Search

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/m 2 (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/m 2 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/m 2 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., (Copyright © 2023 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The introduction of the Y(ang)-technique for aortic root enlargement has sparked a renewed interest in annular and root enlargement procedures world-wide. In order to execute these procedures proficiently however, it's important to understand the complex three-dimensional structure of the aortic root and left ventricular outflow tract, and also be familiar with the different enlargement techniques. Herein, we are providing a description of the aortic root anatomy and the most commonly utilized root enlargement procedures. This should facilitate clinical decision making and guidance of patients towards the most appropriate procedure, which should not only treat the patients' acute symptoms, but should also set the patient up for potentially needed future procedures and respective life-time management of aortic valve disease., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: S.M.S. is a Consultant for Abbott, Artivion and JOMDD. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (2024 Annals of Cardiothoracic Surgery. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The progressive increase in the use of implantable electronic devices, vascular access for dialysis and the increased life expectancy of patients with congenital heart diseases has led in recent years to a considerable number of right-side infective endocarditis, especially of the tricuspid valve (TV). Although current guidelines recommend TV repair for native tricuspid valve endocarditis (TVE), the percentage of valve replacements remains very high in numerous studies. The aim of our study is to analyse our experience in the treatment of TVE with a reparative approach., Methods: This case series includes all the patients who underwent surgery for acute or healed infective endocarditis on the native TV, at the Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc (Bruxelles, Belgium) between February 2001 and December 2020., Results: Thirty-one patients were included in the study. Twenty-eight (90.3%) underwent TV repair and 3 (9.7%) had a TV replacement with a mitral homograft. The repair group was divided into 2 subgroups, according to whether a patch was used during surgery or not. Hospital mortality was 33.3% (n = 1) for the replacement group and 7.1% (n = 2) for repair (P = 0.25). Overall survival at 10 years was 75.6% [95% confidence interval (CI): 52-89%]. Further, freedom from reoperation on the TV at 10 years was 59.3% (95% CI: 7.6-89%) vs 93.7% (95% CI: 63-99%) (P = 0.4) for patch repair and no patch use respectively. Freedom from recurrent endocarditis at 10 years was 87% (95% CI: 51-97%)., Conclusions: Considering that TVE is more common in young patients, a repair-oriented approach should be considered as the first choice. In the case of extremely damaged valves, the use of pericardial patch is a valid option. If repair is not feasible, the use of a mitral homograft is an additional useful solution to reduce the prosthetic material., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery.)

Background: Impaired cognition is a major predisposing factor for postoperative delirium, but it is not systematically assessed. Anesthesia and surgery may cause postoperative delirium by affecting brain integrity. Neurofilament light in serum reflects axonal injury. Studies evaluating the perioperative course of neurofilament light in cardiac surgery have shown conflicting results. The authors hypothesized that postoperative serum neurofilament light values would be higher in delirious patients, and that baseline concentrations would be correlated with patients' cognitive status and would identify patients at risk of postoperative delirium., Methods: This preplanned secondary analysis included 220 patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass. A preoperative cognitive z score was calculated after a neuropsychological evaluation. Quantification of serum neurofilament light was performed by the Simoa (Quanterix, USA) technique before anesthesia, 2 h after surgery, on postoperative days 1, 2, and 5. Postoperative delirium was assessed using the Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Unit, the Confusion Assessment Method, and a chart review., Results: A total of 65 of 220 (29.5%) patients developed postoperative delirium. Delirious patients were older (median [25th percentile, 75th percentile], 74 [64, 79] vs. 67 [59, 74] yr; P < 0.001) and had lower cognitive z scores (-0.52 ± 1.14 vs. 0.21 ± 0.84; P < 0.001). Postoperative neurofilament light concentrations increased in all patients up to day 5, but did not predict delirium when preoperative concentrations were considered. Baseline neurofilament light values were significantly higher in patients who experienced delirium. They were influenced by age, cognitive z score, renal function, and history of diabetes mellitus. Baselines values were significantly correlated with cognitive z scores (r, 0.49; P < 0.001) and were independently associated with delirium whenever the patient's cognitive status was not considered (hazard ratio, 3.34 [95% CI, 1.07 to 10.4])., Conclusions: Cardiac surgery is associated with axonal injury, because neurofilament light concentrations increased postoperatively in all patients. However, only baseline neurofilament light values predicted postoperative delirium. Baseline concentrations were correlated with poorer cognitive scores, and they independently predicted postoperative delirium whenever patient's cognitive status was undetermined., (Copyright © 2024 American Society of Anesthesiologists. All Rights Reserved.)

