, pharmaceutical, and surgical management of Marfan syndrome. This review attempts to concisely discuss the diagnosis, complications, and medical and intensive care management of Marfan syndrome while further divulging on the surgical management of those with this disease process.

Valve-Sparing Aortic Root Replacement State-of-the-Art Review, Part II: Surgical Techniques

Aortic valve disease is common, and valve-preserving operations are preferred whenever possible. Valve-sparing aortic root replacement (VSRR) has become an important tool for managing aortic root pathology in children and adults. The learning curve for this operation is challenging, but with increasing experience and technical modifications, early and late outcomes continue to improve. Durable long term results vary based on underlying anatomy, pathology, and patient selection, as well as surgeon expertise. Part II of this VSRR State-of-the-Art Review article provides technical pearls related to VSRR.

Long-term durability of valve-sparing root replacement in patients with and without connective tissue disease

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this study was to evaluate the long-term outcomes of valve-sparing root replacement in patients with connective tissue disease (CTD) and compare them with patients without CTD who underwent valve-sparing root replacement for root aneurysm.

METHODS

Of 487 patients, 380 (78%) did not have CTD and 107 (22%) had CTD; 97 (91%) with Marfan syndrome, 8 (7%) with Loeys-Dietz syndrome, and 2 (2%) with Vascular Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. Operative and long-term outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

The CTD group was younger (36 ± 14 years vs 53 ± 12 years; P < .001), had more women (41% vs 10%; P < .001) and had less hypertension (28% vs 78%; P < .001) and bicuspid aortic valve (8% vs 28%; P < .001). Other baseline characteristics did not differ between the groups. Overall operative mortality was nil (P = 1.000); the incidence of major postoperative complications was 1.2% (0.9% vs 1.3%; P = 1.000) and did not differ between groups. Residual mild aortic insufficiency (AI) was more frequent in the CTD group (9.3% vs 1.3%, P < .001) with no difference in moderate or greater AI. Ten-year survival was 97.3% (97.2% vs 97.4%; log-rank P = .801). Of the 15 patients with residual AI, 1 had none, 11 remained mild, 2 had moderate, and 1 had severe AI on follow-up. Ten-year freedom from moderate/severe AI was 89.6% (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.8-1.37; P = .750) and 10-year freedom from valve reoperation was 94.9% (hazard ratio, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.43-3.39; P = .717).

CONCLUSIONS

The operative outcomes as well as long-term durability of valve-sparing root replacement is excellent in patients with or without CTD. Valve function and durability are not influenced by CTD.

Aortic valve degeneration after valve-sparing root replacement in patients with bicuspid aortopathy or connective tissue disorder

OBJECTIVE

We sought to evaluate outcomes of valve-sparing root replacement (VSRR) in patients with bicuspid aortopathy (BAV) versus other connective tissue disorder (CTD).

METHODS

This was a single-center cohort study of consecutive patients undergoing VSRR via reimplantation from 2000 to 2023 with BAV or CTD. Operative outcomes, Kaplan-Meier survival estimates, and cumulative risk of reoperation and recurrent aortic insufficiency (AI) with the competing risk of death were assessed.

RESULTS

Of 516 patients who underwent VSRR, 109 (51.9%) had BAV and 101 (48.1%) had CTD. Patients with BAV were older (46.9 ± 10.4 vs 38.4 ± 14 years, P < .001) and more likely male (89.0% vs 56.4%, P < .001) and hypertensive (66.1% vs 28.7%, P < .001). Preoperative AI was similar (P = .57) between groups (30.3% mild, 18.3% moderate, 11.1% severe). Most patients had no/trivial immediate postoperative residual AI (96.3% vs 93.1%). Operative mortality was zero; postoperative adverse events were minimal. Mean clinical follow-up was 5.2 ± 4.4 years; 10-year survival was 95.6% versus 95.7% (P = .70). Echocardiographic follow-up was 3.9 ± 4.1 years; incidence of >2+ AI (9.7% vs 10.1%, P = 1.0) was similar between groups, whereas the incidence of moderate or greater aortic stenosis was greater with BAV (7.5% vs 0%, P = .02). Reoperation was low in both groups (3.7% vs 5.9%, P = .65). Competing risk analysis found no difference in reoperation hazard between BAV and CTD groups (hazard ratio, 0.36; 95% confidence interval, 0.07-1.81, P = .21).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with BAV and CTD have excellent operative outcomes, no mortality, and minimal residual AI after VSRR. Although the incidence of recurrent AI was similar, patients with BAV are at risk for AS.

Diagnosis and treatment of cardiovascular disease in patients with heritable connective tissue disorders or heritable thoracic aortic diseases

Patients with heritable connective tissue disorders (HCTDs), represented by Marfan syndrome, can develop fatal aortic and/or arterial complications before age 50. Therefore, accurate diagnosis, appropriate medical treatment, and early prophylactic surgical treatment of aortic and arterial lesions are essential to improve prognosis. Patients with HCTDs generally present with specific physical features due to connective tissue abnormalities, while some patients with heritable thoracic aortic diseases (HTADs) have few distinctive physical characteristics. The development of genetic testing has made it possible to provide accurate diagnoses for patients with HCTDs/HTADs. This review provides an overview of the diagnosis and treatment of HCTDs/HTADs, including current evidence on cardiovascular interventions for this population.

Midterm Clinical Outcomes of Reimplantation Versus Remodeling Valve-Sparing Aortic Root Replacement in Patients With Connective Tissue Disorders: A Meta-Analysis

This meta-analysis aimed to compare the midterm clinical outcomes of reimplantation versus remodeling techniques for valve-sparing aortic root replacement (VSARR) in patients with connective tissue disorders (CTDs). Studies were screened and identified after the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines from the PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase databases. Forest plots were produced using Review Manager 5.3 (Cochrane, UK). Studies comparing early and midterm clinical outcomes of reimplantation versus remodeling VSARR in patients with CTD with a mean age ≥18 years were included. The sensitivity analysis excluded studies and subgroups of patients that received ring or suture annuloplasty in addition to remodeling surgery. The study selection identified 9 eligible studies. After analysis of the study period and location for patient crossover, 7 retrospective studies consisting of 597 patients (301 reimplantation and 296 remodeling) were pooled. The pooling revealed no significant difference in postoperative mortality (estimated mean follow-up of 10.5 years) (odds ratio [OR] 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.30 to 1.48, I2 = 30%, p = 0.32), reoperation (OR 0.35, CI 0.04 to 3.30, I2 = 81%, p = 0.36), or occurrence of postoperative aortic regurgitation of ≥2 (OR 0.56, CI 0.31 to 1.02, I2 = 47%, p = 0.06). The sensitivity analysis excluding annuloplasty demonstrated improved mortality (OR 0.19, CI 0.06 to 0.64, I2 = 0%, p = 0.007) and decreased aortic regurgitation of ≥2 (OR 0.23, CI 0.10 to 0.53, I2 = 47%, p = 0.0005) in reimplantation VSARR. The rates of reoperation remained insignificant in the sensitivity analysis (OR 0.43, CI 0.05 to 3.53, I2 = 71%, p = 0.43). In conclusion, this meta-analysis has demonstrated no significant difference in the midterm clinical outcomes of reimplantation versus remodeling techniques of VSARR. The sensitivity analysis excluding studies and patient subgroups that received remodeling and annuloplasty suggests remodeling alone to be inferior to reimplantation in patients with CTDs. Further research is required to assess remodeling and annuloplasty against reimplantation in patients of this demographic because the current body of knowledge does not allow sufficient analysis.

