Search

Objective: Reoperation after aortic root replacement (ARR) is associated with increased operative risk and complexity. This study evaluated clinical outcomes and reoperation rates in patients undergoing ARR. Methods: From 2004 to 2021, 2700 adult patients underwent an ARR in a 2-institution database. Among 2542 surviving patients, 705 patients who had a history of previous cardiac surgery as well as 11 patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement after index ARR were excluded. Among the finalized cohort of 1826 patients, 88 (4.8%) underwent a reoperation (REDO) on the aortic valve or proximal aorta (root/ascending) a mean of 3.1 years after index ARR whereas 1738 (95%) did not undergo reoperation (no-REDO). A subgroup analysis was performed among those undergoing reoperation by indication including valve dysfunction (48%), endocarditis/graft infection (33%), and aortic aneurysm/dissection/rupture (12%). Reoperative indication was unknown in 6 patients (7%). Results: The REDO group was younger at time of index ARR (52 vs 58 years, P

Background Marfan syndrome is a genetic connective tissue disorder that commonly affects the cardiovascular, skeletal, and ocular system. The increased risk of developing thoracic aortic aneurysms that can lead to aortic dissection and rupture is the main source of mortality in these patients. Pregnancy-induced changes can further increase the risk for aortic complications, especially in patients with an aortic root diameter > 45 mm. Case summary The case of a 26-year-old female with Marfan syndrome who was lost to follow-up for five years and presented to our department being pregnant at 21 weeks is presented. Echocardiography and cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) showed an aortic root diameter of 55 mm and a large aneurysm of an aberrant right subclavian artery. Following multidisciplinary team discussion, valve-sparing aortic root and ascending aortic replacement was performed at 22 weeks of gestation without any complications. During the remaining pregnancy, the patient had frequent clinical and CMR follow-up investigations showing a mild increased size of the subclavian aneurysm. Uncomplicated caesarean delivery was performed at 35 weeks of gestation, and the subclavian artery aneurysm was successfully treated by interventional embolization. Discussion Although cardiovascular surgery in our patient during pregnancy was uncomplicated, the case illustrates that pre-pregnancy counselling in Marfan patients is recommended to reduce the risk for mother and child. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The valve-sparing aortic root replacement (VSARR) procedure was developed to preserve the aortic valve apparatus to replace aneurysmal aortic roots with synthetic grafts and to eliminate associated aortic regurgitation (AR). However, residual post-repair AR is not uncommon and has been found to be associated with recurrent AR and future reoperation. Methods: We designed and manufactured a 3D-printed, external adjustable symmetrically extensible (EASE) aortic annuloplasty ring that can symmetrically reduce the aortic annulus diameter via a radial constriction, compliant mechanism. An ex vivo porcine VSARR model with annular dilation and AR was developed (n = 4) and used for hemodynamic, echocardiography, and high-speed videography data collection. Results: After ring annuloplasty repair using the EASE aortic ring, the regurgitant fraction decreased from 23.6 ± 6.9% from the VSARR model to 7.4 ± 5.6% (p = 0.05), which was similar to that measured from baseline with a regurgitant fraction of 10.2 ± 3.9% (p = 0.34). The leaflet coaptation height after annuloplasty repair also significantly increased from that measured in VSARR model (0.4 ± 0.1 cm) to 0.9 ± 0.1 cm (p = 0.0004), a level similar to that measured in baseline (1.1 ± 0.1 cm, p = 0.28). Conclusion: Using an ex vivo VSARR model, the EASE ring successfully reduced AR by reducing the annular diameter and improving leaflet coaptation. With its broad applicability and ease of use, this device has the potential to have a significant impact on patients suffering worldwide from AR due to root aneurysms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background In the current study, we aimed to report the short- and mid-term outcomes of patients undergoing valve-sparing aortic root reimplantation (VSARR) and our center’s experience with the procedure. Methods Forty patients with aortic root aneurysms underwent VSARR at our center from 2010 until 2022. We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of these patients and extracted the relevant data. After carefully examining the aortic valve, the surgeon decided to perform Bentall or David’s procedure during the operation. Results The study population comprised 31 (77.5%) men and nine (22.5%) women, with a mean age of 55.35 ± 15.40. One patient developed hemodynamic instability post-surgery in the hospital and died from multi-organ failure. Another patient had severe AI in the intraoperative echocardiography, and aortic valve replacement with a prosthetic graft was performed during the same operation. In pre-operation echocardiography, 25 (62.5%) patients had severe, nine (22.5%) had moderate, and six (15%) had mild AI. In the in-hospital post-operation follow-up echo, AI was improved, and no patients had severe AI (P

