Ascending Aortic Progression After Isolated Aortic Valve Replacement Among Patients with Bicuspid and Tricuspid Aortic Valves.

OBJECTIVES: The aims of the present study were to compare the long-term outcomes for ascending aortic dilatation and adverse aortic events after isolated aortic valve replacement between patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) and tricuspid aortic valve ( TAV). METHODS: This retrospective study included 310 patients who had undergone isolated aortic valve replacement with an ascending aorta diameter ≤ 45 mm between January 2010 and September 2021. The patients were divided into BAV group (n=90) and TAV group (n=220). The differences in the dilation rate of the ascending aorta and long-term outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: Overall survival was 89 ± 4% in the BAV group vs. 75 ± 6% in the TAV group at 10 years postoperatively (P=0.007), yet this difference disappeared after adjusting exclusively for age (P=0.343). The mean annual growth rate of the ascending aorta was similar between the two groups during follow-up (0.5 ± 0.6 mm/year vs. 0.4 ± 0.5 mm/year; P=0.498). Ten-year freedom from adverse aortic events was 98.1% in the BAV group vs. 95.0% in the TAV group (P=0.636). Multivariable analysis revealed preoperative ascending aorta diameter to be a significant predictor of adverse aortic events (hazard ratio: 1.76; 95% confidence interval: 1.33 to 2.38; P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Our study revealed that the long-term survival and the risks of adverse aortic events between BAV and TAV patients were similar after isolated aortic valve replacement. BAV was not a risk factor of adverse aortic events.

Comprehensive imaging evaluation of the aortic valve and root before aortic root surgery: a study comparing MDCT and TEE.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the accuracy and consistency of MDCT and TEE in the preoperative assessment of aortic root surgery. METHODS: From January 2021 to September 2022, 118 patients who underwent aortic root surgery were included in this study. All patients underwent high-quality preoperative MDCT and TEE examinations, and the examination results were independently measured and assessed by two senior radiologists or ultrasound specialists. Bland-Altman analysis and Pearson correlation testing were employed to assess the correlation and consistency between MDCT and TEE. These analyses were then compared with actual intraoperative measurement data. RESULTS: Among all the patients, 73 (61.86%) had tricuspid aortic valve (TAV), and 45 (38.14%) had bicuspid aortic valve (BAV). A comparison between the TEE and MDCT measurements showed that for the annulus diameter, the area-derived diameter had the best correlation and agreement. For the sinus of Valsalva diameter, the circumference-derived diameter was optimal. However, for the STJ diameter, the minimum cross-sectional diameter showed the best agreement with TEE. In contrast, measurements of geometric height showed a weaker correlation and agreement. CONCLUSION: Contrast-enhanced MDCT can be a valuable tool for perioperative evaluation in aortic root surgery, with good correlation, consistency, and feasibility when compared to TEE. The choice of MDCT measurement methodology, specifically area-derived and circumference-derived diameter, proved to be more accurate than other methods. Further research is required to enhance the understanding of aortic valve repair and associated imaging techniques.

Long-term outcomes in patients with bicuspid valve stenosis and aortic dilation undergoing transcatheter valve implantation.