Background: There is ambiguity in the literature regarding the continuous suture technique (CST) for aortic valve replacement (AVR). At our center, there has been a gradual shift towards CST over the interrupted pledgeted technique (IPT). This study aims at comparing outcomes for both techniques., Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of a single-center study of patients undergoing AVR between January 2011 and July 2020. Patients were divided into two groups: Continuous suture technique and interrupted pledget-reinforced sutures. The pre-operative and In-hospital clinical characteristics and echocardiographic hemodynamics (i.e. transvalvular gradients and paravalvular leakage) were compared between CST and IPT., Results: We compared 791 patients with CST to 568 patients with IPT (median age: 73 and 74 years, respectively, p = 0.02). In CST there were 35% concomitant procedure vs. 31% in IPT (p = 0.16). Early mortality was 3.2% in CST versus 4.8% in IPT (p = 0.15), and a second cross-clamp due to a paravalvular-leak in 0.5% vs. 1.2%, respectively (p = 0.22). The CST was not associated with new-onset conduction-blocks mandating pacemaker implants(OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.54-2.14; P = 0.85). The postoperative gradients on echocardiography were lower in CST compared to IPT, especially in smaller annuli (peak gradients: 15.7mmHg vs. 20.5mmHg, in valve size < 23 mm, p < 0.001)., Conclusions: The continuous suture technique was associated with lower postoperative gradients and shorter cross-clamp time compared to interrupted pledgeted technique. Differences in paravalvular leaks were non-significant, although slightly less in the continuous suture technique. There were no further differences in valve-related complications. Hence, continues suture technique is safe, with better hemodynamics compared to the interrupted pledgeted technique. This may be of clinical importance, especially in smaller size annular size., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Objective: The aim of this study was to validate the use of a new resection device in patient candidates for surgical aortic valve replacement. We evaluated the efficacy of this new circular blade to resect the aortic valve and the efficacy to collect the debris during the resection., Methods: For this study, a single size instrument was used, with an external diameter of 22 mm, and patients were selected on the basis of the preoperative assessment of the aortic diameters., Results: From October 2018 to June 2019, 10 patient candidates for surgical aortic valve replacement were selected to undergo native aortic valve resection using a new device, before surgical valve implantation. The mean age of the patients was 74 ± 7.6 years, and 8 of 10 were male. The mean aortic annulus diameter, measured before the procedure, was 25.7 ± 1.57 mm. The resection was complete in 9 (90%) patients. In 1 patient, due to an imprecise positioning of the device, the valve resection was partial. None of the patients showed signs or symptoms due to debris embolism. In all patients, the postoperative course was uneventful., Conclusions: These preliminary results show that resection of the aortic valve using a circular foldable blade is feasible. This prototype, used during conventional surgery even through a small incision, provided an efficient tool to easily resect the valve without debris release., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Background: International guidelines recommend aortic valve replacement (AVR) as Class I triggers in high-gradient severe aortic stenosis (HGSAS) patients with symptoms and/or left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <50%. The association between waiting for these triggers and postoperative survival penalty is poorly studied., Objectives: The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of guideline-based Class I triggers on long-term postoperative survival in HGSAS patients., Methods: 2,030 patients operated for HGSAS were included and classified as follows: no Class I triggers (no symptoms and LVEF >50%, n = 853), symptoms with LVEF >50% (n = 965), or LVEF <50% regardless of symptoms (n = 212). Survival was compared after matching (inverse probability weighting) for clinical differences. Restricted mean survival time was analyzed to quantify lifetime loss., Results: Ten-year survival was better without any Class I trigger than with symptoms or LVEF <50% (67.1% ± 3% vs 56.4% ± 3% vs 53.1% ± 7%, respectively, P  < 0.001). Adjusted death risks increased significantly in operated patients with symptoms (HR: 1.45 [95% CI: 1.15-1.82]) or LVEF <50% (HR: 1.47 [95% CI: 1.05-2.06]) than in those without Class I triggers. Performing AVR with LVEF >60% produced similar outcomes to that of the general population, whereas operated patients with LVEF <60% was associated with a 10-year postoperative survival penalty. Furthermore, according to restricted mean survival time analyses, operating on symptomatic patients or with LVEF <60% led to 8.3- and 11.4-month survival losses, respectively, after 10 years, compared with operated asymptomatic patients with a LVEF >60%., Conclusions: Guideline-based Class I triggers for AVR in HGSAS have profound consequences on long-term postoperative survival, suggesting that HGSAS patients should undergo AVR before trigger onset. Operating on patients with LVEF <60% is already associated with a 10-year postoperative survival penalty questioning the need for an EF threshold recommending AVR in HGSAS patients., Competing Interests: Grant support from the Fondation Nationale de la Recherche Scientifique of the Belgian Government (FRSM PDR T.0237.21). The authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (© 2024 The Authors.)

