Tricuspid valve repair for infective endocarditis.

OBJECTIVES: The progressive increase in the use of implantable electronic devices, vascular access for dialysis and the increased life expectancy of patients with congenital heart diseases has led in recent years to a considerable number of right-side infective endocarditis, especially of the tricuspid valve (TV). Although current guidelines recommend TV repair for native tricuspid valve endocarditis (TVE), the percentage of valve replacements remains very high in numerous studies. The aim of our study is to analyse our experience in the treatment of TVE with a reparative approach. METHODS: This case series includes all the patients who underwent surgery for acute or healed infective endocarditis on the native TV, at the Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc (Bruxelles, Belgium) between February 2001 and December 2020. RESULTS: Thirty-one patients were included in the study. Twenty-eight (90.3%) underwent TV repair and 3 (9.7%) had a TV replacement with a mitral homograft. The repair group was divided into 2 subgroups, according to whether a patch was used during surgery or not. Hospital mortality was 33.3% (n = 1) for the replacement group and 7.1% (n = 2) for repair (P = 0.25). Overall survival at 10 years was 75.6% [95% confidence interval (CI): 52-89%]. Further, freedom from reoperation on the TV at 10 years was 59.3% (95% CI: 7.6-89%) vs 93.7% (95% CI: 63-99%) (P = 0.4) for patch repair and no patch use respectively. Freedom from recurrent endocarditis at 10 years was 87% (95% CI: 51-97%). CONCLUSIONS: Considering that TVE is more common in young patients, a repair-oriented approach should be considered as the first choice. In the case of extremely damaged valves, the use of pericardial patch is a valid option. If repair is not feasible, the use of a mitral homograft is an additional useful solution to reduce the prosthetic material.

Continuous or interrupted pledgeted suture technique in stented bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement: a comparison of in-hospital outcomes.

BACKGROUND: There is ambiguity in the literature regarding the continuous suture technique (CST) for aortic valve replacement (AVR). At our center, there has been a gradual shift towards CST over the interrupted pledgeted technique (IPT). This study aims at comparing outcomes for both techniques. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of a single-center study of patients undergoing AVR between January 2011 and July 2020. Patients were divided into two groups: Continuous suture technique and interrupted pledget-reinforced sutures. The pre-operative and In-hospital clinical characteristics and echocardiographic hemodynamics (i.e. transvalvular gradients and paravalvular leakage) were compared between CST and IPT. RESULTS: We compared 791 patients with CST to 568 patients with IPT (median age: 73 and 74 years, respectively, p = 0.02). In CST there were 35% concomitant procedure vs. 31% in IPT (p = 0.16). Early mortality was 3.2% in CST versus 4.8% in IPT (p = 0.15), and a second cross-clamp due to a paravalvular-leak in 0.5% vs. 1.2%, respectively (p = 0.22). The CST was not associated with new-onset conduction-blocks mandating pacemaker implants(OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.54-2.14; P = 0.85). The postoperative gradients on echocardiography were lower in CST compared to IPT, especially in smaller annuli (peak gradients: 15.7mmHg vs. 20.5mmHg, in valve size < 23 mm, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The continuous suture technique was associated with lower postoperative gradients and shorter cross-clamp time compared to interrupted pledgeted technique. Differences in paravalvular leaks were non-significant, although slightly less in the continuous suture technique. There were no further differences in valve-related complications. Hence, continues suture technique is safe, with better hemodynamics compared to the interrupted pledgeted technique. This may be of clinical importance, especially in smaller size annular size.