BACKGROUND: To date, whether ascending aorta dilation (AAD) should be considered a contraindication for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) remains a topic of debate.. OBJECTIVE: The study investigated the clinical outcome of TAVR in patients with bicuspid aortic valve stenosis (BAV-AS) complicated by AAD. METHODS: We included patients with BAV-AS who underwent TAVR between 2012 and 2019. We collected patient perioperative clinical data., tracked clinical outcomes for over four years post-TAVR, and obtained echocardiography images one year postoperatively. The Kaplan-Meier method was employed for analyzing both unadjusted and adjusted survival data, which was compared using the log-rank test. COX regression and nomograms were used to assess the impact of AAD on post-TAVR clinical outcomes in patients with aortic stenosis (AS), with all-cause mortality as the primary clinical endpoint. RESULTS: A total of 111 BAV patients were included in this study. Long-term follow-up showed an increased mortality risk in patients with BAV-AAD (adjusted Kaplan-Meier analysis: P = .02/0.001). Cox correlation analysis indicated that age (OR = 1.137; P = .034), AAD (OR = 3.51; P = .038), and postoperative left ventricular pressure (LVSP) (OR: 0.959; P = .044) were predictive factors for mortality more than four years after TAVR in patients with BAV. The area under the curve of the Nomogram predicting long-term survival for the training set of patients based on the above metrics was 0.845 (95% CI: 0.696-0.994). Short-term cardiac ultrasound follow-up showed a more rapid rate of AA expansion (0.29 [0-0.34] vs. -1 [-3.3-1] mm/month, P = .001) and a smaller proportion of AA diameter reduction (7.1% vs. 53.7%, P = .001) in patients who died. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with BAV-AAD-AS treated with TAVR have an increased risk of long-term mortality, and clinical prediction models, including AAD age and postoperative LVSP, may predict long-term patient survival. CONDENSED ABSTRACT: The study investigated the clinical outcome of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in patients with bicuspid aortic valve stenosis (BAV-AS) complicated by ascending aorta dilation (AAD). Patients with BAV-AAD-AS treated with TAVR have an increased risk of long-term mortality. AAD, age and postoperative LVSP, may predict long-term patient survival. Short-term cardiac ultrasound follow-up showed a more rapid rate of AA expansion and a smaller proportion of AA diameter reduction in patients who died. A high postoperative AAD expansion rate may indicate an adverse clinical outcome. Surgery regimens for tolerable BAV-AADs and can be considered as a treatment option.

Aortopathy and aortic valve surgery in patients with bicuspid aortic valve with and without raphe.

AIM: To evaluate the association between raphe in bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) patients and valve dysfunction, aortopathy and aortic valve surgery in the REBECCA registry [REgistro della valvola aortica Bicuspide della Società Italiana di ECocardiografia e CArdiovascular Imaging (SIECVI)]. METHODS: Prevalence of aortic valve dysfunction and aortopathy was investigated in BAV patients with and without raphe. Aortic valve dysfunction (regurgitation or stenosis) was categorized as mild, moderate and severe. Aortopathy was defined as annulus ≥14 mm/m2; root ≥20 mm/m2; sinotubular junction ≥16 mm/m2; ascending aorta ≥17 mm/m2, and classified in Type A, isolated ascending aorta dilatation; Type B, aortic root and ascending aorta dilatation; and Type C, isolated aortic root dilatation. RESULTS: Overall, 695 patients with BAV were enrolled; 520 (74.8%) with raphe and 175 (25.2%) without raphe. BAV patients with raphe presented more frequently with moderate or severe aortic stenosis than BAV patients without raphe (183 [35.2%] vs 34 [19.4%], p < 0.001). A higher prevalence of aortopathy, particularly Type B, was observed in patients with vs without raphe. At multivariable analysis, raphe was a predictor of aortic valve surgery at three-year follow-up (odds ratio 2.19, 95% confidence interval 1.08-4.44, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with BAV and raphe have a higher prevalence of significant aortic stenosis, aortopathy, especially Type B, and a higher risk of undergoing aortic valve surgery at three-year follow-up.

Twenty-five years' experience with isolated bicuspid aortic valve repair: impact of commissural orientation.

OBJECTIVES: Repair of the bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) has evolved in the past 25 years. The aim of this study was to review and analyse the long-term durability of isolated BAV repair with particular focus on commissural orientation (CO). METHODS: All patients who underwent BAV repair for severe aortic regurgitation between October 1998 and December 2022 were included. The study group consists of all patients operated after 2009, i.e. since CO modification. The control group includes patients who were operated before 2009. CO was classified as symmetric, asymmetric and very asymmetric. RESULTS: Overall, 594 adult patients (93% male; mean age 42 years) were included. At 15 years, survival was 94.8% [standard deviation (SD): 2.2]; freedom from reoperation was 86.8% (SD: 2.3). Freedom from aortic insufficiency ≥II was 70.8% (SD: 4.7) at 15 years. Modification of CO by sinus plication was performed in 200 (33.7%) instances. Using competing risks analysis, the absence of effective height measurement (P = 0.018), very asymmetric CO (P = 0.028), the presence of calcification (P < 0.001), the use of pericardial patch (P < 0.001), the use of subcommissural sutures (P < 0.001) and preoperative endocarditis (P = 0.005) were identified as independent predictors for reoperation. Follow-up was 97% complete (4228 patient-years); mean follow-up was 7 years (SD: 5). CONCLUSIONS: Isolated BAV repair leads to good survival and durability in all morphologic types if cusp repair is guided by effective height, suture annuloplasty is performed, and CO is modified using sinus plication in asymmetrical valves. Very asymmetrical valves may should be treated with a lower threshold for replacement.

