Hemolysis during open heart surgery in patients with hereditary spherocytosis - systematic review of the literature and case study.

BACKGROUND: Due to the distinctive nature of cardiac surgery, patients suffering from hereditary spherocytosis (HS) are potentially at a high risk of perioperative complications resulting from hemolysis. Despite being the most prevalent cause of hereditary chronic hemolysis, the standards of surgical management are based solely on expert opinion. OBJECTIVE: We analyze the risk of hemolysis in HS patients after cardiac surgery based on a systematic review of the literature. We also describe a case of a patient with hereditary spherocytosis who underwent aortic valve repair. METHODS: This systematic review was registered in the PROSPERO international prospective register of systematic reviews (CRD42023417666) and included records from Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases. The case study investigates a 38-year-old patient who underwent surgery for an aortic valve defect in mid-2022. RESULTS: Of the 787 search results, 21 studies describing 23 cases of HS undergoing cardiac surgery were included in the final analysis. Hemolysis was diagnosed in five patients (one coronary artery bypass graft surgery, two aortic valve bioprosthesis, one ventricular septal defect closure, and one mitral valve plasty). None of the patients died in the perioperative period. Also, no significant clinical hemolysis was observed in our patient during the perioperative period. CONCLUSIONS: The literature data show that hemolysis is not common in patients with HS undergoing various cardiac surgery techniques. The typical management of a patient with mild/moderate HS does not appear to increase the risk of significant clinical hemolysis. Commonly accepted beliefs about factors inducing hemolysis during cardiac surgery may not be fully justified and require further investigation.

Comparative Analysis of Long-Term Outcomes in Valve-Sparing Aortic Root Reimplantation: Full Sternotomy versus Mini-Sternotomy Approach.

Background: Aortic valve-sparing aortic root replacement (VSARR) David procedure has not been routinely performed via minimally invasive access due to its complexity. Methods: We compared our results for mini-VSARR to sternotomy-VSARR from another excellence center. Results: Eighty-four patients, 62 in the sternotomy-VSARR group and 22 in the mini-VSARR group, were included. A baseline, the aneurysm dimensions were higher in the mini-VSARR group. Propensity matching resulted in 17 pairs with comparable characteristics. Aortic cross-clamp and cardiopulmonary bypass times were significantly longer in the mini-VSARR group, by 60 and 20 min, respectively (p < 0.001). In-hospital outcomes were comparable between the groups. Drainage volumes were numerically lower, and hospital length of stay was, on average, 3 days shorter (p < 0.001) in the mini-VSARR group. At a median follow-up of 5.5 years, there was no difference in mortality (p = 0.230). Survival at 1, 5 and 10 years was 100%, 100%, and 95% and 95%, 87% and 84% in the mini-VSARR and sternotomy-VSARR groups, respectively. No repeat interventions on the aortic valve were documented. Echocardiographic follow-up was complete in 91% with excellent durability of repair regardless of the approach: no cases of moderate/severe aortic regurgitation were reported in the mini-VSARR group. Conclusions: The favorable outcomes, reduced drainage, and shorter hospital stays associated with the mini-sternotomy approach underscore its potential advantages expanding beyond cosmetic outcome.

Robotic-Assisted Solutions for Invasive Cardiology, Cardiac Surgery and Routine On-Ward Tasks: A Narrative Review.

Robots are defined as programmable machines that can perform specified tasks. Medical robots are emerging solutions in the field of cardiology leveraging recent technological innovations of control systems, sensors, actuators, and imaging modalities. Robotic platforms are successfully applied for percutaneous coronary intervention, invasive cardiac electrophysiology procedures as well as surgical operations including minimally invasive aortic and mitral valve repair, coronary artery bypass procedures, and structural heart diseases. Furthermore, machines are used as staff-assisting tools to support nurses with repetitive clinical duties i.e., food delivery. High precision and resolution allow for excellent maneuverability, enabling the performance of medical procedures in challenging anatomies that are difficult or impossible using conventional approaches. Moreover, robot-assisted techniques protect operators from occupational hazards, reducing exposure to ionizing radiation, and limiting risk of orthopedic injuries. Novel automatic systems provide advantages for patients, ensuring device stability with optimized utilization of fluoroscopy. The acceptance of robotic technology among healthcare providers as well as patients paves the way for widespread clinical application in the field of cardiovascular medicine. However, incorporation of robotic systems is associated with some disadvantages including high costs of installation and expensive disposable instrumentations, the need for large operating room space, and the necessity of dedicated training for operators due to the challenging learning curve of robotic-assisted interventional systems.

