Search

Objectives: There are several treatment options for non-elderly adults (18-60 years) in need of aortic valve replacement (AVR): a mechanical or biological substitute, a homograft, the Ross procedure or nowadays even transcatheter aortic valve replacement. This study evaluated the current opinions and practices of cardiac surgeons and cardiologists concerning AVR strategies in this patient group., Methods: A 43-item online survey was sent out to several scientific organizations, individual cardiac surgeons, cardiologists and residents/fellows worldwide., Results: Two hundred twenty-two physicians from 33 different countries answered the survey. The UK (24%), Belgium (23%) and North America (22%) are best represented. A mechanical valve is the most frequently used substitute in non-elderly. With increasing patient age, the popularity of a biological valve increases. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement and the Ross procedure are each used in <10% of this cohort. Only 12% of the cardiac surgeons has experience with the Ross surgery. In 23%, the patient seems not to be involved in the decision on the type of valve substitute., Conclusions: The preferred surgical treatment for non-elderly patients in need of AVR differs widely. To enable a shared decision-making process including patient preferences, there is more need for collaboration between cardiac departments, as well as education and scientific research about patient-centred outcomes of the different AVR techniques., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic 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: 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.)

Background: This study compared clinical and hemodynamic in-hospital outcomes of patients undergoing sutureless vs rapid deployment aortic valve replacement (SURD-AVR) in the large population of the Sutureless and Rapid Deployment International Registry (SURD-IR)., Methods: We examined 4695 patients who underwent isolated or combined SURD-AVR. The "sutureless" Perceval valve (LivaNova PLC, London, United Kingdom) was used in 3133 patients and the "rapid deployment" Intuity (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA) in 1562. Potential confounding factors were addressed by the use of propensity score matching. After matching, 2 well-balanced cohorts of 823 pairs (isolated SURD-AVR) and 467 pairs (combined SURD-AVR) were created., Results: Patients who received Perceval and Intuity valves showed similar in-hospital mortality and rate of major postoperative complications. Perceval was associated shorter cross-clamp and cardiopulmonary bypass times. In the isolated SURD-AVR group, patients receiving Perceval were more likely to undergo anterior right thoracotomy incision. Postoperative transvalvular gradients were significantly lower for the Intuity valve compared with those of the Perceval valve, either in isolated and combined SURD-AVR. The Intuity valve was associated with a lower rate of postoperative mild aortic regurgitation., Conclusions: Our results confirm the safety and efficacy of SURD-AVR regardless of the valve type. The Perceval valve was associated with reduced operative times and increased anterior right thoracotomy incision. The Intuity valve showed superior hemodynamic outcomes and a lower incidence of postoperative mild aortic regurgitation., (Copyright © 2022 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Increasing evidence suggests that aortic valve (AV) repair may have better long-term outcomes than AV replacement for aortic insufficiency. However, most literature is limited to centres of excellence and has not sufficiently been replicated in nascent programs. This single-centre experience of a newly established AV repair program aims to compare short-term outcomes of AV sparing versus replacement surgery., Methods: A retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent elective surgery for aortic regurgitation or aortic root dilatation at the Leuven University Hospital between 2013 and 2018 was performed. Patients with a critically ill presentation, endocarditis, aortic stenosis or requiring redo surgery were excluded. Patients were assigned to repair versus replacement based on preoperative intention to preserve the AV. Nearest neighbour propensity score matching was performed to compare both groups. Safety (mortality, morbidity), efficiency (cross-clamp and bypass times) and efficacy end points (repair rate, postoperative echocardiography) were compared., Results: One hundred and seven patients underwent AV surgery (48 repair, 59 replacement), from which 2 groups of 23 matched patients were created. There were 1 death and 2 reoperations after repair and no death and 1 reoperation after replacement. Extracorporeal circulation and aortic cross-clamp time were significantly longer while ventilation and total hospital stay were significantly shorter after AV repair. Echocardiographic follow-up showed comparable aortic regurgitation but lower transvalvular gradients after repair. Freedom from major complications was comparable in both cohorts., Conclusions: Early results suggest the feasibility of replicating experienced centres' perioperative and short-term outcomes in nascent programs., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. All rights reserved.)