[Early to mid-term clinical outcomes of aortic valve repair in patients with bicuspid aortic insufficiency].

Objective: To examine the early to mid-term clinical outcomes of aortic valve repair in patients with bicuspid aortic insufficiency. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study. The clinical data of 124 patients with BAV insufficiency who underwent aortic valve repair from January 2017 to June 2023 in the Department of Cardiovascular Surgery at Fuwai Hospital were analyzed retrospectively. There were 117 males and 7 females with an age of (38.1±12.7) years (range: 14 to 65 years). Depending on whether the aortic sinus was replaced or not, surgical approaches were divided into valve sparing root replacement (reimplantation, remodeling, modified remodeling) and isolated aortic valve repair (annuloplasty, isolated aortic valve leaflet repair). Perioperative and follow-up data were collected. Kaplan-Meier method was used to plot the curves of survival rate, free recurrence rate of massive aortic valve insufficiency and free re-operation rate, and Log-rank test was used for comparison between groups. Results: Among the surgeries, there were 47 cases of reimplantation, 8 cases of remodeling, 8 cases of modified remodeling, 48 cases of aortic annuloplasty (external annuloplasty in 22 cases, CV-0 annuloplasty in 26 cases), and 13 cases of isolated leaflet repair. Leaflet plication was the most used leaflet repair technique, used in 103 patients. The cardiopulmonary bypass time was (133.7±56.9) minutes (range: 48 to 461 minutes), and aortic cross-clamp time was (103.8±47.8) minutes (range: 25 to 306 minutes), with no surgical mortality. All patients underwent outpatient or telephone follow-up. The cumulative follow-up time was 340.3 person-years and the mean follow-up time was (M (IQR)) 34.0 (25.5) months (range: 3 to 76 months). The 5-year survival rate was 98.4%, the 5-year freedom from significant insufficiency rate was 93.4% and the 5-year freedom from aortic valve reoperation rate was 95.6%. The subgroup analysis revealed a significantly better freedom from the significant insufficiency rate in the aortic valve annular reduction group compared to the non-reduction group (P<0.01). Conclusions: Aortic valve repair in patients with bicuspid aortic insufficiency could obtain steady early to mid-term outcomes. Aortic annuloplasty can reduce the risk of recurrent aortic valve insufficiency in patients undergoing aortic repair.

Readmission-related outcomes of surgical versus transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients aged 65 or older with bicuspid aortic valve.

BACKGROUND: There continues to be debate regarding the superiority of transcatheter (TAVR) over surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with bicuspid aortic valves (BAV). We aimed to compare outcomes during readmissions in elderly patients with BAV who underwent SAVR or TAVR. METHODS: Patients 65 years or older with BAV who underwent TAVR or isolated SAVR were identified using the National Readmission Database from 2012 through 2018. We compared outcomes during readmissions within 90 days after discharge from the index surgery. Propensity score matching was performed to adjust the baseline differences. RESULTS: During the study period, 8555 and 1081 elderly patients with BAV underwent SAVR and TAVR, respectively. The number of patients who underwent TAVR went up by 179 % from 2012 to 2018. Propensity score matching yielded 573 patients in each group. A total of 111 (19.4 %) in the SAVR group and 125 (21.8 %) in the TAVR group were readmitted within 90 days after the index surgery (p = .31). The mortality during the readmissions within 90 days was equivalent between the two groups (0.9 % in the SAVR group vs. 3.2 % in the TAVR group, p = .22). However, the median hospital cost was approximately doubled in the TAVR group during the readmission (18,250 dollars vs. 9310 dollars in the SAVR group, p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Readmission within 90 days was common in both groups. While the mortality during the readmissions after the surgery was equivalent between the two groups, hospital cost was significantly more expensive in the TAVR group.