Outcomes of aortic valve-sparing root replacement with cusp repair in connective tissue disease

BACKGROUND

Although, valve sparing is commonly performed in patients with Marfan syndrome, feasibility and results of cusp repair for aortic insufficiency have not been studied.

AIM

To report on the outcomes and durability of aortic cusp repair in valve sparing in patients with Marfan syndrome.

METHODS

All consecutive adult patients with Marfan syndrome who underwent remodelling and annuloplasty with aortic valve repair for aortic insufficiency between May 2005 and December 2020 were included. Patients with Marfan syndrome treated for aortic aneurysm, but without aortic insufficiency, were excluded. Data were collected prospectively and reviewed retrospectively from the Aorticvalve repair International Registry (AVIATOR).

RESULTS

During the study period, 71 patients with Marfan syndrome were referred to surgery. Fifty-five patients with connective tissue disease and aortic insufficiency with aorta aneurysm were treated: 46 underwent aortic valve repair and nine underwent aortic valve replacement (five mechanical aortic valve replacements and four biological aortic valve replacements). The mean age was 42.9±15.4 years, and the mean EuroScore II was 2.5±2.2. No patient died, and no patient had significant aortic insufficiency (grade≥II) at discharge. The 5-year survival rate estimate was 94.4%, which seems statistically similar to that of the age- and sex-matched general population. At 5 years, freedom from reoperation was 94.6%, and the incidence of infective endocarditis was 2.6%. No valve thrombosis, aortic dissection, major bleeding events, thromboembolic events (stroke) or myocardial infarctions were noted during follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Remodelling and aortic valve repair showed excellent durability at 5 years, even in connective tissue disorders.

Cardiovascular Events After Aortic Root Repair in Patients With Marfan Syndrome

BACKGROUND

The usefulness of aortic valve sparing operations to treat aortic root aneurysm in patients with Marfan syndrome (MS) remains controversial.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the occurrence of cardiovascular events in patients with MS who have undergone valve-preserving aortic root replacement.

METHODS

Patients with MS who had aortic valve sparing operations (reimplantation of the aortic valve or remodeling of the aortic root) from 1988 through 2019 were followed prospectively for a median of 14 years. Pertinent data from clinical, echocardiographic, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance images of the aorta were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

There were 189 patients whose mean age was 36 years, and 67% were men. Ten patients presented with acute type A dissection and 29 had mitral regurgitation. There were 52 patients at risk at 20 years. Mortality rate at 20 years was 21.5% (95% CI: 14.7%-30.8%); advancing age and preoperative aortic dissections were associated with increased risk of death by multivariable analysis. At 20 years, the cumulative incidence of moderate or severe aortic insufficiency was 14.5% (95% CI: 9.5%-22.0%), reoperation on the aortic valve was 7.5% (95% CI: 3.9%-14.7%), and new distal aortic dissections was 19.9% (95% CI: 13.9%-28.5%). Remodeling of aortic root was associated with greater risk of developing aortic insufficiency and aortic valve reoperation than reimplantation of the aortic valve.

CONCLUSIONS

Aortic valve sparing operations provide stable aortic valve function and low rates of valve-related complications during the first 2 decades of follow-up but aortic dissections remain problematic in patients with MS.

Midterm outcomes of aortic root surgery in patients with Marfan syndrome: A prospective, multicenter, comparative study

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to compare midterm outcomes of aortic valve-replacing root replacement (AVR) and aortic valve-sparing root replacement (AVS) operations in patients with Marfan syndrome.

METHODS

Patients who met strict Ghent diagnostic criteria for Marfan syndrome and who underwent either AVR or AVS between March 1, 2005 and December 31, 2010 were enrolled in a 3-year follow-up prospective, multicenter, international registry study; the study was subsequently amended to include 20-year follow-up. Enrollees were followed clinically and echocardiographically.

RESULTS

Of the 316 patients enrolled, 77 underwent AVR and 239 underwent AVS; 214 gave reconsent for 20-year follow-up. The median clinical follow-up time for surviving patients was 64 months (interquartile range, 42-66 months). Survival rates for the AVR and AVS groups were similar at 88.2% ± 4.4% and 95.0% ± 1.5%, respectively (P = .1). Propensity score-adjusted competing risk modeling showed associations between AVS and higher cumulative incidences of major adverse valve-related events, valve-related morbidity, combined structural valve deterioration and nonstructural valve dysfunction, and aortic regurgitation ≥2+ (all P < .01). No differences were found for reintervention (P = .7), bleeding (P = .2), embolism (P = .3), or valve-related mortality (P = .8).

CONCLUSIONS

Five years postoperatively, major adverse valve-related events and valve-related morbidity were more frequent after AVS than after AVR procedures, primarily because of more frequent aortic valve dysfunction. No between-group differences were found in rates of survival, valve-related mortality, reintervention on the aortic valve, or bleeding. We plan to follow this homogenous cohort for 20 years after aortic root replacement.

Elective Ascending Aortic Aneurysm Surgery in the Elderly

BACKGROUND

No clear guidelines exist for performing preventive surgery for ascending aortic (AA) aneurysm in elderly patients. This study aims to provide insights by: (1) evaluating patient and procedural characteristics and (2) comparing early outcomes and long-term mortality after surgery between elderly and non-elderly patients.

METHODS

A multicenter retrospective observational cohort-study was performed. Data was collected on patients who underwent elective AA surgery in three institutions (2006-2017). Clinical presentation, outcomes, and mortality were compared between elderly (≥70 years) and non-elderly patients.

RESULTS

In total, 724 non-elderly and 231 elderly patients were operated upon. Elderly patients had larger aortic diameters (57.0 mm (IQR 53-63) vs. 53.0 mm (IQR 49-58), p < 0.001) and more cardiovascular risk factors at the time of surgery than non-elderly patients. Elderly females had significantly larger aortic diameters than elderly males (59.5 mm (55-65) vs. 56.0 mm (51-60), p < 0.001). Short-term mortality was comparable between elderly and non-elderly patients (3.0% vs. 1.5%, p = 0.16). Five-year survival was 93.9% in non-elderly patients and 81.4% in elderly patients (p < 0.001), which are both lower than that of the age-matched general Dutch population.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that in elderly patients, a higher threshold exists to undergo surgery, especially in elderly females. Despite these differences, short-term outcomes were comparable between 'relatively healthy' elderly and non-elderly patients.