Objectives: The use of modern techniques for bicuspid aortic valve repair has been shown to provide safe and durable results against recurrent regurgitation. However, an emerging body of evidence is indicating that aortic stenosis might be an additional late complication of these procedures. To date, the pathogenesis and clinical impact of aortic stenosis after bicuspid aortic valve repair are poorly understood., Methods: A retrospective analysis of 367 patients with bicuspid aortic valve repair was performed to identify predictors of reoperation for stenosis. Bicuspid aortic valve repair was performed using a combination of procedures on the leaflet, annulus, and aortic root., Results: During a median follow-up of 8 years, reoperation for stenosis was required in 33 patients (9.0%). Freedom from reoperation for stenosis was 100%, 99.6%, 91.7%, and 74.9% at 1, 5, 10, and 15 years, respectively. The following factors were independently associated with reoperation for aortic stenosis: Leaflet or raphe resection with shaving was a protective factor (hazard ratio, 0.34; 95% confidence interval, 0.16-0.71; P = .004), whereas the use of expanded polytetrafluoroethylene for free-edge running suture (hazard ratio, 2.55; 95% confidence interval, 1.16-5.57; P = .019), supracoronary replacement of the ascending aorta in combination with valve repair (hazard ratio, 5.41; 95% confidence interval, 2.11-13.85; P = .001), and the need for a second aortic crossclamp (hazard ratio, 10.95; 95% confidence interval, 2.80-42.80; P = .001) were associated with increased risk of reoperation for aortic stenosis., Conclusions: While confirming previous findings, our analysis suggests that the inability to restore leaflet mobility and polytetrafluoroethylene for free-edge running suture are risk factors for stenosis. The so-called ascending phenotypes are probably more prone to stenosis. If the first attempt to repair is unsuccessful, the risk of late reoperation for aortic stenosis is high., (Copyright © 2022 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

