[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.

Outcomes of aortic valve repair in children stratified by complexity: Which outcome for which lesion?

OBJECTIVE: Aortic valvuloplasty frequency has significantly increased over the past 15 years. Surgical repair varies in complexity depending on valvular lesions. Our aim is to report results on the whole spectrum of aortic valvuloplasty techniques. METHODS: All children who consecutively underwent aortic valvuloplasty for aortic stenosis and/or aortic insufficiency between January 2006 and December 2020 at Necker Sick Children's Hospital (Paris, France) were included in a retrospective cohort study. Aortic valvuloplasty techniques were classified into 3 difficulty levels: (1) simple repair, corresponding to commissurotomy and/or shaving in aortic stenosis (AS) in neonates (group 1) and children >1 month (group 2); (2) intermediate-complexity repair, corresponding to commissuroplasty, leaflet resuspension, and fenestration closure in aortic insufficiency (leaflet prolapse in connective tissue disease, isolated leaflet prolapse and Laubry-Pezzi groups); and (3) complex repair requiring a pericardial patch to restore a functional aortic valve in mixed aortic valve disease (bicuspidization with neocommissure and cusp extension groups). RESULTS: During the study period, 324 children underwent aortic valvuloplasty. Survival and freedom from aortic valve reintervention at 10 years were, respectively, 86.1% and 50.9% in neonates with AS, 95.2% and 71.7% in children >1 month with AS, 93.8% and 79.5% in leaflet prolapse in connective tissue disease, 97.7% and 91.9% in isolated leaflet prolapse, 100% and 88% in those with Laubry-Pezzi syndrome, 97.4% and 84.8% in bicuspidization with neocommissure, and 100% and 54.2% in the cusp extension. CONCLUSIONS: Durability of aortic valvuloplasty techniques is satisfactory and offers the possibility to delay the Ross procedure, regardless of the lesion's complexity.

Outcomes of aortic valve-sparing root replacement with cusp repair in connective tissue disease.

BACKGROUND: Although, valve sparing is commonly performed in patients with Marfan syndrome, feasibility and results of cusp repair for aortic insufficiency have not been studied. AIM: To report on the outcomes and durability of aortic cusp repair in valve sparing in patients with Marfan syndrome. METHODS: All consecutive adult patients with Marfan syndrome who underwent remodelling and annuloplasty with aortic valve repair for aortic insufficiency between May 2005 and December 2020 were included. Patients with Marfan syndrome treated for aortic aneurysm, but without aortic insufficiency, were excluded. Data were collected prospectively and reviewed retrospectively from the Aorticvalve repair International Registry (AVIATOR). RESULTS: During the study period, 71 patients with Marfan syndrome were referred to surgery. Fifty-five patients with connective tissue disease and aortic insufficiency with aorta aneurysm were treated: 46 underwent aortic valve repair and nine underwent aortic valve replacement (five mechanical aortic valve replacements and four biological aortic valve replacements). The mean age was 42.9±15.4 years, and the mean EuroScore II was 2.5±2.2. No patient died, and no patient had significant aortic insufficiency (grade≥II) at discharge. The 5-year survival rate estimate was 94.4%, which seems statistically similar to that of the age- and sex-matched general population. At 5 years, freedom from reoperation was 94.6%, and the incidence of infective endocarditis was 2.6%. No valve thrombosis, aortic dissection, major bleeding events, thromboembolic events (stroke) or myocardial infarctions were noted during follow-up. CONCLUSION: Remodelling and aortic valve repair showed excellent durability at 5 years, even in connective tissue disorders.

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.

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.

External Ring Annuloplasty: A Safe Landing Zone for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

Aortic stenosis in patients with previous valve-sparing root replacement represents a challenge, given the substantial morbidity and mortality rates in case of reoperation. Here, we present the case of a patient with late severe aortic stenosis 12 years after valve-sparing aortic root replacement. He was successfully treated by transapical aortic valve implantation. External ring annuloplasty, by reducing the native annuloaortic ectasia, allows transcatheter aortic valve replacement in case of stenotic deterioration of the native valve after valve-sparing aortic root replacement.

Bicuspid valve repair outcomes are improved with reduction and stabilization of sinotubular junction and annulus with external annuloplasty.