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

BACKGROUND

Valve-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.

METHODS

Between 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.

RESULTS

Baseline 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).

CONCLUSIONS

VSRR 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.

Matched comparison between external aortic root support and valve-sparing root replacement

OBJECTIVES

Differences in indication and technique make a randomised comparison between valve-sparing root replacement (VSRR) and personalised external aortic root support (PEARS) challenging. We performed a propensity score (PS)-matched comparison of PEARS and VSRR for syndromic root aneurysm.

METHODS

Patients in the PEARS 200 Database and Aortic Valve Insufficiency and ascending aorta Aneurysm InternATiOnal Registry (undergoing VSRR) with connective tissue disease operated electively for root aneurysm <60 mm with aortic regurgitation (AR) <1/4 were included. Using a PS analysis, 80 patients in each cohort were matched. Survival, freedom from reintervention and from AR ≥2/4 were estimated using a Kaplan-Meier analysis.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 25 and 55 months for 159 PEARS and 142 VSRR patients. Seven (4.4%) patients undergoing PEARS required an intervention for coronary injury or impingement, resulting in one death (0.6%). After VSRR, there were no early deaths, 10 (7%) reinterventions for bleeding and 1 coronary intervention. Survival for matched cohorts at 5 years was similar (PEARS 98% vs VSRR 99%, p=0.99). There was no difference in freedom from valve or ascending aortic/arch reintervention between matched groups. Freedom from AR ≥2/4 at 5 years in the matched cohorts was 97% for PEARS vs 92% for VSRR (p=0.55). There were no type A dissections.

CONCLUSIONS

VSRR and PEARS offer favourable mid-term survival, freedom from reintervention and preservation of valve function. Both treatments deserve their place in the surgical repertoire, depending on a patient's disease stage. This study is limited by its retrospective nature and different follow-ups in both cohorts.

Outcomes of Valve-Sparing Surgery in Heritable Aortic Disorders: Results from the AVIATOR Registry

OBJECTIVES

Root reimplantation has been the favored approach for patients with heritable aortic disorder (HAD) requiring valve-sparring root replacement (VSRR). In the past few years, root remodelling with annuloplasty has emerged as an alternative to root reimplantation in the general population. The aim of this study was to examine the late outcomes of patients with HAD undergoing VSRR and compare different techniques.

METHODS

Using the AVIATOR registry, data were collected from 5 North American and European centers. Patients were divided in 4 groups according to the technique of valve-sparing used (root reimplantation, root remodelling with ring annuloplasty, root remodelling with suture annuloplasty and root remodelling alone). The primary end-points were freedom from aortic regurgitation (AR) ≥2 and freedom from reintervention on the aortic valve. Secondary end-points were survival and changes in annular dimensions over time.

RESULTS

A total of 237 patients were included in the study (reimplantation= 100, remodelling + ring annuloplasty= 76, remodelling + suture annuloplasty= 34, remodelling alone= 27). The majority of patients had Marfan syndrome (82%). Preoperative AR ≥ 2 was present in 41% of the patients. Operative mortality was 0.4% (n = 1). No differences were found between techniques in terms of postoperative AR ≥ 2 (p = 0.58), reintervention (p = 0.52) and survival (p = 0.59). Changes in aortic annulus dimension were significantly different at 10 years (p < 0.05), a difference that started to emerge 4 after years surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, VSRR are safe and durable procedures in patients with HAD. Nevertheless, root remodelling alone is associated with late annular dilatation. Addition of an annuloplasty, however, results in similar freedom from AR, reintervention, survival, and changes in annulus size compared to reimplantation.

Early and long-term outcomes of conventional and valve-sparing aortic root replacement

OBJECTIVE

To determine the early and long-term outcomes of conventional aortic root (ARR) and valve-sparing root replacement (VSRR) using a standard perioperative and operative approach.

METHODS

We present prospectively collected data of 609 consecutive patients undergoing elective and urgent aortic root surgery (470 ARR, 139 VSRR) between 2006 and 2020. Primary outcomes were operative mortality and incidence of postoperative complications. Secondary outcomes were long-term survival and requirement for reintervention. Median follow-up was 7.6 years (range 0.5-14.5).

RESULTS

189 patients (31%) had bicuspid aortic valves and 17 (6.9%) underwent redo procedures. Median cross-clamp time was 88 (range 54-208) min with cardiopulmonary bypass of 108 (range 75-296) min. In-hospital mortality was 10 (1.6%), with transient ischaemic attacks/strokes occurring in 1.1%. In-hospital mortality for VSRR was 0.7%. 12 patients (2.0%) required a resternotomy for bleeding and 14 (2.3%) received haemofiltration. Intensive care unit and hospital stay were 1.7 and 7.0 days, respectively. During follow-up, redo surgery for native aortic valve replacement was required in 1.4% of the VSRR group. Overall survival was 95.1% at 3 years, 93.1% at 5 years, 91.2% at 7 years and 88.6% at 10 years.

CONCLUSIONS

ARR and VSRR can be performed with low mortality and morbidity as well as a low rate of reintervention during the period of long-term follow-up, if performed by an experienced team with a consistent perioperative approach. This series provides contemporary evidence to balance the risks of aortic aneurysms and their rupture at diameters of <5.5 cm against the risks and benefits of surgery.

Valve-sparing aortic root replacement: a primer for cardiologists

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this article is to review the contemporary evidence supporting valve-sparing aortic root replacement as the best option for patients with aortic root aneurysms and preservable aortic valves as well as to review the technical variations and modern adjuncts of these operations that impact both short and long-term durability.

RECENT FINDINGS

In patients with an aortic root aneurysm, with or without aortic valve regurgitation, valve-sparing aortic root replacement provide excellent clinical outcomes and stable valve function over several decades. Successful execution of this operation depends on careful patient selection and a thorough understanding of the anatomical and physiological relationships between the various components of the aortic root. Echocardiography remains the mainstay of imaging to determine the feasibility of valve-sparing root replacement.

SUMMARY

Valve-sparing aortic root replacement is an excellent alternative to composite valve graft replacement in nonelderly patients with aortic root aneurysms. Dedicated aortic root surgeons perform several technical variations of valve-sparing procedures aimed at matching the specific aortic root disorder with the optimal operation.

Long-term outcomes after aortic root replacement for patients with Marfan syndrome

Background

A diversity of surgical strategies are used to treat Marfan syndrome patients with aortic disease. We sought to evaluate the long-term efficiency of aortic root replacement (ARR) for patients with Marfan syndrome.

Methods

Data were collected from 131 patients with Marfan syndrome and aortic disease who underwent ARR in our center. We retrospectively analyzed the long-term outcomes of these patients, among whom 68 had been diagnosed with aortic aneurysm (AA) and had undergone ARR. The remaining 63 patients had aortic dissection (AD); of these, 35 underwent ARR for limited ascending AD, while the others underwent ARR and total arch replacement combined with frozen elephant trunk (FET). Risk factors for survival and reoperation were identified.