Valve-Sparing Aortic Root Replacement With Reimplantation vs Remodeling: A Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Long-term outcomes of valve-sparing aortic root replacement (VSARR) with reimplantation vs remodeling in patients undergoing aortic root surgery remains a controversial subject. METHODS: This study was a pooled meta-analysis of Kaplan-Meier-derived data from comparative studies published by December 31, 2022. RESULTS: Fifteen studies met our eligibility criteria, comprising 3044 patients (1991 in the reimplantation group and 2018 in the remodeling group). Patients who underwent VSARR with remodeling had a higher risk of all-cause death (hazard ratio [HR], 1.54; 95% CI, 1.16-2.03; P = .002, log-rank test P < .001). Landmark analysis (with 4 years as the landmark time point) demonstrated that survival was lower in patients who underwent VSARR with remodeling (HR, 2.15; 95% CI, 1.43-3.24; P < .001) in the first 4 years. Beyond the 4-year time point, no difference in survival was observed (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.72-1.50; P = .822). The risk for need of aortic valve and/or root reintervention was higher in patients undergoing VSARR with remodeling (HR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.07-2.07; P = .019, log-rank test P < .001). We did not find statistically significant coefficients for the covariates of age, female sex, connective tissue disorders, bicuspid aortic valve, aortic dissection, coronary bypass surgery, total arch replacement, or annular stabilization, which means that these covariates did not modulate the effects observed in our pooled analyses. CONCLUSIONS: VSARR with reimplantation is associated with better overall survival and lower risk of need for reintervention over time compared with VSARR with remodeling. Regarding overall survival, we observed a time-varying effect that favored the reimplantation technique up to 4 years of follow-up, but not beyond this time point.

Valve Sparing vs Composite Valve Graft Root Replacement: Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Both valve-sparing root replacement and composite valve graft (CVG) are acceptable options in aortic root replacement. We compare outcomes of these 2 approaches and durability of the aortic valve. METHODS: A consecutive 1635 patients without acute dissection underwent primary aortic root replacement from 1997 to 2022; 473 (29%) underwent valve-sparing root replacement, and 1162 (71%) received CVG. Propensity score matching was used to reduce baseline differences. RESULTS: The CVG group was older (59 ± 14 years vs 49 ± 14 years; P < .001) with more comorbidities, such as hypertension (88.4% vs 66.4%; P < .001), diabetes (7% vs 1.7%; P < .001), ischemic heart disease (5.1% vs 1.3%; P = .001), pulmonary disease (6.6% vs 1.3%; P < .001), renal impairment (8.6% vs 1.3%; P < .001), class III-IV heart failure (35% vs 9.2%; P < .001), bicuspid aortic valves (44.8% vs 24.1%; P < .001), and severe aortic insufficiency (50.2% vs 13.2%; P < .001). Operative mortality was 0.4% (0% in valve sparing); incidence of major postoperative complications was 2.9% (3.6% vs 1.1%; P = .009). Ten-year survival was 93.1% (91.2% vs 97.7%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.7; 95% CI, 0.9-3.3; P = .120). Mean follow-up was 65 ± 60 months; aortic valve reoperations were similar (5.8% vs 5.7%; HR, 0.8; 95% CI, 0.4-1.4; P = .401). Recurrent moderate-severe aortic insufficiency was less prevalent in CVG (6.1% vs 11.1%; HR, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.07-0.27; P < .001). Propensity score matching identified 225 pairs. There was no difference in 10-year survival or reoperations. Recurrent moderate-severe aortic insufficiency was higher with valve sparing. CONCLUSIONS: Both valve-sparing operations and CVG provide excellent early and late outcomes out to 10 years. Valve sparing is associated with a higher risk for development of aortic insufficiency but no difference in reoperations.