Impact of Enterococci vs. Staphylococci Induced Infective Endocarditis after Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.

BACKGROUND: The two most common organisms found in infective endocarditis following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI-IE) are enterococci (EC-IE) and staphylococci (SC-IE). We aimed to compare clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with EC-IE and SC-IE. METHODS: TAVI-IE patients from 2007 to 2021 were included in this analysis. The 1-year mortality was the primary outcome measure of this retrospective multi-center analysis. RESULTS: Out of 163 patients, 53 (32.5%) EC-IE and 69 (42.3%) SC-IE patients were included. Subjects were comparable with regard to age, sex, and clinically relevant baseline comorbidities. Symptoms at admission were not significantly different between groups, except for a lower risk for presenting with septic shock in EC-IE than SC-IE. Treatment was performed in 78% by antibiotics alone and in 22% of patients by surgery and antibiotics, with no significant differences between groups. The rate of any complication, in particular heart failure, renal failure, and septic shock during treatment for IE, was lower in EC-IE compared with SC-IE (p < 0.05). In-hospital (EC-IE: 36% vs. SC-IE: 56%, p = 0.035) and 1-year mortality (EC-IE: 51% vs. SC-IE: 70%, p = 0.009) were significantly lower in EC-IE compared with SC-IE. CONCLUSIONS: EC-IE, compared with SC-IE, was associated with a lower morbidity and mortality. However, absolute numbers are high, a finding that should trigger further research in appropriate perioperative antibiotic management and improvement of early IE diagnosis in the case of clinical suspicion.

Surgical and transcatheter aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis in low-risk elective patients: Analysis of the Aortic Valve Replacement in Elective Patients From the Aortic Valve Multicenter Registry.

OBJECTIVES: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) remains the preferred strategy for high-risk or elderly individuals with aortic valve (AV) stenosis who are not considered to be optimal surgical candidates. Recent evidence suggests that low-risk patients may benefit from TAVI as well. The current study evaluates midterm survival in low-risk patients undergoing elective surgical AV replacement (SAVR) versus TAVI. METHODS: The Aortic Valve Replacement in Elective Patients From the Aortic Valve Multicenter Registry (AVALON) compared isolated elective transfemoral TAVI or SAVR with sternotomy or minimally invasive approach in low-risk individuals performed between 2015 and 2019. Propensity score matching was conducted to determine SAVR controls for TAVI group in a 1-to-3 ratio with 0.2 caliper. RESULTS: A total of 2393 patients undergoing elective surgery (1765 SAVR and 629 TAVI) with median European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II (EuroSCORE II) score 1.81 (interquartile range [IQR], 1.36 to 2.53]) were initially included. Median follow-up was 2.72 years (IQR, 1.32-4.08; max 6.0). Propensity score matching returned 329 TAVI cases and 593 SAVR controls. Thirty-day mortality was 11 out of 329 (3.32%) in TAVI and 18 out of 593 (3.03%) in SAVR (risk ratio, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.52-2.37; P = .801) groups, respectively. At 2 years, survival curves began to diverge in favor of SAVR, which was associated with 30% lower mortality (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.496-0.997; P = .048). CONCLUSIONS: Our data did not demonstrate a survival difference between TAVI and SAVR during the first 2 postprocedure years. After that time, SAVR is associated with improved survival. Extended observations from randomized trials in low-risk patients undergoing elective surgery are warranted to confirm these findings and draw definitive conclusions.

Transcatheter aortic valve­in­valve implantation for failed surgical bioprostheses: results from the Polish Transcatheter Aortic Valve-in-Valve Implantation (ViV­TAVI) Registry