OBJECTIVE: We investigated long-term outcomes of bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) repair, with external annuloplasty, according to aorta phenotype. METHODS: Between 2003 and 2020, all patients with BAV operated on for aortic insufficiency (AI) and/or aneurysm were included. Repairs included isolated AI repair with subvalvular with or without sinotubular junction (STJ) (single or double) annuloplasty, supracoronary aorta replacement (with or without hemiroot remodeling), and root remodeling with external subvalvular ring annuloplasty. RESULTS: Among 343 patients operated, reparability rate was 81.3% (n = 279; age 46 ± 13.3 years). At 10 years (median follow-up: 3.42 years; interquartile range, 1.1, 5.8), survival was 93.9% (n = 8 deaths, similar to general population), cumulative incidence of reoperation was 6.2% (n = 10), AI grade >2 was 5.8% (n = 9), and grade >1 was 23.0% (n = 30). BAV repair stabilizing both the annulus and STJ with annuloplasty, compared with nonstabilized STJ repair (single annuloplasty), had lower incidence of reoperation (2.6% vs 22.5%, P = .0018) and AI grade >2 (1.2% vs 23.6%, P < .001) at 9 years. Initial commissural angle <160° was not a risk factor for reoperation, compared with angle ≥160° if symmetrical repair was achieved (2.7% and 4.1%, respectively, at 6 years, P = .85). Multivariable model showed that absence of STJ stabilization (odds ratio, 6.7; 95% confidence interval, 2.1-20, P = .001) increased recurrent AI, but not initial commissural angle <160° (odds ratio, 1.01; 95% confidence interval, 0.39-2.63, P = .98). Commissures adjusted symmetrically led to lower transvalvular gradient, compared with nonsymmetrical repair (8.7 mm Hg vs 10.2 mm Hg, P = .029). CONCLUSIONS: BAV repair, tailored to aorta phenotype, is associated with excellent durable outcomes if both annulus and STJ are reduced and stabilized with external ring annuloplasty. Commissural angle <160° is not associated with reoperation if symmetrical repair is achieved.

Outcomes of surgical bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement for aortic insufficiency.

BACKGROUND: Results and durability of aortic valve replacement in aortic stenosis are well known, but no study has focused on the results of aortic valve replacement in aortic insufficiency. AIM: The aim of this retrospective study was to describe our mid-term outcomes after aortic valve replacement for aortic insufficiency. METHODS: All consecutive adult patients who underwent bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement for aortic insufficiency at two European centres (in France and Germany) between May 2005 and December 2020 were analysed. RESULTS: During the study period, 289 patients were included. Mean age was 56.9±12.5 years. Overall operative mortality was 1.5%, and the 10-year survival estimate rate was 75.0%, which was significantly lower than in the age- and sex-matched general population, with a standardized mortality ratio of 2.88 (95% confidence interval 1.96-4.08; P<0001). Freedom from aortic valve-related death was 87.6%, and from aortic valve-related reoperation was 87.4%. No patient aged>60 years was reoperated on during follow-up. Freedom from severe structural valve deterioration at 10 years was 73.3%, and freedom from moderate structural valve deterioration at 10 years was 50.3%. Freedom from major adverse valve-related events at 10 years was 69.7%. CONCLUSIONS: Although bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement for aortic insufficiency shows good early results, 10-year mortality and major adverse valve-related event rates in young patients may be a concern, with a reduction in life expectancy compared with the general population.

Comparison of bicuspidization and Ross procedure in the treatment of unicuspid aortic valve disease in adults - Insight from the AVIATOR registry.

Background: Unicuspid aortic valve (UAV) is the second most common underlying cause of aortic valve dysfunction in young adults after the bicuspid valve. The valve may be replaced (for example by pulmonary autograft) or repaired using the bicuspidization technique. The aim of our study was to compare short- and mid-term outcomes of Ross procedure with bicuspidization in patients with severe UAV dysfunction. Methods: This was a multi-center retrospective observational cohort study comparing data from two dedicated Ross centers in the Czech Republic with bicuspidization outcomes provided by AVIATOR registry. As for the Ross group, only the patients with UAV were included. Primary endpoint was mid-term freedom from reintervention. Secondary endpoints were mid-term freedom from major adverse events, endocarditis and pacemaker implantation. Results: Throughout the study period, 114 patients underwent the Ross procedure (years 2009-2020) and 126 patients underwent bicuspidization (years 2006-2019). The bicuspidization group was significantly younger and presented with a higher degree of dyspnea, a lower degree of aortic valve stenosis and more often with pure regurgitation. The primary endpoint occurred more frequently in the bicuspidization group than in the Ross group - 77.9 vs. 97.9 % at 5 years and 68.4 vs. 75.2 % at 10 years (p < 0.001). There was no difference in secondary endpoints. Conclusion: Ross procedure might offer a significantly lower mid-term risk of reintervention than bicuspidization in patients with UAV. Both procedures have comparable survival and risk of other short- and mid-term complications postoperatively.