Influence of preoperative and intraoperative factors on recovery after aortic root surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the influence of intraoperative factors relative to preoperative risk factors on recovery after aortic root replacement (ARR). METHODS: Retrospective review of baseline and intraoperative characteristics was performed of 822 patients at our Aortic Center from 2005 to 2019. Inclusion criteria were all patients age 18 and older who underwent ARR at our institution from 2005 to 2019. The primary endpoint was the aggregate outcome of "failure to achieve uneventful recovery (FUR)," as previously defined. RESULTS: In total, 207 (25%) patients experienced FUR. The following preoperative and intraoperative variables were significantly associated with FUR in the multivariable analysis: cardiopulmonary bypass time (OR 1.01, 95% CI 1.01-1.02) open chest management (OR 5.67, 95% CI 2.65-12.1), ejection fraction (OR 1.03, 95% CI 1.01-1.04), chronic kidney disease > stage 3a (OR 2.37, 95% CI 1.54-3.63), bicuspid aortic valve (OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.21-1.96), and female sex (OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.06-1.61). Cardiopulmonary bypass time and open chest management were among the top three partial R2 contributors to the logistic regression model variance. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest efficacy in using intraoperative parameters to predict postoperative outcomes after ARR.

Five-Year Outcomes After Bicuspid Aortic Valve Replacement With a Novel Tissue Bioprosthesis.

BACKGROUND: This study investigated the safety and effectiveness of surgical aortic valve replacement with RESILIA tissue (Edwards Lifesciences) through 5 years in patients with native bicuspid aortic valves. Outcomes were compared with those for patients with tricuspid aortic valves. METHODS: Of 689 patients from the COMMENCE (ProspeCtive, nOn-randoMized, MulticENter) trial who received the study valve, 645 had documented native valve morphology and core laboratory-evaluable echocardiograms from any postoperative visit, which were used to model hemodynamic outcomes over 5 years. Linear mixed-effects models were used to estimate longitudinal changes in mean gradient and effective orifice area. RESULTS: Patients with native bicuspid aortic valves (n = 214) were more than a decade younger than those with tricuspid aortic valves (n = 458; 59.8 ± 12.4 years vs 70.2 ± 9.5 years; P < .001). The bicuspid aortic valve cohort exhibited no structural valve deterioration over 5 years, and rates of paravalvular leak and transvalvular regurgitation were low (0.7% and 2.9%, respectively [all mild] at 5 years). These outcomes mirrored those in patients with native tricuspid aortic valves. The model-estimated postoperative mean gradient and effective orifice area, as well as the rate of change of these outcomes, adjusted for age, body surface area, and bioprosthesis size, did not differ between the 2 cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with bicuspid aortic valves, RESILIA tissue valves demonstrated excellent outcomes to 5 years, including no structural valve deterioration and very low rates of paravalvular and transvalvular regurgitation. These results are encouraging for RESILIA tissue durability in young patients.

Mid- and long-term outcomes after surgical correction of subaortic stenosis: a 27-year experience.