INTRODUCTION: Transcatheter aortic valve­in ­valve implantation (ViV­TAVI) has emerged as an alternative to redo surgery in patients with failed surgical aortic bioprosthesis. OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the safety and efficacy of ViV­TAVI in Polish patients after surgical aortic valve replacement. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a nationwide multicenter registry of ViV­TAVI procedures. Data were collected using an online form, and the clinical follow ­up lasted 1 year. RESULTS: From 2008 to 2020, 130 ViV­TAVI procedures were performed (1.9% of all transcatheter aortic valve implantation [TAVI] cases). A considerable increase in ViV­TAVI procedures since 2018 has been observed (n = 59, 45% of ViV­TAVI cases). Hancock II, Freestyle, and homograft were the most frequently treated bioprostheses. The self ­expanding supra ­annular Corevalve / Evolut valve was used in 76% of cases. In 21% of cases, the mean postprocedural pressure gradient (PG) exceeded 20 mm Hg. All­cause mortal­ity at 1 year was 10.8%. Aortic valve stenosis was associated with a higher mean PG than aortic valve regurgitation or mixed disease (P = 0.004). Supra ­annular transcatheter aortic valves were associated with lower mean PGs than intra ­annular valves (P = 0.004). Second ­generation devices were associated with shorter procedure time (120 min vs 135 min, P = 0.04), less frequent need for additional TAVI (2% vs 10%, P = 0.04), and lower 1­year cardiovascular mortality (95% vs 82.8%, P = 0.03) than first­generation valves. CONCLUSIONS: Transcatheter treatment of failed bioprostheses is increasingly common, with the best hemodynamic effect shown for supra ­annular valves. The introduction of second­generation valves has improved procedural and clinical outcomes.

Bicuspid aortic valve repair with external or subcommissural annuloplasty-echocardiographic prospective trial.

BACKGROUND: The incompetent bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) can be repaired using various techniques. This study presents a prospective comparison of external and subcommissural aortic annuloplasty. METHODS: Fifty consecutive patients (38 males, age: 43.9 ± 15.8 years) with BAV insufficiency with or without aortic dilatation underwent valve repair in a single institution. They were prospectively allocated to one of two groups based on the aortic annulus stabilization technique: 25 patients were operated on using the subcommissural annuloplasty (SCA) and 25 using the external complete annuloplasty (EA). Transthoracic echocardiography was performed in all patients before the operation and 1 and 3 years after the operation. Moreover, mortality and morbidity at 7 years were evaluated. RESULTS: In prospective echocardiographic comparison, EA was associated with smaller diameter of the aortic annulus (24.1 ± 2.6 mm vs. 25.8±2.1 mm, p < .05) and lower mean and peak transvalvular gradients (7 ± 4 mmHg vs. 13 ± 4 mmHg, p = .02 and 15.3 ± 9.7 mmHg vs. 20.7 ± 5.6 mmHg, p = .03, respectively). No patients died or required reoperation due to recurrent insufficiency at 6,81 (interquartile range-0,17) years after the operation. The Kaplan-Meier actuarial freedom from aortic regurgitation (AR) grade =2 or gradient > 20 mmHg at 35.1 ± 3.6 months years was 96% (24 out of 25) for patients who had external annuloplasty and amounted to 76% (19 out of 25) for those who had SCA, p = .05). CONCLUSIONS: External annuloplasty performed during repair of the BAV is associated with better hemodynamics at medium-term follow-up compared to SCA.

Open aortic arch surgery: 10 years' single-center experience.

INTRODUCTION: Open aortic arch surgery is a complex cardiac surgical procedure. AIM: We reviewed the 10-year outcomes of elective aortic arch aneurysm surgery in a single cardiac surgical center. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The analysis includes all patients who underwent elective aortic arch surgery at our institution between January 2010 and December 2020. The study population was divided into group A consisting of patients operated on during the first 5 years, and group B, including patients operated on during the subsequent 5 years. The groups were compared with regard to baseline characteristics, scope of the surgery, operative and postoperative data as well as morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: Eighty-six elective aortic arch procedures were performed during the analyzed period, including 25 (29%) patients in group A and 61 (71%) patients in group B. The hemiarch procedure was more frequently performed in group A (17 patients, 68%) in comparison to group B (21 patients, 34%) (p = 0.008). Stroke was recorded in 6 (20%) patients from group A and 5 (8.2%) patients from group B (p = 0.002). Five-year survival was 60 ±9.8% for group A, and 81 ±6.2% for group B (log-rank test, p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: After completion of the learning curve, open aortic arch surgery is associated with acceptable early mortality, low incidence of stroke, and a high 5-year survival rate.

The Role of Deep Hypothermia in Cardiac Surgery.

Hypothermia is defined as a decrease in body core temperature to below 35 °C. In cardiac surgery, four stages of hypothermia are distinguished: mild, moderate, deep, and profound. The organ protection offered by deep hypothermia (DH) enables safe circulatory arrest as a prerequisite to carrying out cardiac surgical intervention. In adult cardiac surgery, DH is mainly used in aortic arch surgery, surgical treatment of pulmonary embolism, and acute type-A aortic dissection interventions. In surgery treating congenital defects, DH is used to assist aortic arch reconstructions, hypoplastic left heart syndrome interventions, and for multi-stage treatment of infants with a single heart ventricle during the neonatal period. However, it should be noted that a safe duration of circulatory arrest in DH for the central nervous system is 30 to 40 min at most and should not be exceeded to prevent severe neurological adverse events. Personalized therapy for the patient and adequate blood temperature monitoring, glycemia, hematocrit, pH, and cerebral oxygenation is a prerequisite and indispensable part of DH.