Objective: During aortic valve reimplantation, cusp repair may be needed to produce a competent valve. We investigated whether the need for aortic valve cusp repair affects aortic valve reimplantation durability. Methods: Patients with tricuspid aortic valves who underwent aortic valve reimplantation from January 2002 to January 2020 at a single center were retrospectively analyzed. Propensity matching was used to compare outcomes between patients who did and did not require aortic valve cusp repair. Results: Cusp repair was performed in 181 of 756 patients (24%). Patients who required cusp repair were more often male, were older, had more aortic valve regurgitation, and less often had connective tissue disease. Patients who underwent cusp repair had longer aortic clamp time (124 ± 43 minutes vs 107 ± 36 minutes, P = .001). In-hospital outcomes were similar between groups and with no operative deaths. A total of 98.3% of patients with cusp repair and 99.3% of patients without cusp repair had mild or less aortic regurgitation at discharge. The median follow-up was 3.9 and 3.2 years for the cusp repair and no cusp repair groups, respectively. At 10 years, estimated prevalence of moderate or more aortic regurgitation was 12% for patients with cusp repair and 7.0% for patients without cusp repair (P = .30). Mean aortic valve gradients were 6.2 mm Hg and 8.0 mm Hg, respectively (P = .01). Ten-year freedom from reoperation was 99% versus 99% (P = .64) in the matched cohort and 97% versus 97%, respectively (P = .30), in the unmatched cohort. Survival at 10 years was 98% after cusp repair and 93% without cusp repair (P = .05). Conclusions: Aortic valve reimplantation for patients with tricuspid aortic valves has excellent long-term results. Need for aortic valve cusp repair does not affect long-term outcomes and should not deter surgeons from performing valve-sparing surgery.

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

ABSTRACT: Background: Patients with syndromic heritable thoracic aortic diseases (sHTAD) who underwent prophylactic aortic root replacement are at high risk of distal aortic events, but the underlying mechanisms remain unclear. This prospective, longitudinal study evaluates the impact of valve-sparing aortic root replacement (VSARR) on aortic fluid dynamics and biomechanics in these patients. Methods: Sixteen patients with Marfan or Loeys-Dietz syndrome underwent two time-resolved three-dimensional phase-contrast cardiovascular magnetic resonance (4D flow CMR) studies before (sHTAD-preSx) and after VSARR (sHTAD-postSx). Two matched cohorts of 40 healthy volunteers (HV) and 16 sHTAD patients without indication for aortic root replacement (sHTAD-NSx) with available 4D flow CMR were included for comparison. In-plane rotational flow (IRF), systolic flow reversal ratio (SFRR), wall shear stress (WSS), pulse wave velocity (PWV), and aortic strain were analyzed in the ascending (AscAo) and descending aorta (DescAo). Results: All patients with sHTAD presented altered hemodynamics and increased stiffness (p

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

BackgroundTotal aortic root replacement (TRR) is certainly beneficial for aortic root disease, but does it still have an advantageous prognosis for patients compared to valve-sparing aortic root replacement (VSRR)? An overview of reviews was conducted to assess each of their clinical efficacy/effectiveness.Review methodsSystematic reviews (SRs)/Meta-analyses comparing the prognosis of TRR and VSRR in aortic root surgery were collected from 4 databases, all searched from the time of database creation to October 2022. Two evaluators independently screened the literature, extracted information and applied the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR 2) tool, Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE), and Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews (ROBIS) to evaluate the quality of reporting, methodological quality, risk of bias, and level of evidence of the included studies.Main resultsA total of 9 SRs/Meta-analyses were ultimately included. In terms of the reporting quality of the included studies, PRISMA scores ranged from 14 to 22.5, with issues mainly in reporting bias assessment, risk of study bias, credibility of evidence, protocol and registration, and funding sources. The methodological quality of the included SRs/Meta-analyses was generally low, with key items 2, 7, and 13 having major flaws and non-key items 10, 12, and 16. In terms of risk of bias assessment, the overall assessment of the included 9 studies was high-risk. The quality of the evidence was rated as low to very low quality for the three outcome indicators selected for the GRADE quality of evidence rating: early (within 30 days postoperatively or during hospitalization) mortality, late mortality, and valve reintervention rate.ConclusionsVSRR has many benefits including reduced early and late mortality after aortic root surgery and reduced rates of valve-related adverse events, but the methodological quality of the relevant studies is low, and there is a lack of high-quality evidence to support this.Systematic Review Registrationhttps://www.PROSPERO, identifier: CRD42022381330.