Results

The operative mortality rate was 4.58%. Age >40 years was the sole risk factor for operative mortality. During follow-up, 12 deaths occurred. Patients aged <25 years and female patients were more prone to late death than were other patients. Indications for reoperation were noted in 22 patients, and the risk factors were age <30 years and female sex. At 5 years, the survival rate was 92.96%, and the freedom from reoperation rate was 88.36%. At 10 years, the survival rate was 85.25%, and the freedom from reoperation rate was 71.75%. The survival and freedom from reoperation rates were significantly higher in patients with AD than in those with AA. Specifically, chronic AD was a greater risk factor for late survival than was acute AD in patients with Marfan syndrome.

Conclusions

For patients with Marfan syndrome and aortic disease, ARR can be safely performed and results in low operative mortality and favorable long-term survival. Young and female patients have a higher risk for late death and reoperation. To prevent AD, surgical intervention should be promptly implemented following the diagnosis of aortic sinus dilation.

Aortic root replacement with bicuspid valve reimplantation: Are outcomes and valve durability comparable to those of tricuspid valve reimplantation?

OBJECTIVES

To assess intermediate-term outcomes of aortic root replacement with valve-sparing reimplantation of bicuspid aortic valves (BAV), compared with tricuspid aortic valves (TAV).

METHODS

From January 2002 to July 2017, 92 adults underwent aortic root replacement with BAV reimplantation and 515 with TAV reimplantation at the Cleveland Clinic. Balancing-score matching based on 28 preoperative variables yielded 71 well-matched BAV and TAV pairs (77% of possible pairs) for comparison of postoperative mortality and morbidity, longitudinal echocardiogram data, aortic valve reoperation, and survival.

RESULTS

In the BAV group, 1 hospital death occurred (1.1%); mortality among all reimplantations was 0.2%. Among matched patients, procedural morbidity was low and similar between BAV and TAV groups (1 stroke in TAV group; renal failure requiring dialysis, 1 patient each; red cell transfusion, 25% each). Five-year results: Severe aortic regurgitation was present in 7.4% of the BAV group and 2.9% of the TAV group (P = .7); 39% of BAV and 65% of TAV patients had none. Higher mean gradients (10 vs 7.4 mm Hg; P = .001) and left ventricular mass index (111 vs 101 g/m2; P = .5) were present in BAV patients. Freedom from aortic valve reoperation was 94% in the BAV group and 98% in the TAV group (P = .10), and survival was 100% and 95%, respectively (P = .07).

CONCLUSIONS

Both BAV and TAV reimplantations can be performed with equal safety and good midterm outcomes; however, the constellation of higher gradients, less ventricular reverse remodeling, and more aortic valve reoperations with BAV reimplantations raises concerns requiring continued long-term surveillance.

Marfan syndrome

Marfan syndrome (MFS) is an autosomal dominant, age-related but highly penetrant condition with substantial intrafamilial and interfamilial variability. MFS is caused by pathogenetic variants in FBN1, which encodes fibrillin-1, a major structural component of the extracellular matrix that provides support to connective tissues, particularly in arteries, the pericondrium and structures in the eye. Up to 25% of individuals with MFS have de novo variants. The most prominent manifestations of MFS are asymptomatic aortic root aneurysms, aortic dissections, dislocation of the ocular lens (ectopia lentis) and skeletal abnormalities that are characterized by overgrowth of the long bones. MFS is diagnosed based on the Ghent II nosology; genetic testing confirming the presence of a FBN1 pathogenetic variant is not always required for diagnosis but can help distinguish MFS from other heritable thoracic aortic disease syndromes that can present with skeletal features similar to those in MFS. Untreated aortic root aneurysms can progress to life-threatening acute aortic dissections. Management of MFS requires medical therapy to slow the rate of growth of aneurysms and decrease the risk of dissection. Routine surveillance with imaging techniques such as transthoracic echocardiography, CT or MRI is necessary to monitor aneurysm growth and determine when to perform prophylactic repair surgery to prevent an acute aortic dissection.

The Ross procedure and valve-sparing root replacement procedures in the adult patient: do guidelines follow the evidence?

Prosthetic aortic valve replacements have long been the mainstay of valvular surgery due to their favorable outcomes and low operative complexity. Yet, mechanical valves require lifelong anticoagulation, whereas bioprosthetic valves increase the risk for earlier and more frequent reoperation. Alternative reconstructive techniques have been proposed to address these challenges. These include valve-sparing root replacement procedures if the native aortic valve can be salvaged, and the Ross procedure, which nearly eliminates prosthetic valve-related thromboembolism, anticoagulation-related hemorrhage and endocarditis. Both procedures are technically more complex and thus subject to surgeons' volume and expertise compared to conventional aortic valve replacements. However, they are associated with more favorable outcomes compared to aortic valve replacements if performed by experienced surgeons, especially in younger patients. Nevertheless, despite the growing high-quality literature supporting both procedures, existing multi-society guidelines fail to acknowledge the strength of evidence in support of valve-sparing root replacement procedures and the Ross procedure. In this review, we summarize the existing long-term evidence for the use of each procedure, describe the current guidelines for the treatment of aortic valve pathology, and propose the reevaluation of guidelines based on the available clinical evidence.

Failures of Valve-sparing Aortic Root Replacement using the Root Remodeling Technique

BACKGROUND

Valve failure may occur after valve-sparing aortic root replacement. Little is known about the exact mechanisms of failure. We analyzed our experience with reoperations after aortic root remodeling to determine failure modes, operative risk, and long-term outcome.

METHODS

Between 11/1995 and 12/2019, 1084 patients were treated by root remodeling. Of these, 54 (49 male, 8 to 79 years) underwent reoperation for valve failure (1 week to 16 years postoperatively). The indications for reoperation were aortic regurgitation (n=39), aortic stenosis (n=6), endocarditis (n=7), or ventricular septal defect (n=2). The main causes of valve failure were cusp repair failure (n=29), endocarditis (n=7), and cusp retraction (n=8). The patients were treated by valve replacement (n=40) or cusp repair (n=14). In 6 individuals, combined replacement of valve and root was performed. All 54 patients were followed (mean 69±54 months after reoperation), 1 patient was lost to follow-up.

RESULTS

No patient died in hospital or developed atrioventricular block; twelve patients died late with 10- and 15-year survival of 87%±5.1% and 64%±10.6%. Of the 14 patients who underwent repeat cusp repair, 7 (50%) are still alive with stable valve function, 17 months to 15 years after their reoperation. Eleven patients required a second reoperation leading to a freedom from repeat reintervention of 68%±9.7% at 15 years.