Procedural and 1-year outcomes following large vessel coronary artery perforation treated by covered stents implantation: Multicentre CRACK registry.

BACKGROUND: Data regarding the clinical outcomes of covered stents (CSs) used to seal coronary artery perforations (CAPs) in the all-comer population are scarce. The aim of the CRACK Registry was to evaluate the procedural, 30-days and 1-year outcomes after CAP treated by CS implantation. METHODS: This multicenter all-comer registry included data of consecutive patients with CAP treated by CS implantation. The primary endpoint was the composite of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), defined as cardiac death, target lesion revascularization (TLR), and myocardial infarction (MI). RESULTS: The registry included 119 patients (mean age: 68.9 ± 9.7 years, 55.5% men). Acute coronary syndrome, including: unstable angina 21 (17.6%), NSTEMI 26 (21.8%), and STEMI 26 (21.8%), was the presenting diagnosis in 61.3%, and chronic coronary syndromes in 38.7% of patients. The most common lesion type, according to ACC/AHA classification, was type C lesion in 47 (39.5%) of cases. A total of 52 patients (43.7%) had type 3 Ellis classification, 28 patients (23.5%) had type 2 followed by 39 patients (32.8%) with type 1 perforation. Complex PCI was performed in 73 (61.3%) of patients. Periprocedural death occurred in eight patients (6.7%), of which two patients had emergency cardiac surgery. Those patients were excluded from the one-year analysis. Successful sealing of the perforation was achieved in 99 (83.2%) patients. During the follow-up, 26 (26.2%) patients experienced MACE [7 (7.1%) cardiac deaths, 13 (13.1%) TLR, 11 (11.0%) MIs]. Stent thrombosis (ST) occurred in 6 (6.1%) patients [4(4.0%) acute ST, 1(1.0%) subacute ST and 1(1.0%) late ST]. CONCLUSIONS: The use of covered stents is an effective treatment of CAP. The procedural and 1-year outcomes of CAP treated by CS implantation showed that such patients should remain under follow-up due to relatively high risk of MACE.

Aortic Root Reconstruction with TachoSil Fibrin Sealant Patch in Acute Type A Aortic Dissection.

PURPOSE: We propose a novel technique for reconstruction of the dissected aortic root with the use of TachoSil fibrin sealant patch. METHODS: Patients with acute type A aortic dissection involving the aortic root were included. Appropriately prepared TachoSil fibrin sealant patch was placed between the dissected layers of the aortic root to achieve their durable fusion. Thus, the false lumen was eliminated, and the anatomical and functional structure of the aortic wall was restored. RESULTS: In all, 13 patients mean aged 57 ± 10.3 years underwent surgery for acute type A aortic dissection with the use of TachoSil fibrin sealant patch. All patients survived the surgery. The mean follow-up time was 30.8 ± 16.4 months. Follow-up computed tomography angiography (CTA) scans confirmed no aortic root dissection in all patients. CONCLUSIONS: This technique ensures durable restoration of the aortic wall structure, eliminates the secondary aortic valve regurgitation, and allows for the preservation of patients' native aortic valve.

Comparison of bicuspid and tricuspid aortic valve repair.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of tricuspid aortic valve (TAV) and bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) repair. METHODS: We assessed mortality, freedom from reoperation and the rate of aortic valve regurgitation recurrence. Mortality in both groups was compared with expected survival, and risk factors for reoperation were identified. RESULTS: From January 2010 to April 2020, a total of 368 elective aortic valve repair procedures were performed, including 223 (60.6%) in patients with TAV. The perioperative mortality was 0.7% in the BAV group and 3.6% in the TAV group (P = 0.079). Estimated survival at 5 years in the BAV versus TAV group was 97 ± 3% vs 80 ± 6%, respectively (P < 0.001). Freedom from reoperation at 5 years in the TAV versus BAV group was 96 ± 3% vs 93 ± 4%, respectively (P = 0.28). Grade 2 or more aortic valve regurgitation was noted in 9.9% of BAV patients and 11% of TAV patients (P = 0.66). Reoperation was predicted by cusp perforation [hazard ratio 15.86 (4.44-56.61); P < 0.001], the use of pericardial patch [hazard ratio 8.58 (1.96-37.53); P = 0.004] and aortic valve annulus diameter >27.5 mm [hazard ratio 3.07 (0.99-9.58); P = 0.053]. CONCLUSIONS: BAV repair is as durable as TAV repair. BAV is not a predictor of a higher rate of reoperations. BAV repair yields survival comparable to expected. Cusp perforation, aortic valve annulus diameter >27.5 mm and the use of pericardial patch adversely impact long-term outcome of aortic valve repair.