Outcomes of valve-sparing surgery in heritable aortic disorders: results from the AVIATOR registry.

OBJECTIVES: Root reimplantation has been the favoured approach for patients with heritable aortic disorder requiring valve-sparring root replacement. In the past few years, root remodelling with annuloplasty has emerged as an alternative to root reimplantation in the general population. The aim of this study was to examine the late outcomes of patients with heritable aortic disorder undergoing valve-sparring root replacement and compare different techniques. METHODS: Using the AVIATOR registry (Aortic Valve Insufficiency and ascending aorta Aneurysm InternATiOnal Registry), data were collected from 5 North American and European centres. Patients were divided into 4 groups according to the technique of valve-sparing used (root reimplantation, root remodelling with ring annuloplasty, root remodelling with suture annuloplasty and root remodelling alone). The primary endpoints were freedom from aortic regurgitation (AR) ≥2 and freedom from reintervention on the aortic valve. Secondary endpoints were survival and changes in annular dimensions over time. RESULTS: A total of 237 patients were included in the study (reimplantation = 100, remodelling + ring annuloplasty = 76, remodelling + suture annuloplasty = 34, remodelling alone = 27). The majority of patients had Marfan syndrome (83%). Preoperative AR ≥2 was present in 41% of the patients. Operative mortality was 0.4% (n = 1). No differences were found between techniques in terms of postoperative AR ≥2 (P = 0.58), reintervention (P = 0.52) and survival (P = 0.59). Changes in aortic annulus dimension were significantly different at 10 years (P < 0.05), a difference that started to emerge 4 years after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, valve-sparring root replacement is a safe and durable procedure in patients with heritable aortic disorder. Nevertheless, root remodelling alone is associated with late annular dilatation. The addition of an annuloplasty, however, results in similar freedom from AR, reintervention, survival and changes in annulus size compared to reimplantation.

Bicuspidization of a unicuspid valve using sliding plasty of a rudimentary right coronary cusp.

Unicuspid aortic valve repair relies on the principles of bicuspidization by creating a neo-commissure at 180° from the existing commissure, with pericardial patch interposition. We report a case of a 26-year-old patient with cor triatriatum and a severely regurgitating unicuspid valve. The left atrium membrane was resected. Aortic valve repair was performed creating a neo-commissure using a sliding plasty of the rudimentary right coronary cusp and patch reconstruction of the anterior part of the non-coronary cusp, protected by external subvalvular annuloplasty and hemi-root remodelling. We detail a repair technique of a partial autologous reconstruction approach for bicuspidization.

Aortic valve repair versus mechanical valve replacement for root aneurysm: the CAVIAAR multicentric study.

OBJECTIVES: Despite growing evidence that aortic valve repair improves long-term patient outcomes and quality of life, aortic valves are mostly replaced. We evaluate the effect of aortic valve repair versus replacement in patients with dystrophic aortic root aneurysm up to 4 years. METHODS: The multicentric CAVIAAR (Conservation Aortique Valvulaire dans les Insuffisances Aortiques et les Anévrismes de la Racine aortique) prospective cohort study enrolled 261 patients: 130 underwent standardized aortic valve repair (REPAIR) consisting of remodelling root repair with expansible aortic ring annuloplasty, and 131 received mechanical composite valve and graft replacement (REPLACE). Primary outcome was a composite criterion of mortality, reoperation, thromboembolic or major bleeding events, endocarditis or operating site infections, pacemaker implantation and heart failure, analysed with propensity score-weighted Cox model analysis. Secondary outcomes included major adverse valve-related events and components of primary outcome. RESULTS: The mean age was 56.1 years, and valve was bicuspid in 115 patients (44.7%). Up to 4 years, REPAIR did not significantly differ from REPLACE in terms of primary outcome [Hazard Ratio (HR) 0.66 (0.39; 1.12)] but showed significantly less valve-related deaths (HR 0.09 [0.02; 0.34]) and major bleeding events (HR 0.37 [0.16; 0.85]) without an increased risk of valve-related reoperation (HR 2.10 [0.64; 6.96]). When accounting for the occurrence of multiple events in a single patient, the REPAIR group had half the occurrence of major adverse valve-related events (HR 0.51 [0.31; 0.86]). CONCLUSIONS: Although the primary outcome did not significantly differ between the REPAIR and REPLACE groups, the trend is in favour of REPAIR by a significant reduction of valve-related deaths and major bleeding events. Long-term follow-up beyond 4 years is needed to confirm these findings.