CONCLUSIONS

The main causes of failure of root remodeling are cusp related. Reoperations can be performed with low morbidity and mortality. In selected patients, isolated cusp repair may be an option.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of aortic valve-sparing surgery versus replacement surgery in ascending aortic aneurysms and dissection in patients with Marfan syndrome and other genetic connective tissue disorders

BACKGROUND

Aortic aneurysm and dissection are important causes of morbimortality in patients with Marfan syndrome (MFS) and other connective tissue diseases that affect the cardiovascular tissues. Timely intervention through different surgical techniques improves the prognosis. Both sparing and replacement-type interventions of the aortic valve are used, but selection depends on the condition of the patient at the time of diagnosis, the patient's emergency condition, surgeon preference and hospital resources. Previous meta-analyses have suggested an advantage with the use of sparing-type interventions, but this finding must be updated and extended to patients with other connective tissue disorders. The objetive of this study is to evaluate the outcomes of valve-sparing root replacement versus aortic root replacement procedures in patients with MFS and similar connective tissue diseases that present with aortic aneurysm or dissection.

METHODS

A systematic review of cohort studies that evaluated sparing-type (preserving, remodeling, reimplantation, Yacoub, David or Florida Sleeve) or replacement-type (repair, Bentall, Button-Bentall, composite valve graft or Cabrol) procedures in patients with Marfan, Loeys-Dietz, Beals-Hecht or Ehlers-Danlos syndromes was done. Studies were retrieved from the SCOPUS, MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE and LILACS electronic databases up to January 2020 without language restrictions. Only studies that directly compared sparing- versus replacement-type procedures were included in the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 33 studies (n=1,807 subjects) reported sparing-type surgical interventions and 26 studies (n=2,218 subjects) reported replacement-type surgical interventions. Pooled rates of endocarditis, thromboembolism and aneurysm were higher in replacement-type surgical intervention studies. Sixteen studies were included in the meta-analysis. Sparing-type interventions were associated with a reduced risk of endocarditis (RR =0.13, 95% CI: 0.03-0.61); however, replacement-type interventions favored freedom from valve reoperation (RR =2.39, 95% CI: 1.24-4.60). All studies were at low risk of bias.

CONCLUSIONS

The choice of the best surgical technique is dependent on the type of disease (MFS or other connective tissue diseases) as well as the accompanying aortic and cardiovascular damage, since these key factors are heterogeneous. Although the results of this meta-analysis tend to show some advantages for one type of surgical intervention over the other and viceversa, the surgeon can only make the best decision during the surgical act.

Personalised external aortic root support for elective treatment of aortic root dilation in 200 patients

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

In personalised external aortic root support (PEARS), a custom-made, macroporous mesh is used to stabilise a dilated aortic root and prevent dissection, primarily in patients with genetically driven aortopathies. Data are needed on the safety and postoperative incidence of aortic events.

METHODS

We present a multicentre cohort study evaluating the first 200 consecutive patients (median age 33 years) undergoing surgery with an intention to perform PEARS for aortic root dilatation in 23 centres between 2004 and 2019. Perioperative outcomes were collected prospectively while clinical follow-up was retrieved retrospectively. Median follow-up was 21.2 months.

RESULTS

The main indication was Marfan syndrome (73.5%) and the most frequent concomitant procedure was mitral valve repair (10%). An intervention for myocardial ischaemia or coronary injury was needed in 11 patients, 1 case resulting in perioperative death. No ascending aortic dissections were observed in 596 documented postoperative patient years. Late reoperation was performed in 3 patients for operator failure to achieve complete mesh coverage. Among patients with at least mild aortic regurgitation (AR) preoperatively, 68% had no or trivial AR at follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

This study represents the clinical history of the first 200 patients to undergo PEARS. To date, aortic dissection has not been observed in the restrained part of the aorta, yet long-term follow-up is needed to confirm the potential of PEARS to prevent dissection. While operative mortality is low, the reported coronary complications reflect the learning curve of aortic root surgery in patients with connective tissue disease. PEARS may stabilise or reduce aortic regurgitation.

Early outcomes of patients with Marfan syndrome and acute aortic type A dissection

BACKGROUND

Acute aortic Stanford type A dissection remains a frequent and life-limiting event for patients with Marfan syndrome. Outcome results in this high-risk group are limited.

METHODS

The German Registry for Acute Aortic Dissection Type A collected the data of 56 centers between July 2006 and June 2015. Of 3385 patients undergoing operations for acute aortic Stanford type A dissection, 117 (3.5%) were diagnosed with Marfan syndrome. We performed a propensity score match comparing patients with Marfan syndrome with patients without Marfan syndrome in a 1:2 fashion.

RESULTS

Patients with Marfan syndrome were significantly younger (42.9 vs 62.2 years; P < .001), predominantly male (76.9% vs 62.9%; P = .002), and less catecholamine dependent (9.4% vs 20.3%; P = .002) compared with the unmatched cohort. They presented with aortic regurgitation (41.6% vs 23.0%; P < .001) and involvement of the supra-aortic vessels (50.4% vs 39.5%; P = .017) more often. Propensity matching revealed 82 patients with Marfan syndrome (21 female) with no significant differences in baseline characteristics compared with patients without Marfan syndrome (n = 159, 36 female; P = .607). Although root preservation was more frequent in patients with Marfan syndrome, procedure types did not differ significantly (18.3% vs 10.7%; P = .256). Aortic arch surgery was performed more frequently in matched patients (87.5% vs 97.8%; P = .014). Thirty-day mortality did not differ between patients with and without Marfan syndrome (19.5% vs 20.1%; P = .910). Multivariate regression showed no influence of Marfan syndrome on 30-day mortality (odds ratio, 0.928; 95% confidence interval, 0.346-2.332; P = .876).

CONCLUSIONS

Marfan syndrome does not adversely affect 30-day outcomes after surgical repair for acute aortic Stanford type A dissection compared with a matched cohort. Long-term outcome analysis is needed to account for the influence of further downstream interventions.

Bicuspid-Associated Aortic Root Aneurysm: Mid to Long-Term Outcomes of David V Versus the Bio-Bentall Procedure

David V valve-sparing root replacement (VSRR) and bio-Bentall (BB) are increasingly performed for aortic root aneurysms associated with a bicuspid aortic valve (BAV). However, durability remains a concern in both procedures. We compared the 10-year outcomes of VSRR vs BB for BAV-associated root aneurysms. A retrospective review identified 134 patients with a BAV-associated root aneurysm who underwent VSRR (n = 65) or BB (n = 69) from 2005 to 2019. Patients with aortic stenosis, endocarditis, previous aortic valve replacement, and emergent cases were excluded. Propensity-score matching was performed, resulting in 2 risk-adjusted groups (n = 40 per group). Median follow-up was 6.21 (1.43-8.28) years. The VSRR cohort was younger (46.0 years vs 56.0 years, P < 0.001) and had a lower incidence of at least moderate aortic insufficiency (AI) (78.5% vs 92.8%, P = 0.02). The incidence of Marfan syndrome, aortic root diameter, and ascending aortic diameter were similar. In-hospital mortality was 1.5% (n = 1) and 1.4% (n = 1) for VSRR and BB, respectively. There was no difference between VSRR and BB in 10-year survival (98.3% [95% confidence interval (CI): 88.6-99.8%] vs 96.2% [95% CI: 85.5-99.0%], P = 0.567) and aortic valve reintervention at 10 years (16.1% [95% CI: 6.3-29.8%] vs 12.9% [95% CI: 3.7-28.0%], P = 0.309). The most common reason for valve reintervention in both groups was AI. Survival and valve reintervention at 10 years were similar in the matched cohort. David V VSRR yields similar mid to long-term outcomes to BB for select patients with a BAV-associated aortic root aneurysm in regards to survival and reintervention rates. Further studies comparing longer term outcomes between root replacement techniques and native valve durability are needed.

