Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Outcomes of aortic root replacement in patients with Marfan syndrome: the role of valve-sparing and valve-replacing approaches.
Coselli, Joseph S; Volguina, Irina V; Nguyen, Lynna; Green, Susan Y; LeMaire, Scott A; Moon, Marc R.
Afiliação
  • Coselli JS; Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Michael E. DeBakey Department of Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.
  • Volguina IV; Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, The Texas Heart Institute, Houston, TX, USA.
  • Nguyen L; CHI St Luke's Health-Baylor St Luke's Medical Center, Houston, TX, USA.
  • Green SY; Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Michael E. DeBakey Department of Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.
  • LeMaire SA; Office of Surgical Research, Michael E. DeBakey Department of Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.
  • Moon MR; Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Michael E. DeBakey Department of Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.
Ann Cardiothorac Surg ; 12(4): 338-349, 2023 Jul 31.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37554715
Background: Marfan syndrome (MFS) is a heritable thoracic aortic disease with pervasive cardiovascular effects, including commonly, a dilated aortic root. Traditionally, the root is replaced using a mechanical composite valve graft (CVG); however, this valve-replacing (VR) approach necessitates a lifelong regimen of anticoagulation with a potential for late bleeding complications. In time, valve-sparing (VS) approaches were developed. Today, several options for aortic root replacement (ARR) exist; each has advantages and disadvantages that helps inform choice. The Aortic Valve Operative Outcomes in Marfan Patients (AVOMP) is a multi-center international registry to analyze clinical outcomes of ARR in MFS patients using either VR or VS techniques to better elucidate choice. We summarize outcomes of AVOMP and present our own experience. Methods: We performed 223 consecutive elective ARR [1991-2023] in patients with MFS; 15 such repairs were included in AVOMP. Repairs included 113 (51%) using a mechanical CVG, 62 (28%) using a VS approach, and 48 (22%) using a bioprosthetic root. Many patients underwent aortic arch repair (30% to 54% by type). Results: The median patient age was 38 [29-52] years. In comparing VS and VR groups, patients were similar in age and rates of major comorbidities and symptoms. Patients with VR repair had a more complex aortic history. The rate of redo sternotomy was 24% (n=54). Operative death was uncommon [4% overall (10/223); ranging from 2% to 8% by type], and stroke was rare [1/223 (<1%)]. Late survival and reoperation differed by operative approach; survival was improved in patients who underwent VS repair. Conclusions: We found that repair in patients with MFS undergoing ARR resulted in low operative risk. Our late results were similar to those of AVOMP in that patients undergoing VS repair tended to experience greater rates of valvular-structural deterioration, although this did not appear to impact survival.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Ann Cardiothorac Surg Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Ann Cardiothorac Surg Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Estados Unidos