Native Aortic Valve Resection Using a Novel Blade-Based Device.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to validate the use of a new resection device in patient candidates for surgical aortic valve replacement. We evaluated the efficacy of this new circular blade to resect the aortic valve and the efficacy to collect the debris during the resection. METHODS: For this study, a single size instrument was used, with an external diameter of 22 mm, and patients were selected on the basis of the preoperative assessment of the aortic diameters. RESULTS: From October 2018 to June 2019, 10 patient candidates for surgical aortic valve replacement were selected to undergo native aortic valve resection using a new device, before surgical valve implantation. The mean age of the patients was 74 ± 7.6 years, and 8 of 10 were male. The mean aortic annulus diameter, measured before the procedure, was 25.7 ± 1.57 mm. The resection was complete in 9 (90%) patients. In 1 patient, due to an imprecise positioning of the device, the valve resection was partial. None of the patients showed signs or symptoms due to debris embolism. In all patients, the postoperative course was uneventful. CONCLUSIONS: These preliminary results show that resection of the aortic valve using a circular foldable blade is feasible. This prototype, used during conventional surgery even through a small incision, provided an efficient tool to easily resect the valve without debris release.

[Summary: International consensus statement on nomenclature and classification of the congenital bicuspid aortic valve and its aortopathy, for clinical, surgical, interventional and research purposes]. / Resumen: Consenso internacional para la nomenclatura y clasificación de la válvula aórtica bicúspide congénita y su aortopatía, con fines clínicos, quirúrgicos, intervencionistas y de investigación.

This consensus of nomenclature and classification for congenital bicuspid aortic valve and its aortopathy is evidence-based and intended for universal use by physicians (both pediatricians and adults), echocardiographers, advanced cardiovascular imaging specialists, interventional cardiologists, cardiovascular surgeons, pathologists, geneticists, and researchers spanning these areas of clinical and basic research. In addition, as long as new key and reference research is available, this international consensus may be subject to change based on evidence-based data1.

Este consenso de nomenclatura y clasificación para la válvula aórtica bicúspide congénita y su aortopatía está basado en la evidencia y destinado a ser utilizado universalmente por médicos (tanto pediatras como de adultos), médicos ecocardiografistas, especialistas en imágenes avanzadas cardiovasculares, cardiólogos intervencionistas, cirujanos cardiovasculares, patólogos, genetistas e investigadores que abarcan estas áreas de investigación clínica y básica. Siempre y cuando se disponga de nueva investigación clave y de referencia, este consenso internacional puede estar sujeto a cambios de acuerdo con datos basados en la evidencia1.

Serum Neurofilament Light and Postoperative Delirium in Cardiac Surgery: A Preplanned Secondary Analysis of a Prospective Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Impaired cognition is a major predisposing factor for postoperative delirium, but it is not systematically assessed. Anesthesia and surgery may cause postoperative delirium by affecting brain integrity. Neurofilament light in serum reflects axonal injury. Studies evaluating the perioperative course of neurofilament light in cardiac surgery have shown conflicting results. The authors hypothesized that postoperative serum neurofilament light values would be higher in delirious patients, and that baseline concentrations would be correlated with patients' cognitive status and would identify patients at risk of postoperative delirium. METHODS: This preplanned secondary analysis included 220 patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass. A preoperative cognitive z score was calculated after a neuropsychological evaluation. Quantification of serum neurofilament light was performed by the Simoa (Quanterix, USA) technique before anesthesia, 2 h after surgery, on postoperative days 1, 2, and 5. Postoperative delirium was assessed using the Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Unit, the Confusion Assessment Method, and a chart review. RESULTS: A total of 65 of 220 (29.5%) patients developed postoperative delirium. Delirious patients were older (median [25th percentile, 75th percentile], 74 [64, 79] vs. 67 [59, 74] yr; P < 0.001) and had lower cognitive z scores (-0.52 ± 1.14 vs. 0.21 ± 0.84; P < 0.001). Postoperative neurofilament light concentrations increased in all patients up to day 5, but did not predict delirium when preoperative concentrations were considered. Baseline neurofilament light values were significantly higher in patients who experienced delirium. They were influenced by age, cognitive z score, renal function, and history of diabetes mellitus. Baselines values were significantly correlated with cognitive z scores (r, 0.49; P < 0.001) and were independently associated with delirium whenever the patient's cognitive status was not considered (hazard ratio, 3.34 [95% CI, 1.07 to 10.4]). CONCLUSIONS: Cardiac surgery is associated with axonal injury, because neurofilament light concentrations increased postoperatively in all patients. However, only baseline neurofilament light values predicted postoperative delirium. Baseline concentrations were correlated with poorer cognitive scores, and they independently predicted postoperative delirium whenever patient's cognitive status was undetermined.