Reimplantation valve-sparing aortic root replacement is the most durable approach to facilitate aortic valve repair

Reimplantation of the aortic valve has been performed for 3 decades, and experience shows that patient selection and meticulous operative technique are crucial to provide excellent clinical outcomes and stable aortic valve function for decades. More than the type of the Dacron graft used for the reimplantation (straight graft or Valsalva graft), we believe that attention to certain technical aspects of this operation is key to a successful and durable aortic valve reconstruction. This article describes the operative procedure as we believe it should be performed based on a learned experience with several hundred cases and summarizes the latest outcomes in a large cohort of patients followed prospectively during the past 3 decades.

Outcome of valve sparing root replacement for diverse indications

OBJECTIVES

We report the mid-term outcomes of valve-sparing aortic root replacement (VSRR) in a cohort including patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV), connective tissue disorder (CTD), aortic dissection (AD), and congenital heart disease (CHD). Design. From 2005 to 2017, 174 patients underwent VSRR with the reimplantation technique. The mean age was 46 ± 14 years. The mean follow-up time was 4.8 ± 2.8 years. The indication for operation was aortic aneurysm for 127 (73%), aortic insufficiency (AI) for 38 (22%), and AD for 9 patients (5%). Preoperatively, 53 patients (31%) had ≥ moderate AI. BAV, CTD (Marfan or Loyes-Dietz), previous Ross procedure, or CHD was present in 57 (33%), 28 (16%), 7 (4%) and 12 patients (7%), respectively. Concomitant aortic valve repair was performed for 103 patients (59%). Results. Thirty-day mortality was zero. Four patients underwent aortic valve replacement (AVR) during follow-up. Kaplan-Meier estimates for survival, freedom from AVR, and freedom from ≥ moderate AI or reoperation were 96, 98, and 97% at 5 years. There was no difference in survival, freedom from AVR, or freedom from ≥ moderate AI or reoperation in patients with and without BAV, CTD, leaflet repair, or preoperative ≥ moderate AI. In Cox regression analysis, BAV, CTD, aortic valve repair, preoperative ≥ moderate AI, or aortic dimension were not risk factors for reoperation or valve dysfunction. Conclusions. Mid-term outcomes of VSRR for patients with diverse indications in terms of survival, reoperation rate, and valve dysfunction rate were excellent in a center with a limited annual volume of VSSR.

Long-term experience with valve-sparing root reimplantation surgery in tricuspid aortic valve

Objective

To analyze our long-term experience with valve-sparing reimplantation technique in treating aortic root aneurysm, aortic regurgitation, and aortic dissection in patients with tricuspid aortic valve.

Methods

Between March 1998 and October 2018, 303 consecutive patients underwent valve-sparing reimplantation in our institution. The mean age of this cohort was 52.9 ± 15 years. Time to event analysis was performed with the Kaplan-Meier method. Risk of death, reoperation, and aortic regurgitation (AR) recurrence were analyzed using the cox-regression method.

Results

In-hospital mortality was 1% (n = 3) of which two were admitted for acute aortic dissection. Median follow-up was 5.81 years ([IQR]: 2.8-10 years). Thirty-nine patients (14.4%) died during follow-up. At 5 and 10 years, overall survival was 92 ± 2%and 75 ± 4.9%, respectively. Seventeen patients required late aortic valve reoperation. Freedom from valve reoperation was 95 ± 2% and 90 ± 3%. Freedom from AR > 2+ and AR > 1+ at 10 years was 91 ± 4% and 71.5 ± 4.6%, respectively. Significant multivariate predictors of death included age, New York Heart Association dyspnea class (NYHA), type A acute dissection (TAAD), and preoperative left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD). Significant multivariate predictors of AR recurrence included indication for surgery, previous cardiac surgery, and presence of preoperative AR. Freedom from events like major bleeding, thromboembolic events, and infective endocarditis at 10 years were 97%, 98%, and 96%, respectively.

Conclusions

Aortic valve-sparing with the reimplantation technique has been performed for over two decades in our institution, and the results in patients with tricuspid aortic valve (TAV) are excellent in terms of survival and freedom from valve-related adverse outcomes including valve reoperation. These results continue supporting the use of valve sparing root replacement using the reimplantation technique (VSRR) in patients with aortic aneurysm, irrespective of whether they have preoperative AR or not. VSRR is safe, durable, and reproducible, but further follow-up, well into the second decade is still necessary.

Valve-sparing aortic root replacement (David I procedure) in Marfan disease: single-centre 20-year experience in more than 100 patients†

OBJECTIVES

Valve-sparing aortic root replacement (VSARR) is recommended for patients with aortic root dilatation and preserved aortic valve cusp morphology. The durability of VSARR in Marfan patients has been questioned. The aim of our study was to establish the long-term outcomes of VSARR in Marfan patients.

METHODS

Between 1993 and 2015, 582 patients underwent VSARR (David I reimplantation) at our institution. Of these patients, 104 had Marfan disease. Thirteen surgeons performed the procedures in this group. The mean follow-up time was 12 ± 5.4 years (1201 patient-years).

RESULTS

Early mortality was 0.96%, and long-term survival was 91% at 10 years and 76% at 20 years in Marfan patients. Marfan patients had a significantly better survival compared to non-Marfan patients (P < 0.0001). Freedom from aortic-valve reoperation was 86% at 10 years and 80% at 20 years in Marfan patients. The reoperation rate was similar in Marfan and non-Marfan patients (P = 0.60). Morphological perioperative features (untreated prolapse, commissural plasty, cusp plasty and graft size mismatch) predicted long-term mortality (P = 0.0054). Graft size mismatch and untreated prolapse predicted structural valve deterioration (both P < 0.0001). Long-term valve function in event-free survivors was excellent [mean gradient 4.2 (2.9-6.9), 98% aortic regurgitation ≤ mild]. There were no valve-related thromboembolic or bleeding events. The endocarditis rate was 0.96%. Only 17% of the patients were on oral anticoagulants during the follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

VSARR using the David I reimplantation technique results in excellent long-term outcomes in Marfan patients. We present the longest follow-up period so far. The genetic disease does not affect long-term valve function. The durability of the repair is affected by morphological perioperative criteria depending on surgical expertise, and dedicated training is recommended.