Background: There is an ever-growing number of patients requiring aortic valve replacement (AVR). Limited data is available on the long-term outcomes and structural integrity of bioprosthetic valves in younger patients undergoing surgical AVR., Methods: The INSPIRIS RESILIA Durability Registry (INDURE) is a prospective, open-label, multicentre, international registry with a follow-up of 5 years to assess clinical outcomes of patients younger than 60 years who undergo surgical AVR using the INSPIRIS RESILIA aortic valve. INDURE will be conducted across 20-22 sites in Europe and Canada and intends to enrol minimum of 400 patients. Patients will be included if they are scheduled to undergo AVR with or without concomitant root replacement and/or coronary bypass surgery. The primary objectives are to 1) determine VARC-2 defined time-related valve safety at one-year (depicted as freedom from events) and 2) determine freedom from stage 3 structural valve degeneration (SVD) presenting as morphological abnormalities and severe haemodynamic valve degeneration at 5 years. Secondary objectives include the assessment of the haemodynamic performance of the valve, all stages of SVD, potential valve-in-valve procedures, clinical outcomes (in terms of New York Heart Association [NYHA] function class and freedom from valve-related rehospitalisation) and change in patient quality-of-life., Discussion: INDURE is a prospective, multicentre registry in Europe and Canada, which will provide much needed data on the long-term performance of bioprosthetic valves in general and the INSPIRIS RESILIA valve in particular. The data may help to gather a deeper understanding of the longevity of bioprosthetic valves and may expand the use of bioprosthetic valves in patients under the age of 60 years., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03666741 (registration received September, 12th, 2018).

Objectives: A geometric annuloplasty ring could improve efficacy and stability of aortic valve repair. Toward this goal, a 1-piece 3-dimensional titanium annuloplasty ring with Dacron covering was developed and tested successfully in animals. The purpose of this study was to define hemodynamic outcomes with this device used as the annuloplasty component of human aortic valve repair., Methods: In a 4-center pilot trial with informed consent, 16 patients underwent aortic valve repair for aortic insufficiency, with the annuloplasty device sutured into the annulus beneath the leaflets. Preoperative annular diameter averaged 26.5 ± 2.0 (mean ± standard deviation) mm, and average ring size was 22.3 ± 1.2 mm. After annuloplasty, leaflet defects were easy to identify, and 14 of 16 patients (88%) required leaflet plication and/or autologous pericardial reconstruction for leaflet defects. Three patients had ascending aortic replacement, and 2 had remodeling root replacement. One had ultrasonic leaflet decalcification and another tricuspid valve annuloplasty. Follow-up data were from site-specific studies at the 6-month postoperative time point., Results: There were no in-hospital mortalities or major complications. Preoperative aortic insufficiency grade (0-4 scale) was 3.6 ± 1.0 and fell to 1.0 ± 0.8 at 6 months (P < .0001). New York Heart Association class fell from 2.5 ± 0.5 to 1.1 ± 0.3 (P < .0001). Postrepair valve area was 2.7 ± 0.2 cm(2), and 6-month mean systolic gradient was 11.3 ± 3.3 mm Hg. Left ventricular end-diastolic diameter and ejection fraction both normalized (both P < .0001)., Conclusions: Geometric ring annuloplasty facilitated aortic valve repair, allowing more precise reconstruction of leaflet defects. Aortic insufficiency reduction and systolic gradients were excellent, and expansion of valve reconstruction into broader categories of aortic valve disease seems indicated., (Copyright © 2014 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Prosthesis-patient mismatch (P-PtM) after aortic valve replacement results in disturbed valve performance associated with increased pressure gradients. However, it is unknown whether this can be related to future structural valve deterioration (SVD) of the bioprosthesis., Methods and Results: In 564 patients (mean age, 74+/-5 years) receiving an aortic valve bioprosthesis, clinical follow-up (median, 6.1 years; maximum, 16.4 years) was analyzed including echocardiography. SVD was diagnosed in 40 patients (7%) as substantially increased stenosis (n=24) or regurgitation (n=16) of the operated valve over time. When patients with P-PtM (effective orifice area index <0.85 cm(2)/m(2); n=285) developed SVD, it was preferentially of the stenosis type, whereas when patients without P-PtM (n=279) developed SVD, the majority was of the incompetence type (P<0.05). Multivariable analysis including patient- and valve-related variables revealed that P-PtM and label size

ObjectiveThere is uncertainty about surgical procedures for adult patients aged 18-60 years undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR). Options include conventional AVR (mechanical, mAVR; tissue, tAVR), the pulmonary autograft (Ross) and aortic valve neocuspidisation (Ozaki). Transcatheter treatment may be an option for selected patients. We used formal consensus methodology to make recommendations about the suitability of each procedure.MethodsA working group, supported by a patient advisory group, developed a list of clinical scenarios across seven domains (anatomy, presentation, cardiac/non-cardiac comorbidities, concurrent treatments, lifestyle, preferences). A consensus group of 12 clinicians rated the appropriateness of each surgical procedure for each scenario on a 9-point Likert scale on two separate occasions (before and after a 1-day meeting).ResultsThere was a consensus that each procedure was appropriate (A) or inappropriate (I) for all clinical scenarios as follows: mAVR: total 76% (57% A, 19% I); tAVR: total 68% (68% A, 0% I); Ross: total 66% (39% A, 27% I); Ozaki: total 31% (3% A, 28% I). The remainder of percentages to 100% reflects the degree of uncertainty. There was a consensus that transcatheter aortic valve implantation is appropriate for 5 of 68 (7%) of all clinical scenarios (including frailty, prohibitive surgical risk and very limited life span).ConclusionsEvidence-based expert opinion emerging from a formal consensus process indicates that besides conventional AVR options, there is a high degree of certainty about the suitability of the Ross procedure in patients aged 18-60 years. Future clinical guidelines should include the option of the Ross procedure in aortic prosthetic valve selection.