Background: For patients with aortic root dilatation and a structurally normal aortic valve (AV) undergoing composite aortic valve-graft (Bentall-De Bono) versus valve-sparing aortic root replacement (VSARR) procedures there are conflicting data regarding early and long-term benefits. We undertook a study-level meta-analysis to compare the results of both procedures., Methods: Three databases were assessed, and both randomized trials and observational studies were considered eligible. Kaplan-Meier curves of long-term survival and reoperation risk were reconstructed and compared with Cox linear regression and incidence rate ratios (IRR) with 95 % confidence intervals (CI). Landmark analysis and time-varying hazard ratio (HR) were analyzed. Odds ratios (OR) were calculated for early mortality, postoperative stroke, and re-exploration for postoperative bleeding. A random effects model was used. Sensitivity analyses included leave-one-out-analysis, meta-regression and subgroups analysis., Results: 1456 articles were identified, including 39 observational studies, totaling 14,651 patients (Bentall-De Bono = 9557 and VSARR = 5094). Twelve studies were adjusted. The mean weighted follow-up was 5.05 ± 3.7 years. VSARR was associated with significantly greater survival (HR = 0.50; 95 % CI, 0.45-0.57; p < 0.0001) at 15-year follow-up. The reoperation risk was higher following VSARR (HR = 1.30; 95 % CI, 1.03-1.63; p = 0.02.), although time-varying HR model and landmark analysis reported an increased risk of reoperation within 5 years after VSARR (HR = 1.57; 95 % CI, 1.23-2.01; p < 0.001), after which the difference disappeared. Subgroups analysis of studies excluding aortic dissection showed a comparable rate of late reoperation., Conclusions: VSARR is associated with improved long-term survival compared to Bentall-De Bono. The risk of late reoperation is higher within 5 years following VSARR, after which the two procedures are comparable., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Non declared., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Isolated exclusion of the non-coronary sinus (NCS) is an attractive strategy in valve-sparing aortic root surgery, which avoids the mobilisation and re-implantation of coronary ostia. However, the long-term durability of aortic valve repair and the fate of remnant sinuses of Valsalva remain unclear.Method: From January 2006 to December 2013, 29 patients underwent replacement of the ascending aorta extending to the NCS (group NCS) and 56 patients underwent a modified Yacoub procedure (group MY) in our centre by a single surgeon. Significant difference of preoperative parameters was observed between two groups in the presence of bicuspid aortic valve (41.4% vs 12.5%, p=0.002) and the diameter of the sinus of Valsalva (47.3±4.7 mm vs 51.5±4.9 mm, p=0.01).Results: The group NCS, as compared to the group MY, was associated with significantly shorter cardiopulmonary bypass time (106.6±40.5 min vs 138.4±37.5 min, p=0.001) and aortic cross clamping time (69.0±21.8 min vs 105.4±27.8 min, p<0.01). The mean follow-up was 11.5±2.8 years. No surgical re-intervention was performed for aortopathies of the aortic root; the neo-sinus were not dilated in either groups (38.2±4.2 mm vs 34.0±4.0 mm, p<0.01). The 10-year freedom from aortic valve-related re-operation was estimated to be 96.6±3.4% and 94.5±3.1% (p=0.58), and the cumulative 10-year survival rates were 95.2±4.6% and 85.6±4.7% (p=0.61) in the group NCS and the group MY, respectively.Conclusions: Aortic valve-sparing isolated NCS replacement can be safely performed in selected patients; its early outcomes, overall survival and long-term freedom from aortic valve-related or aortopathy-related re-intervention were comparable to those obtained with the Yacoub procedure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Valve‐sparing aortic root replacement such as the reimplantation (David) procedure is becoming increasingly popular. Despite the fact that the procedure is technically more complex, long‐term studies demonstrated that excellent clinical outcomes in selected patients with durable repair are achievable. Benefits of minimal access cardiac surgery have stimulated enthusiasm in the use of this access for valve‐sparing aortic root replacement. Methods: We have reviewed available literature on the topic of valve‐sparing aortic root replacement (David procedure) via minimally invasive access through upper hemisternotomy in an attempt to assess current trends and to recognize potential advantages of this technique. Patient selection and preoperative work‐up play important role in performing minimally invasive David procedure safely. Surgical technique corresponds to the standard David procedure, with a few exceptions related to the minimal access, and is performed via upper ministernotomy. Results and Conclusion: Evidence from nonrandomized observational and comparative studies demonstrated excellent clinical outcomes of minimally invasive David procedure in selected patients with comparable perioperative mortality and outcomes to the conventional technique. To date, David procedure with a minimal access technique has been performed in carefully selected patients. We believe it could be particularly beneficial to provide younger patients (Marfan syndrome and bicuspid aortic valve) with minimally invasive David procedure as it can allow faster recovery with improved cosmesis with excellent outcomes. A decision to perform minimally invasive David procedure should be individualized to each patient and based on the experience of the team. Further large prospective randomized studies with long‐term follow‐up are still needed to confirm durability of minimal access technique. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