Management of a giant aortic root aneurysm in a young patient with Marfan syndrome: a case report

Introduction

Marfan syndrome (MFS) is a common heritable connective tissue disease involving multiple organs. Even though the clinical manifestations of MFS can be various, aortic root aneurysm is estimated as one of the most serious complications. We herein describe an individualized treatment decision-making process for a 23-year-old male with MFS, suffering from a giant but stable aortic root aneurysm which is extremely rare at his age.

Case

The patient, a 23-year-old male with a family history of MFS, presented to our cardiovascular department because of progressive exertional chest distress, fatigue and occasional precordial pain. Physical examinations revealed 190.5 cm of height, high myopia, and a diastolic murmur at the aortic valve area. Laboratory examinations for systemic vasculitis and infectious diseases were negative. Transthoracic echocardiography and enhanced thoracic computed tomography (CT) scan revealed the existence of a giant aortic root aneurysm (125.1 mm in short-axis), severe aortic valve regurgitation, cardiac dilatation (LV; 99 mm in diastolic diameter) and a poor ejection fraction (EF; 18%). Considering the risk of rupture or dissection of the dilated aortic root, we performed Bentall procedure based on the results of multidisciplinary team discussion and intraoperative exploration. Postoperative thoracic CT scan revealed a normal sized reconstructed aortic root, and the patient was discharged uneventfully 7 days later.

Conclusion

It is extremely rare to report such a giant aortic root aneurysm in a young patient. In the treatment decision-making process, the patient’s specific situation should be taken into consideration. A mechanical Bentall procedure seems to be an acceptable option for some selected cases.

Microarray analysis of long non-coding RNA expression profiles in Marfan syndrome

Long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) serve a crucial role in every aspect of cell biological functions as well as in a variety of diseases, including cardiovascular disease, cancer and nervous system disease. However, the differential expression profiles of lncRNAs in Marfan syndrome (MFS) have not been reported. The aim of the present study was to identify potential target genes behind the pathogenesis of MFS by analyzing microarray profiles of lncRNA in aortic tissues from individuals with MFS and normal aortas (NA). The differentially expressed lncRNA profiles between MFS (n=3) and NA (n=4) tissues were analyzed using microarrays. Bioinformatics analyses were used to further investigate the candidate lncRNAs. Reverse transcription-quantitative (RT-qPCR) was applied to validate the results. In total, the present study identified 294 lncRNAs (245 upregulated and 49 downregulated) and 644 mRNAs (455 upregulated and 189 downregulated) which were differential expressed between MFS and NA tissues (fold change ≥1.5; P<0.05). Gene Ontology enrichment analysis indicated that the differentially expressed mRNAs were involved in cell adhesion, elastic fiber assembly, extracellular matrix (ECM) organization, the response to virus and the inflammatory response. Kyoto Encyclopedia of Gene and Genomes pathway analysis indicated that the differentially expressed mRNAs were mainly associated with focal adhesion, the ECM-receptor interaction, the mitogen-activated protein kinase signaling pathway and the tumor necrosis factor signaling pathway. The lncRNA-mRNA coexpression network analysis further elucidated the interaction between the lncRNAs and mRNAs. A total of five lncRNAs (uc003jka.1, uc003jox.1, X-inactive specific transcript, linc-lysophosphatidic acid receptor 1 and linc-peptidylprolyl isomerase domain and WD repeat containing 1) with the highest degree of coexpression were selected and confirmed using RT-qPCR. In the present study, expression profiles of lncRNA and mRNA in MFS were revealed using microarray analysis. These results provided novel candidates for further investigation of the molecular mechanisms and effective targeted therapies for MFS.

Minimally invasive aortic root surgery: Midterm results in a 2-year follow-up

OBJECTIVES

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) via partial upper sternotomy (PUS) for aortic root surgery represents an alternative to the full median sternotomy (FMS). PUS offers less operative trauma. We analyzed the midterm outcome of root replacement (Bentall) or valve-sparing root replacement (David) via PUS to evaluate the safety of this access.

METHODS

Between November 2011 to April 2017, a total of 47 consecutive patients underwent aortic root surgery with aortic aneurysm and/or localized aortic dissection through Bentall or David operation through PUS mean age (57.9 ± 10.5 years). Bentall operation was performed in 36 patients (77%), whereas 11 patients (23%) received a David procedure. The outcome was carried out in 6-months, 1-year, and 2-years-follow up.

RESULTS

Mean operation time was 287.3 ± 72.6 minutes, mean cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time 174 ± 54.8 minutes, mean cross-clamp time 133 ± 33.1 minutes. Rethoracotomy-rate was (4.2%). Superficial wound healing disturbance was (2%) and no deep sternal infection or sternum instability occurred. Hospitalization-and intensive care unit-stay was 11.8 ± 4.4 and 1.9 ± 1.3 days with a total median ventilation-time of 10 (IQR 7.5-13.5) hours. There was no 30-day-mortality. After 2 years the total rate of mortality, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, and redo surgery was (6.3%, 4.2%, and 4.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally invasive aortic root surgery via partial upper sternotomy could be a safe alternative to the full median sternotomy. It requires longer operative times but reduces postoperative morbidity with good postoperative outcome.

Does the Aortic Annulus Dilate After Aortic Root Remodeling?

BACKGROUND

The 2 main techniques of valve-sparing aortic root replacement (VSRR) are remodeling and reimplantation. There is concern that the aortic annulus, which is not stabilized in remodeling technique, may dilate over time and cause aortic regurgitation. Our aim was to assess whether the aortic annulus dilates after VSRR with remodeling technique without aortic annuloplasty.

METHODS

Data on patients undergoing elective or urgent VSRR remodeling technique between 2005 and 2018 were collected. Patients undergoing arch and emergency surgery for acute type A aortic dissection were excluded. Preoperative aortic annulus diameter was measured by transthoracic echocardiography, and this was compared with the annulus diameter measured from the most recently available transthoracic echocardiography. The requirement for reintervention during follow-up was recorded.

RESULTS

Between 2005 and 2018, 98 patients underwent VSRR. Sixty-six (67.3%) had Marfan syndrome or Loeys-Dietz syndrome. Median age was 60 (interquartile range, 18-68) years and 71 (72.4%) were men. Median cross-clamp and cardiopulmonary bypass times were 122 (interquartile range, 104-164) minutes and 138 (interquartile range, 121-198) minutes, respectively. Median intensive care unit and hospital stay were 1 day and 6 days, respectively. No patients suffered perioperative stroke. There was no in-hospital mortality. At median follow-up of 7.1 years (interquartile range, 5-129 months), mean postoperative annular diameter was 25.7 mm, from 24.2 mm preoperatively (P = .403). One patient required aortic valve replacement during follow-up. Freedom from moderate or severe aortic regurgitation was 97%.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant aortic annular dilatation in selected patients undergoing remodeling VSRR. Our data do not support routine use of annuloplasty in patients with annular diameter less than or equal to 25 mm.

Incidence of cardiovascular events and risk markers in a prospective study of children diagnosed with Marfan syndrome

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the incidence of cardiovascular events (CVEs) and their associated risk markers in children with Marfan syndrome (MFS).

