Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Outcome of valve sparing root replacement for diverse indications.
Huuskonen, Antti; Valo, Johanna; Kaarne, Markku; Ropponen, Jussi; Ihlberg, Leo; Juvonen, Tatu; Raivio, Peter.
Afiliación
  • Huuskonen A; Department of Cardiac Surgery, Heart and Lung Center, Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland.
  • Valo J; Department of Cardiac Surgery, Heart and Lung Center, Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland.
  • Kaarne M; Department of Cardiac Surgery, Heart and Lung Center, Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland.
  • Ropponen J; Department of Cardiac Surgery, Heart and Lung Center, Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland.
  • Ihlberg L; Department of Cardiac Surgery, Heart and Lung Center, Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland.
  • Juvonen T; Department of Cardiac Surgery, Heart and Lung Center, Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland.
  • Raivio P; Department of Cardiac Surgery, Heart and Lung Center, Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland.
Scand Cardiovasc J ; 55(3): 173-179, 2021 Jun.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33501855
ABSTRACT

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.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Bases de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Implantación de Prótesis de Válvulas Cardíacas / Tratamientos Conservadores del Órgano Tipo de estudio: Risk_factors_studies Límite: Adult / Humans / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: Scand Cardiovasc J Asunto de la revista: ANGIOLOGIA / CARDIOLOGIA Año: 2021 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Finlandia

Texto completo: 1 Bases de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Implantación de Prótesis de Válvulas Cardíacas / Tratamientos Conservadores del Órgano Tipo de estudio: Risk_factors_studies Límite: Adult / Humans / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: Scand Cardiovasc J Asunto de la revista: ANGIOLOGIA / CARDIOLOGIA Año: 2021 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Finlandia