l Adults with conotruncal anomaly (CA) show dilated aortic root. l Aortic valve leaflets themselves tend to be enlarged. l CA can be a good indication for a valve-sparing aortic root replacement. Aortopathy is a well-known feature of conotruncal anomalies, but it remains unknown whether valve-sparing aortic root replacement, such as the David procedure, is feasible in young patients with severe aortic regurgitation. We assessed the aortic valve complex and aortic root morphology in patients with conotruncal anomalies using echocardiography. Furthermore, we evaluated the relevant factors associated with aortopathy in this population. A total of 172 adult patients with conotruncal anomalies were enrolled in this study. Dimensions of the aortic valve complex were measured at the level of the sinus of Valsalva (SV) and sinotubular junction (STJ). The geometric height (GH), effective height (EH), and coaptation length (CL) were also assessed to analyze the aortic valve complex in detail. Sixteen of 172 patients were excluded due to poor imaging; 105 patients with tetralogy of Fallot, 24 with double outlet right ventricle, and 27 with transposition of the great arteries totaling 156 patients (32+/-11 years old) were included in the analysis. The patients were divided into four groups: Group 1 (98 patients) had no dilatation of SV or STJ; Group 2 (32 patients) had dilated SV and STJ; Group 3 (14 patients) had dilated SV; and Group 4 (12 patients) had dilated STJ. GH and EH in Group 2 were also highest among the four, whereas CL was not significantly shortened. Multivariate analysis revealed that male sex, age, and conduit repair were risk factors for aortopathy in this population. Patients with dilated SV and STJ (Group 2) were the most common among the patients with aortopathy (Groups 2, 3, and 4). The aortic valve leaflets themselves were enlarged, and the poor coaptation of the valve tips was compensated in spite of aortic root dilatation, which plays an important role in preventing severe aortic regurgitation in this population. Overall, valve-sparing aortic valve replacement is more feasible in the young populations than we expected. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Anatomically pre-shaped sinus prostheses (SP) were developed to mimic the aortic sinus with the goal to preserve near physiological hemodynamic conditions after valve-sparing aortic root replacement. Although SP have shown more physiological flow patterns, a comparison to straight tube prosthesis and the analysis of derived quantitative parameters is lacking. Hence, this study sought to analyze differences in aortic wall shear stress (WSS) between anatomically pre-shaped SP, conventional straight tube prostheses (TP), and age-matched healthy subjects) using time-resolved 3-dimensional flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance (4D Flow CMR). Moreover, the WSS gradient was introduced and analyzed regarding its sensitivity to detect changes in hemodynamics and its dependency on the expression of secondary flow patterns. Methods Twelve patients with SP (12 male, 62 ± 9yr), eight patients with TP (6 male, 59 ± 9yr), and twelve healthy subjects (2 male, 55 ± 6yr) were examined at 3 T with a 4D Flow CMR sequence in this case control study. Six analysis planes were placed in the thoracic aorta at reproducible landmarks. The following WSS parameters were recorded: WSSavg (spatially averaged over the contour at peak systole), max. WSSseg (maximum segmental WSS), min. WSSseg (minimum segmental WSS) and the WSS Gradient, calculated as max. WSSseg – min. WSSseg. Kruskal-Wallis- and Mann-Whitney-U-Test were used for statistical comparison of groups. Occurrence and expression of secondary flow patterns were evaluated and correlated to WSS values using Spearman’s correlation coefficient. Results In the planes bordering the prosthesis all WSS values were significantly lower in the SP compared to the TP, approaching the physiological optimum of the healthy subjects. The WSS gradient showed significantly different values in the four proximally localized contours when comparing both prostheses with healthy subjects. Strong correlations between an elevated WSS gradient and secondary flow patterns were found in the ascending aorta and the aortic arch. Conclusion Overall, the SP has a positive impact on WSS, most pronounced at the site and adjacent to the prosthesis. The WSS gradient differed most obviously and the correlation of the WSS gradient with the occurrence of secondary flow patterns provides further evidence for linking disturbed flow, which was markedly increased in patients compared to healthy sub jects, to degenerative remodeling of the vascular wall.