Valve-sparing operations after Ross procedure: a single-center experience.

Background: The Ross procedure has demonstrated excellent long-term results, with restoration of life-expectancy in patients with severe aortic valve dysfunction. However, reintervention after Ross can occur, and herein we describe our center's experience with redo surgery after previous Ross procedures. Methods: We searched our prospective database for aortic valve-repair and recruited all adult (≥18 years) patients who have undergone valve-sparing root replacements (VSRRs) and/or aortic valve-repair after Ross procedure between July 2001 and July 2022. Univariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify variables affecting early mortality. Survival, freedom-from-valve-reintervention and freedom-from-aortic regurgitation (AR) grade ≥3 were analyzed with the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: A total of 63 patients were recruited for this study. Indication for reoperation after Ross was aortic aneurysm without AR in 17 (27%), aortic aneurysm with AR in 27 (43%), and isolated AR in 19 (30%) patients. Median follow-up time was 7.82 years. The majority of patients (76%) had undergone the free root technique during their index Ross operation. Cumulative survival, after redo surgery following Ross, was 98.4% [95% confidence interval (CI): 89.3-99.8%] at 1 year, 96.3% (95% CI: 88.2-98.3%) at 5 years, and 92.4% (95% CI: 87.1-98.0%) at 10 years. Freedom-from-reoperation on the aortic valve at 1 year was 98.4% (95% CI: 97.0-99.8%), at 5 years was 96.7% (95% CI: 87.6-99.0%), and 79.7% (95% CI: 71.1-88.3%) at 10 years. Conclusions: Long-term survival after redo surgery following the Ross operation is excellent. The data support our aggressive valve-sparing approach after Ross.

Tricuspid annular dynamics, not diameter, predicts tricuspid regurgitation after mitral valve surgery: Results from a prospective randomized trial.

Objective: Current guidelines advise using prophylactic tricuspid valve annuloplasty during mitral valve surgery, especially in the presence of annular diameter enlargement. However, several retrospective studies and a prospective randomized study from our department could not confirm that diameter enlargement is predictive of late regurgitation. We examined whether 2- and 3-dimensional echocardiographic and clinical characteristics could identify patients who will develop moderate or severe recurrent tricuspid regurgitation. Methods: Patients with less than severe functional tricuspid regurgitation (FTR) were randomized not to receive tricuspid annuloplasty, and 11 of 53 of them were excluded from the study because 3-dimensional echocardiographic analysis was not possible. Cox regression was used to estimate the model-based probability of moderate or severe FTR (vena contracta ≥3 mm) or progression of TR and FTR regression using valve dimensions (annulus area, diameter perimeter, nonplanar angle, and sphericity index), dynamics (annulus contraction, annulus displacement, and displacement velocity), and clinical parameters as possible predictors. Results: At a median follow-up of 3.8 years (range, 3-5.6 years), 17 patients had moderate or severe FTR or progression, and 13 had FTR regression. Our models identified annular displacement velocity as a significant predictor for FTR recurrence and nonplanar angle as a significant predictor for FTR regression. Conclusions: Annular dynamics, not the dimension, predict recurrence and regression of FTR. Annular contraction should be systematically investigated as a possible surrogate of right ventricle function to prophylactically treat the tricuspid valve.

Impact of early versus class I-triggered surgery on postoperative survival in severe aortic regurgitation: An observational study from the Aortic Valve Insufficiency and Ascending Aorta Aneurysm International Registry.