OBJECTIVES: We reviewed the mid- and long-term surgical outcomes of patients with subaortic stenosis (SAS). METHODS: Patients operated for SAS from April 1990 to August 2016 were reviewed retrospectively. Patients with major associations such as aortic arch obstruction were excluded. Time to reintervention and predictors of recurrence were assessed using Kaplan-Meier analysis, log-rank test and uni/multivariable Cox regression. RESULTS: 120 patients at a median age of 4.7 years (interquartile range 2.9, 8.1) underwent primary operation (median peak preoperative left ventricular outflow tract gradient 52.5 mmHg, interquartile range 40, 70) involving fibrous tissue excision (n = 120) with septal myectomy (93%; n = 112) as the procedure of choice.At median follow-up of 13 years (interquartile range 7, 18), freedom from reintervention at 1, 3, 5 and 10 years was 99% (95% confidence interval 94%, 99%), 94% (87%, 97%), 93% (86%, 96%) and 90% (82%, 94%), respectively. Recurrence occurred in 18% (n = 20) with 15 patients undergoing reinterventions, 13 of whom required radical reoperation. Multivariable analysis revealed higher preoperative peak left ventricular outflow tract gradient (hazard risk 1.06, confidence interval 1.03, 1.09, P < 0.001), and presence of bicuspid aortic valve (hazard risk 14.13, confidence interval 3.32, 60.1, P < 0.001) as predictors for reintervention. Mild/moderate aortic regurgitation occurred in 49% (n = 55) of patients at the most recent follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Reintervention for recurrent SAS is common, predicted by higher preoperative peak left ventricular outflow tract gradient, and presence of bicuspid aortic valve, and frequently involves a radical procedure. Aortic regurgitation is a major consequence of SAS, but its severity usually remains low. CLINICAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: SCHN HREC reference number 2019/ETH02729, approved on 09 July 2019.

Outcomes of valve-sparing aortic root replacement in patients with bicuspid aortic valve and tricuspid aortic valve: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Valve-sparing aortic root replacement (VSARR) is a safe and effective surgical procedure to treat aortic root aneurysm. This meta-analysis aimed to investigate how this procedure might differ in patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) and tricuspid aortic valve (TAV). DESIGN: Meta-analysis with meta-regression and systematic review. SETTING: Systematic search in the following databases: PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Embase. INTERVENTIONS: All observational studies of VSARR in patients with BAV or TAV were included in our study. Studies were included without any restrictions on language or publication date. A trial sequential analysis and a post-hoc meta-regression was performed on the main outcomes. RESULT: Eleven articles met the inclusion criteria. A total of 1138 patients in BAV group, and 2125 patients in TAV group. No significant differences in gender and age were observed between BAV and TAV patients. BAV and TAV patients showed no differences in in-hospital mortality rate [0.00% vs. 1.93%; RR (95% CI) 0.33 (0.09, 1.26), I2 = 0%, P = 0.11] and the rate of in-hospital reoperation [5.64% vs. 5.99%; RR (95% CI) 1.01(0.59, 1.73), I2 = 33%, P = 0.98]. The overall long-term mortality rate of BAV patients was better than that of TAV patients [1.63% vs. 8.15%; RR (95% CI) 0.34 (0.13, 0.86), I2 = 0%, P = 0.02]. During the follow-up observation period, patients in TAV group showed small but no statistic advantage in 3-year, 5-year, and over 10-year incidences of reintervention. Regarding the secondary endpoints, the two groups showed similar aortic cross-clamping time and total cardiopulmonary bypass time. CONCLUSION: The VSARR techniques yielded similar clinical outcomes in both BAV and TAV patients. Although patients with BAV might have a higher incidence of reinterventions after initial VSARR, it is still a safe and effective approach to treat aortic root dilation with or without aortic valve insufficiency. TAV patients showed small but no statistic advantage in long-term (over 10 years) reintervention rate, which means, patients with BAV may face a higher risk of reintervention in the clinic.

Benchmarking Outcomes of Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Bicuspid Aortic Valves.

BACKGROUND: The relative roles for transcatheter and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for bicuspid aortic valve (AV) stenosis are debated. This study analyzes the 5-year longitudinal outcomes of isolated SAVR in bicuspid vs tricuspid AV patients, particularly in low-risk patients. METHODS: All patients undergoing isolated index SAVR at 1146 United States hospitals in The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) Adult Cardiac database between July 1, 2011, and December 31, 2018, with linkage to Medicare claims, were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 65,687 patients were analyzed, including of 9131 bicuspid patients (13.9%). Compared with tricuspid patients, bicuspid patients were significantly younger (median 70 vs 74 years, P < .001) with lower Society of Thoracic Surgeons predicted risk of mortality scores (mean 1.6% vs 2.3%, P < .001) and lower risk profile. Risk-adjusted 30-day mortality and major morbidity were similar, but risk-adjusted 5-year mortality was significantly lower in the bicuspid patients (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.66-0.77), specifically in low-risk patients (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.64-0.76). Additionally, the bicuspid cohort had a lower 5-year readmission risk of heart failure, stroke, bleeding, or other cardiovascular causes (all P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: In this nationally representative study, 30-day mortality was similar, but risk-adjusted 5-year mortality was significantly lower in bicuspid patients undergoing isolated SAVR compared with tricuspid patients, specifically low-risk and normal left ventricular ejection fraction patients. This analysis provides a much-needed 5-year longitudinal national-level benchmark to better inform the discussion of transcatheter vs SAVR in bicuspid patients.