Background: Patients with syndromic heritable thoracic aortic diseases (sHTAD) who underwent prophylactic aortic root replacement are at high risk of distal aortic events, but the underlying mechanisms remain unclear. This prospective, longitudinal study evaluates the impact of valve-sparing aortic root replacement (VSARR) on aortic fluid dynamics and biomechanics in these patients., Methods: Sixteen patients with Marfan or Loeys-Dietz syndrome underwent two time-resolved three-dimensional phase-contrast cardiovascular magnetic resonance (4D flow CMR) studies before (sHTAD-preSx) and after VSARR (sHTAD-postSx). Two matched cohorts of 40 healthy volunteers (HV) and 16 sHTAD patients without indication for aortic root replacement (sHTAD-NSx) with available 4D flow CMR were included for comparison. In-plane rotational flow (IRF), systolic flow reversal ratio (SFRR), wall shear stress (WSS), pulse wave velocity (PWV), and aortic strain were analyzed in the ascending (AscAo) and descending aorta (DescAo)., Results: All patients with sHTAD presented altered hemodynamics and increased stiffness (p < 0.05) compared to HV, both in the AscAo (median PWV 7.4 in sHTAD-NSx; 6.8 in sHTAD-preSx; 4.9 m/s in HV) and DescAo (median PWV 9.1 in sHTAD-NSx; 8.1 in sHTAD-preSx; 6.3 m/s in HV). Patients awaiting VSARR had markedly reduced in-plane (median IRF -2.2 vs 10.4 cm 2 /s in HV, p = 0.001), but increased through-plane flow rotation (median SFRR 7.8 vs 3.8% in HV, p = 0.002), and decreased WSS (0.36 vs 0.47 N/m 2 in HV, p = 0.004) in the proximal DescAo. After VSARR, proximal DescAo IRF (p = 0.010) and circumferential WSS increased (p = 0.011), no longer differing from HV, but SFRR, axial WSS and stiffness remained altered. Patients in which aortic tortuosity was reduced after surgery showed greater post-surgical increase in IRF compared to those in which tortuosity increased (median IRF increase 18.1 vs 3.3 cm 2 /s, p = 0.047). Most AscAo flow alterations were restored to physiological values after VSARR., Conclusion: In patients with sHTAD, VSARR partially restores downstream fluid dynamics to physiological levels. However, some flow disturbances and increased stiffness persist in the proximal DescAo. Further longitudinal studies are needed to evaluate whether persistent alterations contribute to post-surgical risk., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Arturo Evangelista and Gisela Teixido-Tura report financial support was provided by Carlos III Health Institute. Jose Rodriguez-Palomares and Ignacio Ferreira Gonzalez report financial support was provided by the Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities. Jose Rodriguez-Palomares and Gisela Teixido-Tura report financial support was provided by the Spanish Society of Cardiology. Andrea Guala reports financial support was provided by La Caixa Foundation. Juan Garrido-Oliver reports financial support was provided by Secretaria d’Universitats i Recerca del Departament de Recerca i Universitats de la Generalitat de Catalunya i del Fons Europeu Social Plus. Kevin M. Johnson and Oliver Wieben report a relationship with General Electric Healthcare that includes non-financial support. The other authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Neo-aortic root dilatation and valve regurgitation are emerging problems late after arterial switch operation (ASO). We sought to evaluate the prevalence and outcomes of neo-aortic root or valve reoperation after ASO. All patients with biventricular circulation who underwent an ASO between 1983 and 2015 were included at a single institution. In our cohort of 782 late ASO survivors, the median duration of follow-up was 18.1 years (interquartile range [IQR], 11.3-25.6 years). During follow-up, 47 patients (6.0%) underwent 60 reoperations on the neo-aortic valve/root. The first neo-aortic valve/root reoperation occurred at a median of 15.2 years (IQR, 7.8-18.4 years) after ASO. Operations included mechanical Bentall (31.9%; n = 15), aortic valve repair (25.5%; n = 12), mechanical aortic valve replacement (AVR) (21.3%; n = 10), valve-sparing root replacement (19.1%; n = 9), and the Ross procedure (2.1%; n = 1). There was 1 late death (2.1%). Multivariable predictors of neo-aortic valve/root reoperation were bicuspid valve (hazard ratio [HR], 4.