OBJECTIVES: Class I triggers for severe and chronic aortic regurgitation surgery mainly rely on symptoms or systolic dysfunction, resulting in a negative outcome despite surgical correction. Therefore, US and European guidelines now advocate for earlier surgery. We sought to determine whether earlier surgery leads to improved postoperative survival. METHODS: We evaluated the postoperative survival of patients who underwent surgery for severe aortic regurgitation in the international multicenter registry for aortic valve surgery, Aortic Valve Insufficiency and Ascending Aorta Aneurysm International Registry, over a median follow-up of 37 months. RESULTS: Among 1899 patients (aged 49 ± 15 years, 85% were male), 83% and 84% had class I indication according to the American Heart Association and European Society of Cardiology, respectively, and most were offered repair surgery (92%). Twelve patients (0.6%) died after surgery, and 68 patients died within 10 years after the procedure. Heart failure symptoms (hazard ratio, 2.60 [1.20-5.66], P = .016) and either left ventricular end-systolic diameter greater than 50 mm or left ventricular end-systolic diameter index greater than 25 mm/m2 (hazard ratio, 1.64 [1.05-2.55], P = .030) predicted survival independently over and above age, gender, and bicuspid phenotype. Therefore, patients who underwent surgery based on any class I trigger had worse adjusted survival. However, patients who underwent surgery while meeting early imaging triggers (left ventricular end-systolic diameter index 20-25 mm/m2 or left ventricular ejection fraction 50% to 55%) had no significant outcome penalty. CONCLUSIONS: In this international registry of severe aortic regurgitation, surgery when meeting class I triggers led to postoperative outcome penalty compared with earlier triggers (left ventricular end-systolic diameter index 20-25 mm/m2 or ventricular ejection fraction 50%-55%). This observation, which applies to expert centers where aortic valve repair is feasible, should encourage the global use of repair techniques and the conduction of randomized trials.

Functional and pathomorphological anatomy of the aortic valve and root for aortic valve sparing surgery in tricuspid and bicuspid aortic valves.

The aortic valve (AV) is a three-dimensional structure, with leaflets that are suspended within the functional aortic annulus (FAA). These structures (AV and FAA) are therefore intrinsically connected and disease of just one component can independently lead to AV dysfunction. Hence, AV dysfunction can occur in the setting of entirely normal valve leaflets. However, as these structures are functionally inter-connected, disease of one component can lead to abnormalities of the other over time. Thus, AV dysfunction is often multifactorial. Valve-sparing root procedures require an in-depth understanding of these inter-relationships, and herein we are providing a detailed account of some of the most pertinent anatomical relationships.

Three decades of reimplantation of the aortic valve-the Brussels experience.

Background: Over the last three decades, the importance of native valve preservation has increasingly become evident. Valve-sparing root replacement procedures, such as the reimplantation or remodeling technique, are therefore being progressively used for aortic root replacement and/or aortic valve repair. Herein, we are summarizing our single-center experience with the reimplantation technique. Methods: We queried our prospective database for aortic valve repair and recruited all adult (≥18 years) patients who have undergone valve-sparing root replacement with the reimplantation technique between March 1998 and January 2022. We subcategorized the patients into three distinct groups: root aneurysm without aortic regurgitation (AR) (grade ≤1+), root aneurysm with AR (grade >1+) and isolated chronic AR (root <45 mm). Univariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify variables of interest, which were further analyzed by multivariable Cox-regression analysis. Survival, freedom from valve reintervention, and freedom from recurrent regurgitation, were analyzed with the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: A total of 652 patients were recruited for this study; 213 patients underwent reimplantation for aortic aneurysm without AR, 289 patients for aortic aneurysm with AR, and 150 patients with isolated AR. Cumulative survival was 95.4% (95% CI: 92.9-97.0%) after 5 years, 84.8% (80.0-88.5%) after 10 years, and 79.5% (73.3-84.5%) after 12 years, which was comparable to the age-matched Belgian population. Older age (HR 1.06, P≤0.001) and male gender (HR 2.1, P=0.02) were associated with late mortality. Freedom from reoperation on the aortic valve at 5 years was 96.2% (95% CI: 93.8-97.7%), and 90.4% (95% CI: 87.4-94.2%) at 12 years. Age (P=0.001) and preoperative left ventricular end-diastolic dimension (LVEDD) (P=0.03) were associated with late reoperation. Conclusions: Our long-term data supports our reimplantation approach as a viable option for aortic root aneurysms and/or aortic regurgitation, with long-term survival that mirrors that of the general population.