Aneurysm of the aortic root and valve­sparing aortic root replacement: long-term outcomes from a single Polish center.

BACKGROUND: Valve-sparing aortic root replacement (VSARR) techniques are an alternative to the classic Bentall procedure when aortic root aneurysm is not accompanied by aortic valve stenosis, and the regurgitant aortic valve is amenable to repair. AIMS: The aim of the study was to assess long -term outcomes of valve sparing aortic root replacement using the David technique and the Yacoub technique. METHODS: A total of 101 consecutive, elective VSARR procedures were performed from January 2010 to April 2020 including 52 David procedures (51.5%) and 49 Yacoub procedures (48.5%). We analyzed mortality, freedom from reoperation, and freedom from aortic valve regurgitation. The analysis was performed for the entire study cohort and for 2 subgroups: the David technique and the Yacoub technique. RESULTS: The mean (SD) age was 50.2 (16.1) years; 90 (89.1%) patients were male. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) EuroScore II was 3.7 (2.7‒5.8). At 1, 5, and 8 years after surgery, survival (SE) was 98% (3%), 91.8% (8%), and 91.8% (8%), respectively, whereas freedom from reoperation (SE) was 100%, 97% (3%), and 97% (3%), respectively. Follow­up echocardiography performed at a median (IQR) of 18.7 (2.5‒36.7) months postsurgery revealed freedom from aortic valve regurgitation in 90.8% of patients. No significant differences in mortality, freedom from reoperation, and freedom from aortic valve regurgitation were noted between the David and Yacoub subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: VSARR is a safe and effective surgical technique in patients with aortic root aneurysm, as the associated mortality, reoperation rate, and aortic valve regurgitation recurrence are low.

Long-term outcomes of aortic valve repair in over 500 consecutive patients: a single-center experience.

BACKGROUND: Over the last years, aortic valve repair has evolved from being a random and irreproducible procedure to a standardized technique yielding durable long­term results. AIMS: The aim of the study was to assess long­term outcomes of aortic valve repair and aortic valve sparing procedures. METHODS: We analyzed the outcomes of all consecutive patients who underwent aortic valve repair and/ or aortic valve sparing root replacement till the end of 2019. We assessed mortality, freedom from reoperation, and freedom from at least moderate aortic valve regurgitation. RESULTS: A total of 504 patients underwent aortic valve repair and/or aortic valve sparing root replacement over 17 years, including 452 (89.7%) elective and 52 (10.3%) emergency surgeries for acute type A aortic dissections. Median (interquartile range) age was 59 (35-66) years, 72.4% were male. Median follow­up time was 35 months. Estimated 5­year survival was 83%, and 10­year survival was 73%. In 452 patients after elective surgery, the estimated actuarial 5­year and 10­year survival was 86% and 75%, respectively. In patients after emergency surgery for acute type A aortic dissection, actuarial 5­year survival was 62%, and 10­year survival was 62%. Estimated 5- and 10­year freedom from reoperation was 96% and 87%, respectively. The comparison of both subgroups did not reveal differences (P = 0.42). Freedom from at least moderate aortic valve regurgitation was confirmed in 86.6% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Aortic valve repair is a durable and effective surgical procedure associated with low early and late mortality. Aortic valve reconstruction in patients with acute type A aortic dissection yields good long­term results.

General anaesthesia or sedation for percutaneous aortic valve implantation? The questionnaire results and authors' experience.

INTRODUCTION: Over the last two decades transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has been approved for clinical use. The anaesthetic choice for this procedure is evolving. General anaesthesia was the predominant anaesthetic technique. Growing experience and advances in technology and economic considerations have led to an increasing interest in performing TAVR under monitored sedation. AIM: The assessment of monitored sedation, called cooperative sedation, involves pharmacologically mediated suppression of consciousness and preservation of verbal contact in response to stimulation as a safe method of anaesthesia for TAVR. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sixty out of 63 TAVR patients with femoral access received monitored sedation. Dexmedetomidine was administered in most of such cases (46 patients). A questionnaire was also carried out by staff involved in performing TAVR procedures, with more than 5 years of experience in it, concerning the method of anaesthesia and perioperative care. RESULTS: Conversion to general anaesthesia was required in 10% of patients (6 cases), only one as a patient-related complication (hypercarbia). The questionnaire carried out showed that anaesthesia and postoperative care after TAVR are underestimated. CONCLUSIONS: The preliminary results regarding anaesthetic management in TAVR procedures demonstrate that monitored sedation is safe, provided that contraindications are observed.