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., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The Ross procedure has demonstrated excellent long-term results, with restoration of life-expectancy in patients with severe aortic valve dysfunction. However, reintervention after Ross can occur, and herein we describe our center's experience with redo surgery after previous Ross procedures., Methods: We searched our prospective database for aortic valve-repair and recruited all adult (≥18 years) patients who have undergone valve-sparing root replacements (VSRRs) and/or aortic valve-repair after Ross procedure between July 2001 and July 2022. Univariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify variables affecting early mortality. Survival, freedom-from-valve-reintervention and freedom-from-aortic regurgitation (AR) grade ≥3 were analyzed with the Kaplan-Meier method., Results: A total of 63 patients were recruited for this study. Indication for reoperation after Ross was aortic aneurysm without AR in 17 (27%), aortic aneurysm with AR in 27 (43%), and isolated AR in 19 (30%) patients. Median follow-up time was 7.82 years. The majority of patients (76%) had undergone the free root technique during their index Ross operation. Cumulative survival, after redo surgery following Ross, was 98.4% [95% confidence interval (CI): 89.3-99.8%] at 1 year, 96.3% (95% CI: 88.2-98.3%) at 5 years, and 92.4% (95% CI: 87.1-98.0%) at 10 years. Freedom-from-reoperation on the aortic valve at 1 year was 98.4% (95% CI: 97.0-99.8%), at 5 years was 96.7% (95% CI: 87.6-99.0%), and 79.7% (95% CI: 71.1-88.3%) at 10 years., Conclusions: Long-term survival after redo surgery following the Ross operation is excellent. The data support our aggressive valve-sparing approach after Ross., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (2023 Annals of Cardiothoracic Surgery. All rights reserved.)

The aortic valve (AV) is a three-dimensional structure, with leaflets that are suspended within the functional aortic annulus (FAA). These structures (AV and FAA) are therefore intrinsically connected and disease of just one component can independently lead to AV dysfunction. Hence, AV dysfunction can occur in the setting of entirely normal valve leaflets. However, as these structures are functionally inter-connected, disease of one component can lead to abnormalities of the other over time. Thus, AV dysfunction is often multifactorial. Valve-sparing root procedures require an in-depth understanding of these inter-relationships, and herein we are providing a detailed account of some of the most pertinent anatomical relationships., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (2023 Annals of Cardiothoracic Surgery. All rights reserved.)

Background: Current guidelines recommend valve-sparing aortic root replacement (VSRR) procedures over valve replacement for the treatment of root aneurysm. The reimplantation technique seems to be the most widely used valve-sparing technique, with excellent outcomes in mostly single-center studies. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to present a comprehensive overview of clinical outcomes after VSRR with the reimplantation technique, and potential differences for bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) phenotype., Methods: We conducted a systematic literature search of papers reporting outcomes after VSRR that were published since 2010. Studies solely reporting on acute aortic syndromes or congenital patients were excluded. Baseline characteristics were summarized using sample size weighting. Late outcomes were pooled using inverse variance weighting. Pooled Kaplan-Meier (KM) curves for time-to-event outcomes were generated. Further, a microsimulation model was developed to estimate life expectancy and risks of valve-related morbidity after surgery., Results: Forty-four studies, with 7,878 patients, matched the inclusion criteria and were included for analysis. Mean age at operation was 50 years and almost 80% of patients were male. Pooled early mortality was 1.6% and the most common perioperative complication was chest re-exploration for bleeding (5.4%). Mean follow-up was 4.8±2.8 years. Linearized occurrence rates for aortic valve (AV) related complications such as endocarditis and stroke were below 0.3% patient-year. Overall survival was 99% and 89% at 1- and 10-year respectively. Freedom from reoperation was 99% and 91% after 1 and 10 years, respectively, with no difference between tricuspid and BAVs., Conclusions: This systematic review and meta-analysis shows excellent short- and long-term results of valve-sparing root replacement with the reimplantation technique in terms of survival, freedom from reoperation, and valve related complications with no difference between tricuspid and BAVs., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (2023 Annals of Cardiothoracic Surgery. All rights reserved.)