Valve-sparing aortic root replacement using the reimplantation (David) technique: a systematic review and meta-analysis on survival and clinical outcome.

Background: Current guidelines recommend valve-sparing aortic root replacement (VSRR) procedures over valve replacement for the treatment of root aneurysm. The reimplantation technique seems to be the most widely used valve-sparing technique, with excellent outcomes in mostly single-center studies. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to present a comprehensive overview of clinical outcomes after VSRR with the reimplantation technique, and potential differences for bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) phenotype. Methods: We conducted a systematic literature search of papers reporting outcomes after VSRR that were published since 2010. Studies solely reporting on acute aortic syndromes or congenital patients were excluded. Baseline characteristics were summarized using sample size weighting. Late outcomes were pooled using inverse variance weighting. Pooled Kaplan-Meier (KM) curves for time-to-event outcomes were generated. Further, a microsimulation model was developed to estimate life expectancy and risks of valve-related morbidity after surgery. Results: Forty-four studies, with 7,878 patients, matched the inclusion criteria and were included for analysis. Mean age at operation was 50 years and almost 80% of patients were male. Pooled early mortality was 1.6% and the most common perioperative complication was chest re-exploration for bleeding (5.4%). Mean follow-up was 4.8±2.8 years. Linearized occurrence rates for aortic valve (AV) related complications such as endocarditis and stroke were below 0.3% patient-year. Overall survival was 99% and 89% at 1- and 10-year respectively. Freedom from reoperation was 99% and 91% after 1 and 10 years, respectively, with no difference between tricuspid and BAVs. Conclusions: This systematic review and meta-analysis shows excellent short- and long-term results of valve-sparing root replacement with the reimplantation technique in terms of survival, freedom from reoperation, and valve related complications with no difference between tricuspid and BAVs.

Surgical outcomes of aortic valve repair for specific aortic valve cusp characteristics; retraction, calcification, and fenestration.

OBJECTIVES: We investigated the predictive value of aortic valve cusp retraction, calcification, and fenestration for aortic valvuloplasty feasibility. METHODS: Multicenter data were collected for 2082 patients who underwent surgical aortic valvuloplasty or aortic valve replacement. The study population had retraction, calcification, or fenestration in at least one aortic valve cusp. Controls had normal or prolapsed cusps. RESULTS: All cusp characteristics demonstrated significantly increased odds ratios [ORs] for switch to valve replacement. This effect was strongest for cusp retraction, followed by calcification and fenestration (OR, 25.14; P ≤ .001; OR, 13.50, P ≤ .001; OR, 12.32, P ≤ .001). Calcification and retraction displayed increased odds for developing grade 4 aortic regurgitation compared with grade 0 or 1 combined on average over time (OR, 6.67; P ≤ .001; OR, 4.13; P = .038). Patients with cusp retraction showed increased risk for reintervention at 1- and 2-year follow-up after aortic valvuloplasty (hazard ratio, 5.66; P ≤ .001; hazard ratio, 3.22, P = .007). Cusp fenestration was the only group showing neither an increased risk of postoperative severe aortic regurgitation (P = .57) or early reintervention (P = .88) compared with the control group. CONCLUSIONS: Aortic valve cusp retraction, calcification, and fenestration were all related to increased rates of switch to valve replacement. Calcification and retraction were associated with recurrence of severe aortic regurgitation. Retraction was related to early reintervention. Fenestration was neither associated with recurrence of severe aortic regurgitation or reintervention. This indicates that surgeons are well able to distinguish aortic valve repair candidates in patients with cusp fenestration.