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.1-10.7; P <.001), Taussig-Bing anomaly (HR, 3.0; 95% CI, 1.2-7.4; P <.02), previous pulmonary artery band (HR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.2-6.3; P <.01) and left ventricular outflow tract obstruction before ASO (HR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.0-5.8; P <.04). Freedom from neo-aortic valve or root reoperation was 98.0% (95% CI, 96.7%-98.8%) at 10 years, 93.3% (95% CI, 90.8%-95.2%) at 20 years, and 88.5% (95% CI, 84.1%-91.8%) at 30 years after ASO. Among the 47 patients who underwent neo-aortic reoperation, freedom from AVR was 82.3% (95% CI, 67.7%-90.7%) at 10 years, 58.0% (95% CI, 41.8%-71.2%) at 20 years, and 43.2% (95% CI, 27.0%-58.3%) at 25 years after ASO. The need for neo-aortic valve or root reoperation surpasses 10% by 30 years post-ASO. Evolving understanding of the mechanisms of neo-aortic valve insufficiency and techniques of neo-aortic valve repair may decrease the need for AVR. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVES We compared the long-term outcomes between aortic valve reimplantation [David V (DV)] and aortic valve and root replacement with biological valved conduit [Bentall–De Bono (BD)] for the patients with aortic root aneurysm with tricuspid valve. METHODS Among 876 patients who underwent aortic root replacement in our institution between 2005 and 2018, 371 patients who underwent DV (n  = 199) or BD (n  = 172) for aortic root aneurysm with tricuspid valve were retrospectively reviewed. Exclusion criteria included aortic stenosis, infective endocarditis, previous prosthetic aortic valve, bicuspid aortic valve, aortic dissection and mechanical Bentall procedure. Propensity score matching was performed based on the patient characteristics, matching 90 patients in each group. The primary end point was all-cause mortality. Secondary end points were reoperation for any cause and specifically for aortic valve-related cause. RESULTS After propensity score matching, DV and BD groups each had 1 in-hospital mortality (1.1%). Survival at 10 years was 95.3% [95% confidence interval (CI) 85.8–98.5] in DV and 98.6% (95% CI 90.8–99.8) in BD (P  = 0.345). The cumulative incidences of reoperation at 10 years in DV versus BD were 3.9% (95% CI 0.7–11.8) vs 18.1% (95% CI 6.9–33.4) for any cause (P  = 0.046) and 1.9% (95% CI 0.1–8.8) vs 15.9% (95% CI 5.5–31.4) for aortic valve-related causes (P  = 0.032). The reasons for valve-related reoperation were aortic insufficiency (3/5 in DV vs 5/10 in BD), aortic stenosis (0/5 vs 2/10) and infective endocarditis (2/5 vs 3/10). CONCLUSIONS Both DV and BD procedures for patients with aortic root aneurysm with tricuspid valve resulted in excellent 10-year survival. All-cause and aortic valve-related reoperations were significantly less frequent with valve-sparing root replacement, suggesting an advantage of DV over biological BD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Reoperation after aortic root replacement (ARR) is associated with increased operative risk and complexity. This study evaluated clinical outcomes and reoperation rates in patients undergoing ARR., Methods: From 2004 to 2021, 2700 adult patients underwent an ARR in a 2-institution database. Among 2542 surviving patients, 705 patients who had a history of previous cardiac surgery as well as 11 patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement after index ARR were excluded. Among the finalized cohort of 1826 patients, 88 (4.8%) underwent a reoperation (REDO) on the aortic valve or proximal aorta (root/ascending) a mean of 3.1 years after index ARR whereas 1738 (95%) did not undergo reoperation (no-REDO). A subgroup analysis was performed among those undergoing reoperation by indication including valve dysfunction (48%), endocarditis/graft infection (33%), and aortic aneurysm/dissection/rupture (12%). Reoperative indication was unknown in 6 patients (7%)., Results: The REDO group was younger at time of index ARR (52 vs 58 years, P  < .0001) and had more bicuspid aortic valves (56% vs 37%, P  = .0003). Most patients underwent modified Bentall ARR (61%), whereas 38% underwent a valve-sparing root replacement. Index root operations were similar between groups. At time of reoperation, 53% underwent aortic valve replacement and 35% underwent redo root replacement. Long-term survival was similar between REDO and no-REDO groups (80% vs 85%, P  = .26) and reoperation was not a risk factor for late mortality (hazard ratio, 1.31; P  = .26); however, REDO ARR was a risk factor for late mortality (hazard ratio, 2.41; P  = .02)., Conclusions: The incidence of aortic valve and/or proximal aorta reoperation after index ARR is relatively low at 4.8%; however, root reoperation is a risk factor for late mortality., Competing Interests: The authors reported no conflicts of interest. The Journal policy requires editors and reviewers to disclose conflicts of interest and to decline handling or reviewing manuscripts for which they may have a conflict of interest. The editors and reviewers of this article have no conflicts of interest., (© 2024 The Author(s).)