AIMS

To assess the incidence of CVEs and determine risk markers in a cohort diagnosed with Marfan syndrome during childhood and followed for several years.

METHODS

From a French multicentre nationwide database, 462 patients with MFS diagnosed during childhood were included prospectively. Patients' files were screened for a period of 20 years (1993-2013). CVEs (e.g. death, aortic dissection, cardiac valve or aortic root surgery) were assessed during the prospective follow-up.

RESULTS

Median (interquartile range) age at the end of follow-up was 17.2 (11.1-21.3) years. CVEs were reported for 35 participants (7.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 5.3-10.4%). First CVEs were prophylactic aortic root surgery (n=29), aortic dissection (n=4; two aged <18 years) and death (n=2). Kaplan-Meier cumulative incidence of CVEs was 5.3% (95% CI 3.3-8.7%) during childhood (aged≤18 years) and 19.4% (95% CI 13.3-27.9%) at 25years of age. The cumulative rate of CVEs was higher in case of Valsalva sinus Z-score increase of≥0.1 per year (P=0.0003), maximal Valsalva sinus diameter growth speed ≥5mm per year (P=0.03), aortic regurgitation≥2 (P=0.0005) and maximal Valsalva sinus Z-score≥3 before 16 years of age (P<0.0001). In a multivariable Cox proportional analysis, the Valsalva sinus Z-score remained significantly related to outcome. Considering aortic root evolution, aortic regurgitation, age at diagnosis and beta-blocker therapy were related to Valsalva sinus Z-score evolution during follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

CVEs in children with MFS are mainly related to prophylactic aortic root surgery. Aortic dissections are rarely observed in children. The Valsalva sinus Z-score is a strong indicator of subsequent CVEs in children with MFS. Attention to follow-up and beta-blocker observance may be warranted in high-risk children.

Long-term outcomes and predictors of recurrent aortic regurgitation after aortic valve-sparing and reconstructive cusp surgery: a single centre experience

Background

Aortic valve sparing surgery (AVS), in combination with aortic cusp repair (ACR), still raises many questions about the increased surgical complexity and applicability for patients with pure aortic valve regurgitation (AR). The aim of this study was to investigate our long-term outcomes and predictors of recurrent AR (> 2+) after AVS and reconstructive cusp surgery.

Methods

We reviewed data of 81 patients who underwent AVS (a reimplantation technique) with concomitant ACR for AR and or dilatation of the aortic root at our institution during the period from April 2004 to October 2016. On preoperative echocardiography, the majority of the patients, 70 (86.4%) presented with severe AR grade (> 3+) and 28 (34.5%) of the patients had the bicuspid phenotype. Time to event analysis (long-term survival, freedom from reoperation, and recurrence of AR > 2+) was performed with the Kaplan–Meier method. Multivariate Cox regression risk analysis was performed to identify independent predictors of recurrent AR (> 2+). The mean follow-up was 5.3 ± 3.3 years and 100% complete.

Results

The in-hospital (30-day) mortality rate after elective surgery was 1.2%. The overall actuarial survival rates were 92.9 ± 3.1% and 90.4 ± 3.9% at five and 10 years, respectively. Actuarial freedom from recurrent AR (> 2+) was 83.7 ± 4.5% within the cohort at five and 10 years. The cumulative freedom from all causes of cardiac reoperation was 94.2 ± 2.8% within the cohort at 10 years. Neither bleeding nor thromboembolic or permanent neurologic events were reported during follow-up. By multivariate analysis, independent predictors of reccurent AR (> 2+) were an effective height lower than 9 mm (p= 0.02) and intraoperative residual mild AR (p= 0.0001).

Conclusions

AVS with ACR, combined in a systematic fashion, is a safe and reproducible option with low risk of long-term valve related events and normal life expectancy for patients with pure aortic regurgitation.

The competent aortic valve and effective height, not lower than 9 mm intraoperatively, are mandatory to achieve long-lasting AV competency.

Root reconstruction for proximal repair in acute type A aortic dissection

Background

Retrospective compared the results of root reconstruction and root replacement for acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) patients and observed the rate of aortic insufficiency (AI) and aortic root dilation in the midterm follow-up period.

Methods

From 2008-2016, 427 ATAAD patients received surgical therapy in our center. There were 328 male and 99 female patients, aging from 22 to 83 years with a mean age of (51.1±12.5) years. These patients were divided into two major groups: 298 cases with root reinforcement reconstruction (Root Reconstruction), 129 cases with Bentall procedure (Root Replacement).

Results

The 30-day mortality was 7.7% (33/427), while no difference between the 2 procedures (8.1% and 7.0%, P=0.844). Cross-clamp, cardiopulmonary bypass, and circulatory arrest times of all the patients were 252.5±78.1, 173.6±68.9, 30.7±9.5 minutes, respectively. In the average follow-up time of (34.5±26.1) months, midterm survival rates were similar between the 2 procedures (86.2% and 86.0%, P=0.957). Only one patient received redo Bentall procedure because of severe aortic regurgitation and dilated aortic root (50 mm) in the Root Reconstruction Group.

Conclusions

The indication of root management of ATAAD is based on the diameter of aortic root, structure of aortic root, and the dissection involvement. For most ATAAD patients, aortic root reinforcement reconstruction is a feasible and safe method.

The Florida Sleeve Procedure Is Durable and Improves Aortic Valve Function

Background  The Florida (FL) Sleeve procedure was introduced as a simplified approach for valve-sparing correction of functional Type I aortic insufficiency (AI) associated with aortic root aneurysms. In this study, short- and long-term outcomes after the FL Sleeve procedure were investigated.

Methods  From May 2002 to January 2016, 177 patients underwent the FL Sleeve procedure. Left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD), left ventricular end-systolic diameter, left ventricular ejection fraction, and degree of AI (none = 0, minimal = 1, mild = 2, moderate = 3, severe = 4) were evaluated by echocardiography.

Results  Mean ± standard deviation of age was 49.41 ± 15.37 years. Survival rate was 98% at 1 year, 97% at 5 years, and 93% at 8 years. Freedom from reoperation was 99% at 1 year and 98% at 2 to 8 years. Three patients (1.69%) died during hospitalization. Three patients (1.69%) developed periprocedural stroke. Postoperative follow-up echocardiography was available in 140 patients at 30 days, and 31 patients at 5 years. AI grade significantly improved from baseline at 30 days (2.18 ± 1.26 vs. 1.1 ± 0.93, p  < 0.001) and at 5 years (2.0 ± 1.23 vs. 1.45 ± 0.88, p  = 0.04). Preoperative mean LVEDD significantly decreased from 52.20 ± 6.73 to 46.87 ± 8.40 ( p  < 0.001) at 30 days, and from 53.22 ± 7.07 to 46.61 ± 10.51 ( p  = 0.01) at 5 years.

Conclusions  The FL Sleeve procedure is a safe, effective, and durable treatment of aortic root aneurysm and Type I AI. Long-term survival and freedom from reoperation rates are encouraging.