Background: Over the last three decades, the importance of native valve preservation has increasingly become evident. Valve-sparing root replacement procedures, such as the reimplantation or remodeling technique, are therefore being progressively used for aortic root replacement and/or aortic valve repair. Herein, we are summarizing our single-center experience with the reimplantation technique., Methods: We queried our prospective database for aortic valve repair and recruited all adult (≥18 years) patients who have undergone valve-sparing root replacement with the reimplantation technique between March 1998 and January 2022. We subcategorized the patients into three distinct groups: root aneurysm without aortic regurgitation (AR) (grade ≤1+), root aneurysm with AR (grade >1+) and isolated chronic AR (root <45 mm). Univariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify variables of interest, which were further analyzed by multivariable Cox-regression analysis. Survival, freedom from valve reintervention, and freedom from recurrent regurgitation, were analyzed with the Kaplan-Meier method., Results: A total of 652 patients were recruited for this study; 213 patients underwent reimplantation for aortic aneurysm without AR, 289 patients for aortic aneurysm with AR, and 150 patients with isolated AR. Cumulative survival was 95.4% (95% CI: 92.9-97.0%) after 5 years, 84.8% (80.0-88.5%) after 10 years, and 79.5% (73.3-84.5%) after 12 years, which was comparable to the age-matched Belgian population. Older age (HR 1.06, P≤0.001) and male gender (HR 2.1, P=0.02) were associated with late mortality. Freedom from reoperation on the aortic valve at 5 years was 96.2% (95% CI: 93.8-97.7%), and 90.4% (95% CI: 87.4-94.2%) at 12 years. Age (P=0.001) and preoperative left ventricular end-diastolic dimension (LVEDD) (P=0.03) were associated with late reoperation., Conclusions: Our long-term data supports our reimplantation approach as a viable option for aortic root aneurysms and/or aortic regurgitation, with long-term survival that mirrors that of the general population., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (2023 Annals of Cardiothoracic Surgery. All rights reserved.)

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., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: The objectives were to analyze the long-term outcomes of tricuspid aortic valve repair for isolated severe aortic regurgitation and the impact of different annuloplasty techniques., Methods: The study cohort consists of 127 consecutive patients who received aortic valve repair for isolated severe aortic regurgitation in the tricuspid aortic valve between 1996 and 2019 in our institution. Exclusion criteria were aorta dilatation (≥45 mm), connective tissue disease, active endocarditis, type A dissection, and rheumatic disease. Mean age of patients was 55.6 ± 16 years, and 80% were male. Median follow-up was 6.4 years. Time-to-event analysis was performed, as well as risk of death, reoperation, and aortic regurgitation recurrence., Results: Cusp repair was performed in 117 patients (92%), and annuloplasty was performed in 126 patients (99%) with Cabrol stitch (73%), reimplantation technique (19.7%), or ring annuloplasty (6.3%). There was no hospital mortality. At 10 and 14 years, overall survival was 81% ± 5% and 71% ± 6%, respectively, and freedom from reoperation was 80% ± 5% and 73% ± 6%, respectively. Age and left coronary cusp repair were independent predictors of reoperation. Freedom from recurrent severe aortic regurgitation (>2+) was 73% ± 5% and 66% ± 7% at 10 and 12 years, respectively. Age, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter, and patch repair were independent predictors of recurrent aortic regurgitation. Type of annuloplasty had no impact on survival or reoperation., Conclusions: Aortic valve repair for isolated severe aortic regurgitation in the tricuspid aortic valve is a safe procedure, and durability at 14 years is acceptable. In this study, the annuloplasty technique did not influence repair durability as was found in bicuspid aortic valve repair or aortic valve-sparing surgery. Severity of cusp pathology seems to be the main determinant of repair durability., (Copyright © 2021 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Up to 30% of patients with severe aortic stenosis (SAS) (indexed aortic valve area [AVAi] <0.6 cm 2 /m 2 ) exhibit low-transvalvular gradient despite normal ejection fraction. There is intense debate regarding the prognostic significance of this entity., Objectives: The purpose of this study was to compare the outcome of patients with discordant low-gradient SAS (DLG-SAS) vs moderate aortic stenosis (MAS) and high-gradient SAS (HG-SAS)., Methods: We used the BEL-F-ASt (Belgium-France-Aortic Stenosis) registry including consecutive patients with AS. Survival was compared overall and after matching (inverse probability weighting and propensity-score matching) for clinical and imaging variables. The analysis was first performed in the overall population (n = 2,582) and then in the population of unoperated patients (n = 1,812)., Results: After-inverse probability weighting-matching, the 3 groups were balanced. Five-year survival was better in MAS than in DLG-SAS and HG-SAS-patients (58.9% vs 47% vs 41.2%, P  < 0.001). Similar results were obtained in unoperated patients (54.1% vs 37.9% vs 28.1%, P  < 0.001). To explore the impact of MG (≤40 vs >40 mmHg) and AVAi (<0.6 vs ≥0.6 cm 2 /m 2 ) on outcomes, survival of propensity score-matched cohorts of HG-vs DLG-SAS and MAS vs DLG-SAS were compared. After matching for MG, survival was better in MAS than in DLG-SAS (52% vs 40%, P  < 0.001). After matching for AVAi, survival was better in DLG-SAS than in HG-SAS patients (45% vs 33%, P  < 0.001)., Conclusions: Survival of DLG-SAS is better than that of HG-SAS and worse than that of MAS patients. At comparable MG, the lower the AVAi, the worse the prognosis, whereas at comparable AVAi, the higher the MG, the worse the prognosis. These data argue that DLG-SAS is an intermediate form in the disease continuum., Competing Interests: Grant support was received from the Fonds de la recherche scientifique de la Fédération Wallonie Bruxelles de Belgique (FRSM PDR T.0237.21). The authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (© 2023 The Authors.)