Objective: To investigate the effect of graft sizing on valve performance in valve-sparing aortic root replacement for bicuspid aortic valve., Methods: In addition to a diseased control model, 3 representative groups-free-edge length to aortic/graft diameter (FELAD) ratio <1.3, 1.5 to 1.64, and >1.7-were replicated in explanted porcine aortic roots (n = 3) using straight grafts sized respective to the native free-edge length. They were run on a validated ex vivo univentricular system under physiological parameters for 20 cycles. All groups were tested within the same aortic root to minimize inter-root differences. Outcomes included transvalvular gradient, regurgitation fraction, and orifice area. Linear mixed effects model and pairwise comparisons were employed to compare outcomes across groups., Results: The diseased control had mean transvalvular gradient 10.9 ± 6.30 mm Hg, regurgitation fraction 32.5 ± 4.91%, and orifice area 1.52 ± 0.12 cm 2 . In ex vivo analysis, all repair groups had improved regurgitation compared with control ( P  < .001). FELAD <1.3 had the greatest amount of regurgitation among the repair groups ( P  < .001) and 1.5-1.64 the least ( P  < .001). FELAD <1.3 and >1.7 exhibited greater mean gradient compared with both control and 1.5 to 1.64 ( P  < .001). Among the repair groups, 1.5 to 1.64 had the largest orifice area, and >1.7 the smallest ( P  < .001)., Conclusions: For a symmetric bicuspid aortic valve, performance after valve-sparing aortic root replacement shows a bimodal distribution across graft size. As the FELAD ratio departs from 1.5 to 1.64 in either direction, significant increases in transvalvular gradient are observed. FELAD <1.3 may also result in suboptimal improvement of baseline regurgitation., Competing Interests: The authors reported no conflicts of interest. The Journal policy requires editors and reviewers to disclose conflicts of interest and to decline handling or reviewing manuscripts for which they may have a conflict of interest. The editors and reviewers of this article have no conflicts of interest., (© 2024 The Author(s).)

Objective: The purpose of this study is to assess the mid-term outcomes of aortic root replacement after repair of CHDs., Method: This is a single-institutional retrospective, cohort study with consecutive patients undergoing aortic root replacement after surgical repair of CHDs between 1999 and 2022. Operative indications included aortic root dilatation with/without aortic insufficiency, sinus of Valsalva rupture, or aortic dissection involving the root., Results: Forty-four patients (36 male and 8 female) were enrolled. Mean age at the root replacement was 36.6 ± 11.9 years. The most frequent primary diagnosis was congenital aortic stenosis (n = 10) and ventricular septal defect (n = 10). Mean time from the surgical repair to aortic root replacement was 26.6 ± 13.0 years. Operative indications were aortic root enlargement with or without aortic valve aetiology (n = 40), sinus of Valsalva rupture (n = 2), and aortic dissection (n = 2). Forty-two patients underwent valve-replacing aortic root replacement, and two patients underwent valve-sparing, with 40 concomitant procedures. The median follow-up was 3.5 (1.3-7.6) years. There were one early and five late mortalities and five cardiovascular-related reoperations. Actuarial survival at 5-10 years after root replacement was 81.0 ± 6.6%. The cumulative incidence of cardiovascular-related reoperation and aortic root or valve-related reoperation at 5 years after root replacement was 11.9% and 5.6%, respectively., Conclusion: The early and mid-term outcomes of aortic root replacement for patients with a history of repair of CHDs were favourable in terms of survival and aortic root or valve-related reoperation.

Background: Anatomically pre-shaped sinus prostheses (SP) were developed to mimic the aortic sinus with the goal to preserve near physiological hemodynamic conditions after valve-sparing aortic root replacement. Although SP have shown more physiological flow patterns, a comparison to straight tube prosthesis and the analysis of derived quantitative parameters is lacking. Hence, this study sought to analyze differences in aortic wall shear stress (WSS) between anatomically pre-shaped SP, conventional straight tube prostheses (TP), and age-matched healthy subjects) using time-resolved 3-dimensional flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance (4D Flow CMR). Moreover, the WSS gradient was introduced and analyzed regarding its sensitivity to detect changes in hemodynamics and its dependency on the expression of secondary flow patterns. Methods: Twelve patients with SP (12 male, 62 ± 9yr), eight patients with TP (6 male, 59 ± 9yr), and twelve healthy subjects (2 male, 55 ± 6yr) were examined at 3 T with a 4D Flow CMR sequence in this case control study. Six analysis planes were placed in the thoracic aorta at reproducible landmarks. The following WSS parameters were recorded: WSSavg (spatially averaged over the contour at peak systole), max. WSSseg (maximum segmental WSS), min. WSSseg (minimum segmental WSS) and the WSS Gradient, calculated as max. WSSseg – min. WSSseg. Kruskal-Wallis- and Mann-Whitney-U-Test were used for statistical comparison of groups. Occurrence and expression of secondary flow patterns were evaluated and correlated to WSS values using Spearman's correlation coefficient. Results: In the planes bordering