The Ross operation: utilization of the patient’s own pulmonary valve as a replacement device for the diseased aortic valve

Major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events after the Ross procedure: a report from the German-Dutch Ross Registry

BACKGROUND

The purpose of the study is to report major cardiac and cerebrovascular events after the Ross procedure in the large adult and pediatric population of the German-Dutch Ross registry. These data could provide an additional basis for discussions among physicians and a source of information for patients.

METHODS AND RESULTS

One thousand six hundred twenty patients (1420 adults; 1211 male; mean age, 39.2±16.2 years) underwent a Ross procedure between 1988 and 2008. Follow-up was performed on an annual basis (median, 6.2 years; 10 747 patient-years). Early and late mortality were 1.2% (n=19) and 3.6% (n=58; 0.54%/patient-year), respectively. Ninety-three patients underwent 99 reinterventions on the autograft (0.92%/patient-year); 78 reinterventions in 63 patients on the pulmonary conduit were performed (0.73%/patient-year). Freedom from autograft or pulmonary conduit reoperation was 98.2%, 95.1%, and 89% at 1, 5, and 10 years, respectively. Preoperative aortic regurgitation and the root replacement technique without surgical autograft reinforcement were associated with a greater hazard for autograft reoperation. Major internal or external bleeding occurred in 17 (0.15%/patient-year), and a total of 38 patients had composite end point of thrombosis, embolism, or bleeding (0.35%/patient-year). Late endocarditis with medical (n=16) or surgical treatment (n=29) was observed in 38 patients (0.38%/patient-year). Freedom from any valve-related event was 94.9% at 1 year, 90.7% at 5 years, and 82.5% at 10 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Although longer follow-up of patients who undergo Ross operation is needed, the present series confirms that the autograft procedure is a valid option to treat aortic valve disease in selected patients. The nonreinforced full root technique and preoperative aortic regurgitation are predictors for autograft failure and warrant further consideration. Clinical Trial Registration-URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00708409.

Autograft Reinforcement to Preserve Autograft Function After the Ross Procedure

Background— Autograft reinforcement interventions (R) during the Ross procedure are intended to preserve autograft function and improve durability. The aim of this study is to evaluate this hypothesis.

Methods and Results— 1335 adult patients (mean age:43.5±12.0 years) underwent a Ross procedure (subcoronary, SC, n=637; root replacement, Root, n=698). 592 patients received R of the annulus, sinotubular junction, or both. Regular clinical and echocardiographic follow-up was performed (mean:6.09±3.97, range:0.01 to 19.2 years). Longitudinal assessment of autograft function with time was performed using multilevel modeling techniques. The Root without R (Root−R) group was associated with a 6× increased reoperation rate compared to Root with R (Root+R), SC with R (SC+R), and without R (SC-R; 12.9% versus 2.3% versus 2.5%.versus 2.6%, respectively; P <0.001). SC and Root groups had similar rate of aortic regurgitation (AR) development over time. Root+R patients had no progression of AR, whereas Root−R had 6 times higher AR development compared to Root+R. In SC, R had no remarkable effect on the annual AR progression. The SC technique was associated with lower rates of autograft dilatation at all levels of the aortic root compared to the Root techniques. R did not influence autograft dilatation rates in the Root group.

Conclusions— For the time period of the study surgical autograft stabilization techniques preserve autograft function and result in significantly lower reoperation rates. The nonreinforced Root was associated with significant adverse outcome. Therefore, surgical stabilization of the autograft is advisable to preserve long-term autograft function, especially in the Root Ross procedure.