Objective: Current guidelines advise using prophylactic tricuspid valve annuloplasty during mitral valve surgery, especially in the presence of annular diameter enlargement. However, several retrospective studies and a prospective randomized study from our department could not confirm that diameter enlargement is predictive of late regurgitation. We examined whether 2- and 3-dimensional echocardiographic and clinical characteristics could identify patients who will develop moderate or severe recurrent tricuspid regurgitation., Methods: Patients with less than severe functional tricuspid regurgitation (FTR) were randomized not to receive tricuspid annuloplasty, and 11 of 53 of them were excluded from the study because 3-dimensional echocardiographic analysis was not possible. Cox regression was used to estimate the model-based probability of moderate or severe FTR (vena contracta ≥3 mm) or progression of TR and FTR regression using valve dimensions (annulus area, diameter perimeter, nonplanar angle, and sphericity index), dynamics (annulus contraction, annulus displacement, and displacement velocity), and clinical parameters as possible predictors., Results: At a median follow-up of 3.8 years (range, 3-5.6 years), 17 patients had moderate or severe FTR or progression, and 13 had FTR regression. Our models identified annular displacement velocity as a significant predictor for FTR recurrence and nonplanar angle as a significant predictor for FTR regression., Conclusions: Annular dynamics, not the dimension, predict recurrence and regression of FTR. Annular contraction should be systematically investigated as a possible surrogate of right ventricle function to prophylactically treat the tricuspid valve., (© 2023 The Author(s).)

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., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery.)

