Repair, replacement, Ross: how I approach the older child with mixed aortic stenosis/aortic insufficiency

Complexity and Outcome of Reoperations After the Ross Procedure in the Current Era

BACKGROUND

The Ross procedure has several advantages, but the need for reintervention is inevitable. The aim of this study was to examine the complexity and outcomes of reoperation after the Ross procedure.

METHODS

Retrospective chart review was performed of patients with a prior Ross procedure who underwent reoperation at our institution from September 1991 to January 2021. Demographic, echocardiographic, surgical, and perioperative data were collected. Descriptive statistical and regression analyses were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 105 patients underwent a reoperation at Mayo Clinic after the initial Ross procedure performed at our institution (n = 16; 16.2%) or elsewhere (n = 83; 83.8%). Mean age at the Ross procedure was 27 ± 17 years, and mean age at reoperation at our institution was 37 ± 19 years. Indications for surgical procedure varied, but 64% had autograft regurgitation as 1 of their indications for reoperation. Autograft interventions were performed in 78 patients (74.2%). Pulmonary valve or conduit replacement was performed in 56 patients (53.3%). Double root replacement was performed in 11 patients (10.5%). Aortic reconstruction was performed in 37 patients (38.4%). There were 5 early deaths (5%). During a median follow-up of 6.25 years (3 months-24 years), late deaths occurred in 14 patients (13.1%). Patients with ejection fraction <30% on preoperative echocardiography had shorter duration between the Ross procedure and subsequent reoperation (P = .03).

CONCLUSIONS

Reoperations after the Ross procedure are performed for a wide range of indications, with most due to autograft dysfunction. The number of early deaths is not low. Reoperation after the Ross procedure should be advised before left ventricular systolic dysfunction.

Mixed aortic stenosis and regurgitation: a clinical conundrum

Mixed aortic stenosis (AS) and aortic regurgitation (AR) is the most frequent concomitant valve disease worldwide and represents a heterogeneous population ranging from mild AS with severe AR to mild AR with severe AS. About 6.8% of patients with at least moderate AS will also have moderate or greater AR, and 17.9% of patients with at least moderate AR will suffer from moderate or greater AS. Interest in mixed AS/AR has increased, with studies demonstrating that patients with moderate mixed AS/AR have similar outcomes to those with isolated severe AS. The diagnosis and quantification of mixed AS/AR severity are predominantly echocardiography-based, but the combined lesions lead to significant limitations in the assessment. Aortic valve peak velocity is the best parameter to evaluate the combined haemodynamic impact of both lesions, with a peak velocity greater than 4.0 m/s suggesting severe mixed AS/AR. Moreover, symptoms, increased left ventricular wall thickness and filling pressures, and abnormal left ventricular global longitudinal strain likely identify high-risk patients who may benefit from closer follow-up. Although guidelines recommend interventions based on the predominant lesion, some patients could potentially benefit from earlier intervention. Once a patient is deemed to require intervention, for patients receiving transcatheter valves, the presence of mixed AS/AR could confer benefit to those at high risk of paravalvular leak. Overall, the current approach of managing patients based on the dominant lesion might be too reductionist and a more holistic approach including biomarkers and multimodality imaging cardiac remodelling and inflammation data might be more appropriate.