Aortic valve fenestration: respect it or fix it?

OBJECTIVES: We investigated whether aortic valve fenestrations (respected or fixed) represent a factor associated with recurrent aortic insufficiency or reoperation after repair. METHODS: Between 2003 and 2019, patients who underwent aortic valve repair were included. Aortic insufficiency phenotypes were root aneurysm (repair: root remodelling + annuloplasty), ascending aorta aneurysm (repair: tubular aortic replacement + annuloplasty) and isolated regurgitation (repair: single/double annuloplasty). Fenestrations were either respected or fixed according to their features. RESULTS: A total of 618 patients (out of 798 operated on; 77.4%) had their valve repaired, with 167 cases of fenestrations (128 were respected, 39 fixed-32 with a patch, 6 with running suture and 1 with both). After conducting propensity score matching between no-fenestration (n = 167) and fenestration groups (n = 167), respectively, we noted the following: survival [90.3% (n = 7 deaths) vs 95.8% (n = 4)], cumulative incidence of reoperation [6.7% (n = 7) vs 5.2% (n = 4)], aortic insufficiency grade ≥ 3 [6.4% (n = 6) vs 4.4% (n = 4)] and grade ≥ 2 [28.9% (n = 28) vs 37.1% (n = 35)] were similar at 9 years [P = 0.94; median follow-up: 2.2, interquartile range: (0.8, 5.8)], whether fenestration was respected (P = 0.55) or fixed (P = 0.6, at 6 years). Standardization of the surgical approach (consisting of double annuloplasty in isolated regurgitation phenotype and expansible subvalvular annuloplasty with effective height assessment with remodelling repair for root aneurysm phenotype) reduced the risk of reoperation (era before standardization: hazard ratio: 5.4, 95% confidence interval: 1.9-15.7, P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Fenestration, respected or fixed, is not a factor associated with reoperation or recurrence of significant aortic insufficiency after valve repair if the surgical approach is standardized.

Aortic valve repair using pericardial patch standardized with external ring annuloplasty.

OBJECTIVES: This study was undertaken to analyse outcomes of aortic valve repair using additional material and compare the results to those of cusp repair without the use of the pericardial patch. METHODS: All consecutive patients aged over 16 who underwent aortic valve repair with external ring annuloplasty for isolated aortic insufficiency, aortic insufficiency and tubular aortic aneurysm or aortic root aneurysm between May 2003 and November 2019 were included in a cohort study. Data were collected and analysed from the AVIATOR registry (AorticValve repair InternATiOnal Registry). Propensity score framework analysis (inverse probability of treatment weighting) was used to compare outcomes of the groups while controlling for confounders. RESULTS: During the 16-year study period, 618 patients underwent aortic valve repair. Eight-year survival rate was 92% in the patch group and 90.2% in the no patch group without significant differences [P = 0.957 inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) weighted]. Early valve-related reoperation was more frequent in the patch group as compared to the no patch group (6% vs 1%, P < 0.001 IPTW weighted), the freedom from aortic valve-related reintervention and from structural valve deterioration at 8 years was not significantly different between the patch and no patch groups (93.7% vs 94%, P = 0.968 IPTW weighted; and 99.3% vs 96.7%, P = 0.964 IPTW weighted). CONCLUSIONS: Although a higher rate of early reintervention was observed, aortic valve repair using the pericardial patch, in a standardized approach using external annuloplasty, with effective coaptation height of at least 9 mm, was not associated with an increase in mid-term aortic valve-related reoperation or structural valve deterioration as compared to valve repair without the pericardial patch.