Many authors have reported their results of mitral valve (MV) repair (MVr) in acute and healed endocarditis. However, the results published by different authors highlight the fact that the reparability rate for this indication remains low. Over the last three decades, our group has adopted an early and repair-oriented approach to infective endocarditis with the objective to improve the repair rate and the long-term results.‬ ‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬ In this paper, we describe our institutional experience on mitral valve repair for infective endocarditis.‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬ Data for this paper were extracted from our institutional database on heart valve disease. From 1991 to 2015, 160 consecutive patients in our institution underwent MV surgery for active IE on native MV. The median follow-up was 122 months. This study was approved by the institutional ethics review board, and written informed consent was waived for this study given its retrospective design. Hospital mortality was 11.6% (n = 18). Early MV reoperation before hospital discharge was required in five (3.1%) patients. At 5, 10, and 15 years, overall survival in the MVr for endocarditis in the group was 79% ± 4%, 65% ± 5%, 57% ± 6%, respectively. Freedom from reoperation at 5, 10, and 15 years was 95% ± 2%, 88% ± 4%, and 81% ± 6%, respectively. Mitral infective endocarditis is an insidious pathology and his surgical approach can be challenging. An early and repair-oriented surgical approach can allow to improve reparability rates with good long-term durability and a low recurrence rate of endocarditis., (© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Although the use of the surgical robot facilitates less invasive mitral valve surgery, both real and perceived limitations have slowed the application of this technology. Aim of the present investigation was to report the early and long-term results of robotic mitral valve repair in a single institution over a 10-year period., Methods: Between March 2012 and May 2022, a total of 278 consecutive patients underwent robotically assisted mitral valve repair at the Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc (Brussels, Belgium). Indications have evolved over time allowing the treatment of complex mitral valve lesions. Clinical and echocardiographic follow-up were 97.8% and 86.1% complete, respectively., Results: Mean age of the study population was 57.8±11.9 years and 221/278 (79.5%) patients were male. Despite being asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic [New York Heart Association (NYHA) class I-II], most of the patients presented with severe mitral regurgitation (MR). Degenerative mitral valve disease was the most common cause of MR. All patients underwent successful mitral valve repair using different techniques, and 25/278 (9.0%) had one or more concomitant procedures associated. The mean cardio-pulmonary bypass and aortic cross clamp times were 153±37 and 106±25 minutes, respectively. There was no operative or in-hospital mortality. Overall survival rate was 97.8%±3.2%, 95.8%±3.2% and 93.7%±3.0% at 3, 7 and 10 years. One early (0.4%) reoperation with re-repair was recorded for ring disruption, while late mitral valve re-repair was necessary in 4/279 (1.4%) patients for recurrent severe MR in three of them and mitral endocarditis in one. The overall freedom from mitral valve reoperation was 98.1%±1.0% at 3, 7 and 10 years. Overall freedom from MR (grade 2+ or more) was 91.7%±3.2%, 77.8%±4.8% and 67.1%±9.2% at 3, 7 and 10 years, respectively., Conclusions: Robotic mitral valve repair is safe and is associated with excellent clinical and echocardiographic results. The use of robotic technologies allows, after an appropriate learning curve, to reproduce all conventional techniques to treat MR, regardless of the complexity of the valve lesion., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (2022 Annals of Cardiothoracic Surgery. All rights reserved.)

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., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Gofus, Karalko, Fila, Ondrášek, Schäfers, Kolesár, Lansac, El-Hamamsy, de Kerchove, Dinges, Hlubocký, Němec, Tuna and Vojáček.)

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., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. All rights reserved.)

Background: We report the clinical and echocardiographic results of our experience in robotic mitral valve repair over a 7-year period. The outcomes of the earliest and the latest patients will be compared., Methods: Between March 2012 and October 2019, 226 patients underwent robotic mitral valve repair for severe mitral regurgitation in a single institution. The first 113 patients (Group 1) were operated between March 2012 and September 2015 and the last 113 patients (Group 2) between October 2015 and October 2019. Conventional techniques employed in open surgery were used. Clinical and echographic follow-up were 96.0% and 94.2% complete, respectively., Results: Successful mitral repair was achieved in all cases with no hospital mortality. The overall survival rate was 92.7 ± 2.8% and 91.0 ± 3.2% at 3 and 7 years, respectively, with no in between groups difference (p = 0.513). The overall freedom from mitral reoperation was 97.4 ± 1.2% at 3 and 7 years and was similar in both groups (p = 0.276). Freedom from mitral regurgitation Grade 2+ at 3 and 7 years were 89.1 ± 2.6% and 87.9 ± 2.8%, respectively, with no significant difference between groups (p = 0.056)., Conclusions: Developing a robotic mitral repair program can be done without compromising the safety and efficacy of repair. After a well-conducted training, robotic approach allows to perform simple and complex mitral repair using similar techniques as in conventional approach and without additional risk for the patient., (© 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Unicuspid aortic valves are rare congenital malformations. Surgical repair is feasible in aortic regurgitation, and in some cases of aortic stenosis. The standard surgical approach is a bicuspidization and symmetrization with pericardial patch augmentation of valve leaflets. Herein, we are describing our original technique for bicuspidization of a unicuspid aortic valve in adults without leaflet patch augmentation. We also address the surgical management of a commissural diastasis., (© 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)