Predictors of early and medium-term outcome of 200 consecutive aortic valve and root repairs.

OBJECTIVES: Advantages of aortic valve repair and root reconstruction include maintenance of natural valve hemodynamic parameters and avoidance of prosthetic valve-related complications. However, general acceptance of valve reconstruction may be limited by paucity of long-term follow-up data from only a few centers. This report is intended to supplement existing outcome information for aortic valve repair. METHODS: Between 2003 and 2013, 200 consecutive patients (149 men, 51 women; mean age, 52.1 years) with significant aortic regurgitation and aortic root enlargement underwent aortic valve repair and associated root reconstruction. The same prospective selection criteria and systematic valve repair approaches were followed throughout the study. Root management consisted of either root remodeling or reimplantation with Dacron prostheses. Kaplan-Meier techniques were used to assess major end points of all-cause mortality, reoperation, and repair failure. Univariable log-rank testing was used to identify associations between risk factors and major events. RESULTS: Early mortality was 2% (4 patients), and early repair failure was 3% (6 patients). New York Heart Association functional class was found to be a risk factor for early mortality and morbidity (odds ratio, 3.3; P = .03), whereas crossclamp time and cardiopulmonary time were risk factors for early mortality (odds ratio, 1.04; 95% confidence interval, 1-1.07; P = .01 and odds ratio, 1.02; 95% confidence interval, 1-1.03; P = .02), respectively. Survival at a mean follow-up of 48.6 ± 34.3 months (median follow-up, 43.6 months; range, 17.8-78 months) was 94%, with a freedom from reoperation of 91%. Univariable risk factors for mortality were preoperative New York Heart Association functional class and requirement for root replacement. Repair failure and reoperation were associated with bicuspid valve anatomy, subcommissural annuloplasty, and complex leaflet repair. Freedom from repair failure was associated with aortic reimplantation. CONCLUSIONS: Data from a prospective cohort of patients undergoing aortic valve repair and root reconstruction reinforce the satisfactory medium-term results obtained with valve reconstruction. Further analysis of these patient outcomes is necessary to draw definitive conclusions on operative techniques.

Different techniques for aortic valve repair and the associated root reconstruction - prospective long-term follow-up of the first 100 patients.

INTRODUCTION: The advantages of aortic valve and aortic root reconstructive surgery include the provision of natural postoperative valve hemodynamics and the avoidance of prosthetic valve-related complications. A systematic approach based on functional classification of aortic regurgitation allows standardization and reproducibility. Its potential applicability, however, is limited by the relative lack of long-term follow-up data. AIM: To achieve the long term results of aortic valve and root repair in prospectively recruited group of 100 patients operated on during first seven years. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Between the years 2003 and 2013, 225 consecutive patients (175 male, 50 female, mean age 51.3 years) with severe aortic regurgitation and aortic root enlargement underwent aortic valve repair or sparing surgery. The first 100 patients operated between 2003 and 2009 were prospectively enrolled in the study in order to achieve a 105-month follow-up. They underwent aortic valve repair and associated aortic root reconstruction. This prospective study is aimed at assessing the major endpoints of overall survival and freedom from reoperation. Additionally, log-rank testing for the risk factors associated with overall mortality, reoperation, and aortic valve repair failure was performed. RESULTS: Among 225 patients, early mortality occurred in the case of 5 patients (2.2%), while 6 (2.5%) patients experienced early valve failure. In a prospective analysis performed on the first 100 patients, long-term results achieved with Kaplan-Meier analysis showed a survival rate of 93% and freedom from reoperation at the level of 91.3%. The risk factors for overall mortality included NYHA class, creatinine level, and perioperative root replacement as reimplantation. Redo operation was associated with bicuspid aortic valve and perioperative leaflet resection with pericardial patch repair. CONCLUSIONS: One hundred and five month follow-up data from this prospectively analyzed cohort of patients prove that aortic valve repair associated with aortic root reconstruction can be performed with satisfactory results.