OBJECTIVES The potential risk of autograft dilatation and homograft stenosis after the Ross procedure mandates lifelong follow-up. This retrospective cohort study aimed to determine long-term outcome of the Ross procedure, investigating autograft and homograft failure patterns leading to reintervention. METHODS All adults who underwent the Ross procedure between 1991 and 2018 at the University Hospitals Leuven were included, with follow-up data collected retrospectively. Autograft implantation was performed using the full root replacement technique. The primary end-point was long-term survival. Secondary end-points were survival free from any reintervention, autograft or homograft reintervention-free survival, and evolution of autograft diameter, homograft gradient and aortic regurgitation grade over time. RESULTS A total of 173 adult patients (66% male) with a median age of 32 years (range 18–58 years) were included. External support at both the annulus and sinotubular junction was used in 38.7% (67/173). Median follow-up duration was 11.1 years (IQR, 6.4–15.9; 2065 patient-years) with 95% follow-up completeness. There was one (0.6%) perioperative death. Kaplan–Meier estimate for 15-year survival was 91.1% and Ross-related reintervention-free survival was 75.7% (autograft: 83.5%, homograft: 85%). Regression analyses demonstrated progressive neoaortic root dilatation (0.56 mm/year) and increase in homograft gradient (0.72 mmHg/year). CONCLUSIONS The Ross procedure has the potential to offer excellent long-term survival and reintervention-free survival. These long-term data further confirm that the Ross procedure is a suitable option in young adults with aortic valve disease which should be considered on an individual basis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVES To compare procedural and in-hospital outcomes of patients undergoing sutureless (Perceval, Livanova PLC, London, UK) and rapid deployment (Intuity Elite, Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA, USA) aortic valve replacement (group 1) versus sutured aortic valve replacement (group 2). METHODS Patients receiving isolated aortic valve replacement between 2014 and 2020 were analysed using data from the Sutureless and Rapid Deployment International Registry. Patients in group 1 and group 2 were propensity-score matched in a 1:1 ratio. RESULTS A total of 7708 patients were included in the study. After matching, 2 groups of 2643 each were created. Patients in group 1 were more likely to undergo minimally invasive approaches and were associated with shorter operative times when compared with group 2. Overall in-hospital mortality was similar between groups. While an increased risk of stroke was observed in group 1 in the first study period (2014–2016; relative risk 3.76, P  < 0.001), no difference was found in more recent year period (relative risk 1.66, P  = 0.08; P for heterogeneity 0.003). Group 1 was associated with reduced rates of postoperative low cardiac output syndrome, atrial fibrillation and mild aortic regurgitation. New pacemaker implant was three-fold higher in group 1. CONCLUSIONS Our findings showed significant differences in procedural and clinical outcomes between the study groups. These results suggest that sutureless and rapid deployment aortic valve replacement should be considered as part of a comprehensive valve programme. The knowledge of the respective post-aortic valve replacement benefits for different valve technologies may result in patient-tailored valve selection with improved clinical outcomes. Open in new tab Download slide [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVES Current evidence on sutureless and rapid deployment aortic valve replacement (SURD-AVR) is limited and does not allow for the assessment of the clinical impact and the evolution of procedural and clinical outcomes of this new valve technology. The Sutureless and Rapid Deployment International Registry (SURD-IR) represents a unique opportunity to evaluate the current trends and outcomes of SURD-AVR interventions. METHODS Data from 3682 patients enrolled between 2007 and 2018 were analysed. Patients were divided according to the date of surgery into 6 equal groups and by the type of intervention: isolated SURD-AVR (n  = 2472) and combined SURD-AVR (n  = 1086). RESULTS Across the 11-year study period, significant changes occurred in patient characteristics including a decrease in age and in estimated surgical risk. Less invasive approaches for isolated SURD-AVR increased considerably from 49.4% to 85.5%. The overall in-hospital mortality rate was 1.6% and 3.9% in isolated and combined procedures, respectively, with no change over time. The rate of perioperative stroke decreased significantly (from 4% to 0.5%), as did the rates of postoperative pacemaker implantation (from 12.8% to 5.9%) and aortic regurgitation (from 17.8% to 2.7%). CONCLUSIONS The present study provides a comprehensive analysis of the current trends and results of SURD-AVR interventions. The most notable changes over time were the increasing implantation of SURD valves in a younger population, with more frequent utilization of less invasive techniques. SURD-AVR demonstrated remarkable improvements in clinical outcomes with a significant reduction in the rates of stroke, pacemaker implantation and postoperative aortic regurgitation. Open in new tab Download slide Open in new tab Download slide [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]