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.

A multicentre, propensity score matched analysis comparing a valve-sparing approach to valve replacement in aortic root aneurysm: Insight from the AVIATOR database.

OBJECTIVES: Our goal was to evaluate the outcome of valve-sparing root replacement (VSRR) and to compare the outcomes to those of patients having composite valve-graft conduit aortic root replacement (CVG-ARR) in a cohort of patients with aortic root aneurysm ± valve insufficiency, without valvular stenosis. Although valve-sparing procedures are preferable in young patients, there is a lack of comparative data in comparable patients. METHODS: The VSRR procedures were performed in 2005 patients, and 218 patients underwent a CVG-ARR procedure. Exclusion criteria included aortic dissection, endocarditis and valvular stenosis. Propensity score matching (3:1 ratio) was applied to compare VSRR (reimplantation 33% and remodelling 67%) and CVG-ARR. RESULTS: We matched 218 patients with CVG-ARR to 654 patients with VSRR (median age, 56.0; median follow-up was 4 years in both groups; interquartile range 1-5 years). Early mortality was 1.1% of those who had VSRR versus 2.3% in those who had CVG-ARR. Survival was 95.4% [95% confidence interval (CI) 94-97%] at 5 years in patients who had VSRR versus 85.4% (95% CI 82-92%) in those who had CVG-ARR; P = 0.002. Freedom from reintervention at 5 years was 96.8% (95% CI 95-98%) with VSRR and 95.4% (95% CI 91-99%) with CVG-ARR (P = 0.98). Additionally, there were more thromboembolic, endocarditis and bleeding events in the patients who had CVG-ARR (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: This multicentre study shows excellent results after valve-sparing root replacement in patients with an ascending aortic aneurysm with or without valve insufficiency. Compared to composite valve-graft aortic root replacement, survival is better and valve-related events are fewer. Consequently, valve-sparing procedures should be considered whenever a durable repair is feasible. We advocate a valve-sparing strategy even in more complex cases when performed in experienced centres.

Late results of aortic valve repair for isolated severe aortic regurgitation.

OBJECTIVES: The objectives were to analyze the long-term outcomes of tricuspid aortic valve repair for isolated severe aortic regurgitation and the impact of different annuloplasty techniques. METHODS: The study cohort consists of 127 consecutive patients who received aortic valve repair for isolated severe aortic regurgitation in the tricuspid aortic valve between 1996 and 2019 in our institution. Exclusion criteria were aorta dilatation (≥45 mm), connective tissue disease, active endocarditis, type A dissection, and rheumatic disease. Mean age of patients was 55.6 ± 16 years, and 80% were male. Median follow-up was 6.4 years. Time-to-event analysis was performed, as well as risk of death, reoperation, and aortic regurgitation recurrence. RESULTS: Cusp repair was performed in 117 patients (92%), and annuloplasty was performed in 126 patients (99%) with Cabrol stitch (73%), reimplantation technique (19.7%), or ring annuloplasty (6.3%). There was no hospital mortality. At 10 and 14 years, overall survival was 81% ± 5% and 71% ± 6%, respectively, and freedom from reoperation was 80% ± 5% and 73% ± 6%, respectively. Age and left coronary cusp repair were independent predictors of reoperation. Freedom from recurrent severe aortic regurgitation (>2+) was 73% ± 5% and 66% ± 7% at 10 and 12 years, respectively. Age, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter, and patch repair were independent predictors of recurrent aortic regurgitation. Type of annuloplasty had no impact on survival or reoperation. CONCLUSIONS: Aortic valve repair for isolated severe aortic regurgitation in the tricuspid aortic valve is a safe procedure, and durability at 14 years is acceptable. In this study, the annuloplasty technique did not influence repair durability as was found in bicuspid aortic valve repair or aortic valve-sparing surgery. Severity of cusp pathology seems to be the main determinant of repair durability.