Outcomes of the Ross procedure in patients older versus younger than 50 years old.

OBJECTIVES: The Ross procedure is traditionally considered for young adult patients with aortic valve disease. This study compares long-term outcomes of patients undergoing the Ross procedure who are ≥50 and <50-years old. METHODS: Data were collected from 225 patients undergoing Ross procedure at a single centre from 1994 to 2019. Patients were categorized into younger (<50-years old; n = 156) and older (≥50-years old; n = 69) cohorts. Baseline demographics clinical outcomes were compared. RESULTS: The mean age was 36 ± 8.1 and 55 ± 4.2 years in the younger and older cohort, respectively. Both groups were predominantly male (58.5% vs 69.6%; P = 0.59). The younger group had a higher rate of aortic insufficiency (51% vs 26.1%; P < 0.01), and bicuspid aortic valve (81.4% vs 58.0%; P < 0.01). Aortic stenosis was more prevalent in the older cohort (25.6% vs 58.0%; P < 0.01). Operative mortality was acceptable in both groups (1.3% vs 4.3%; P = 0.15). Survival up to 10 years was not statistically different between 2 groups (96.2% vs 91.3% P = 0.16), whereas survival up to 15 years for younger patients was significantly higher (94.9% vs 85.5%; P = 0.03). After non-cardiac related deaths were excluded, survival up to 15 years (98.7% vs 91.3%; P = 0.02) was significantly lower than younger patients. In both groups, survival after the Ross procedure was similar to the age- and sex-matched US population. CONCLUSIONS: Survival up to 10 years after Ross procedure were similar, but up to 15 years was significantly higher in younger patients. The Ross procedure restored patients from both groups to expected survival. Our results suggest that at experienced centres, the Ross procedure is a safe and reasonable option for patients who are 50 years and older.

One-year outcome of transcatheter aortic valve replacement for bicuspid aortic valve stenosis: a report from the Japanese Nationwide registry (J-TVT registry).

The outcome of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) remains unclear, particularly among Asian patients that are known to have different valvular morphology and lower body habitus. This study investigated patient characteristics, procedural and 1-year outcome of TAVR for BAV within national TAVR registry in Japan. The patient-level data were extracted from the J-TVT (Japanese Transcatheter Valvular Therapy) registry between August 2013 and December 2018; overall, there were 423 patients (2.5%) with BAV and 16,802 patients with tricuspid aortic valve (TAV). At baseline, patients with BAV were younger and had less arteriosclerotic comorbidities. There was no statistically significant difference between BAV and TAV groups in conversion to surgery (0.5% vs. 1.1%, p = 0.34) and 30-day mortality (0.5% vs. 1.3%, p = 0.18). Cumulative all-cause survival and survival from major adverse events were analyzed. Cox proportional hazard regression model was used to estimate the hazard ratio. All-cause mortality and major adverse event rate at 1 year were comparable between the two groups. Relative hazard for all-cause mortality for BAV compared to TAV was 1.01 (0.70-1.45; p = 0.96), and for major adverse event was 0.94 (0.69-1.27; p = 0.67). From the Japanese nationwide TAVR registry, procedural and 1-year outcome of TAVR in BAV was as favorable as TAVR in TAV.

Effect of ascending aorta replacement on the long-term outcomes of bicuspid aortic valve repair.

OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to determine the effect of sinutubular junction stabilization on long-term outcomes of bicuspid aortic valve repair. METHODS: From January 1998 to January 2020, 419 patients underwent bicuspid aortic valve repair with ascending aorta replacement and 421 without (bicuspid aortic valve repair alone). Propensity score matching (97 pairs) was used to compare outcomes. RESULTS: Before matching, prevalence of severe aortic regurgitation at 10 years was 5.4% after bicuspid aortic valve repair + ascending aorta replacement and 10% after bicuspid aortic valve repair alone; aortic valve gradient was 20 mm Hg after bicuspid aortic valve repair + ascending aorta replacement and 19 mm Hg after bicuspid aortic valve repair alone. Ten-year freedom from reoperation overall was 79% after bicuspid aortic valve repair + ascending aorta replacement and 75% after bicuspid aortic valve repair alone; freedom from late aortic regurgitation was 93% after bicuspid aortic valve repair + ascending aorta replacement and 92% after bicuspid aortic valve repair alone; and freedom from aortic stenosis was 87% after bicuspid aortic valve repair + ascending aorta replacement and 93% after bicuspid aortic valve repair alone. Ten-year survival was 95% after bicuspid aortic valve repair + ascending aorta replacement and 96% after bicuspid aortic valve repair alone. After matching, prevalence of severe aortic regurgitation at 10 years was 11% after bicuspid aortic valve repair + ascending aorta replacement and 9.1% after bicuspid aortic valve repair alone (P = .33); aortic valve gradient was 16 mm Hg after bicuspid aortic valve repair + ascending aorta replacement and 25 mm Hg after bicuspid aortic valve repair alone (P < .0001). Ten-year freedom from reoperation was 85% after bicuspid aortic valve repair + ascending aorta replacement and 72% after bicuspid aortic valve repair alone (P = .08) overall. Ten-year freedom from reoperation for late aortic regurgitation was 88% after bicuspid aortic valve repair + ascending aorta replacement and 86% after bicuspid aortic valve repair alone (P = .65). Freedom from aortic stenosis was 97% after bicuspid aortic valve repair + ascending aorta replacement and 91% after bicuspid aortic valve repair alone (P = .03). Ten-year survival was 96% after bicuspid aortic valve repair + ascending aorta replacement and 96% after bicuspid aortic valve repair alone (P = .16). CONCLUSIONS: Bicuspid aortic valve repair with or without ascending aorta replacement is associated with good short- and long-term outcomes. Bicuspid aortic valve repair + ascending aorta replacement has a minimal effect on long-term repair durability. Sinutubular junction stabilization should not be performed for the sole purpose of long-term repair durability.

Long-term outcomes of valve-sparing root versus composite valve graft replacement for acute type A aortic dissection: Meta-analysis of reconstructed time-to-event data.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the long-term outcomes of valve-sparing aortic root replacement (VSARR) versus composite aortic valve graft replacement (CAVGR) in the treatment of acute type A aortic dissections (ATAAD). METHODS: We performed a pooled meta-analysis of Kaplan-Meier-derived time-to-event data from studies with longer follow-up beyond the immediate postoperative period. RESULTS: Seven studies met our eligibility criteria, comprising a total of 858 patients (367 patients in the VSARR groups and 491 patients in the CAVGR group). We found no statistically significant differences in the overall survival between the groups over time (HR 0.83, 95%CI 0.63-1.10, P = 0.192), but we observed a higher risk of reoperation in the VSARR group when compared with the CAVGR group (HR 9.99, 95% CI 2.23-44.73, P = 0.003). The meta-regression revealed statistically significant positive coefficients for age (P < 0.001) in the analysis of survival, which means that this covariate has a modulating effect on this outcome. The higher the mean age, the higher the HR for overall mortality was found to be with VSARR as compared with CAVGR. Other covariates such as female sex, hypertension, diabetes, connective tissue disorders, bicuspid aortic valve, hemiarch and/or total arch replacement, concomitant coronary bypass surgery did not seem to have any effect on the outcomes. CONCLUSION: VSARR did not confer a better (or worse) survival over time in patients with ATAAD, but it was associated with higher risk of reoperations in the long run.