the prosthesis all WSS values were significantly lower in the SP compared to the TP, approaching the physiological optimum of the healthy subjects. The WSS gradient showed significantly different values in the four proximally localized contours when comparing both prostheses with healthy subjects. Strong correlations between an elevated WSS gradient and secondary flow patterns were found in the ascending aorta and the aortic arch. Conclusion: Overall, the SP has a positive impact on WSS, most pronounced at the site and adjacent to the prosthesis. The WSS gradient differed most obviously and the correlation of the WSS gradient with the occurrence of secondary flow patterns provides further evidence for linking disturbed flow, which was markedly increased in patients compared to healthy sub jects, to degenerative remodeling of the vascular wall. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVES Some studies have suggested that root remodelling is unsuitable as valve-sparing aortic root replacement in children because of the increased risk of valve failure. This study reviewed our experience with root remodelling in children. METHODS All patients who underwent root remodelling at the age of ≤18 years between 1999 and 2016 were evaluated. In 2004, cusp effective height was measured intraoperatively and prolapse was corrected with central plication on the cusp. Suture annuloplasty was introduced after 2009 for annular dilatation. RESULTS There were 17 consecutive patients. The median age at operation was 14 (2.8–18) years. Aortic valve morphology was tricuspid in 10 patients, bicuspid in 5 patients, unicuspid in 1 patient and a pulmonary autograft in 1 patient. Marfan syndrome, Loeys-Dietz syndrome and other connective tissue diseases were present in 11, 1 and 2 patients, respectively. Five patients had more than moderate aortic regurgitation. The median graft size used for root remodelling was 24 (18–26) mm. Cusp repair and annuloplasty were performed in 15 and 14 patients, respectively. The mean follow-up time was 6.5 ± 4.3 years. One patient with preoperatively severely depressed ventricular function died in the hospital from persistent heart failure. One patient (operated on before 2004) required aortic valve reoperation due to cusp prolapse. One patient with a unicuspid valve had developed moderate aortic regurgitation, and the other 14 patients had mild or less regurgitation. The median diameter of the sinus of Valsalva at the last follow-up was 36 (30–43) mm, Z-score of 1.5 (−3.5 to 3.9). CONCLUSIONS Root remodelling can be performed in children with favourable results by appropriate cusp repair and annuloplasty. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To characterize residual aortic regurgitation (AR), identify its risk factors, and evaluate outcomes following aortic root replacement with aortic valve reimplantation. From 2002 to 2020, 756 patients with a tricuspid aortic valve underwent elective reimplantation for aortic root aneurysm. AR on transthoracic echocardiograms before hospital discharge was graded as mild or greater. Machine learning was used to identify risk factors for residual AR and subsequent aortic valve reoperation. Sixty-five patients (8.6%) had mild (58 [7.7%]) or moderate (7 [0.93%]) residual postoperative AR. They had more severe preoperative AR (38% vs 12%; P <.0001), thickened cusps (7.7% vs 2.2%; P =.008), aortic valve repair (38% vs 23%; P =.004), and multiple returns to cardiopulmonary bypass for additional repair (11% vs 3.3%; P =.003) than those without AR. Predictors of residual AR were severe preoperative AR, smaller aortic root graft, and concomitant cusp repair. At 10 years, patients with versus without residual AR had more moderate or severe AR (48% vs 7.0%; P <.0001) and freedom from reoperation was worse (89% vs 98%; P <.0001). Residual AR was a risk factor for early reoperation. Concomitant coronary bypass, lower body mass index, and lower ejection fraction were risk factors for late reoperation. Ten-year survival was similar among patients with and without residual AR (97% vs 93%; P =.43). Residual AR after elective reimplantation of a tricuspid aortic valve for aortic root aneurysm is uncommon. Patients with severe preoperative AR and those who undergo valve repair have higher risk for residual AR, which can progress and increase risk of aortic valve reoperation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although, in theory, valve-sparing aortic root replacement (David procedure) is an ideal surgical option for acute aortic dissection type A (AADA) it is usually not regarded as the first-choice treatment due to the emergency setting and the relative complexity of the procedure. Here, we report the results of a consecutive, single-surgeon series of 45 AADA patients with the David procedure as first-choice treatment strategy.Methods and Results: Between September 2009 and July 2013 a total of 49 patients with AADA were consecutively operated by the same surgeon at our institution. The David procedure was the treatment of choice for the proximal aorta unless aortic valve pathology or critical preoperative patient status advocated against it. Median follow-up was 5.0 years (CI95%, 4.0–6.0). Out of the 45 patients included in this study the David procedure was performed in 28 patients (62.2%), while in 17 patients (37.8%) an alternative surgical strategy had to be pursued. Although X-clamping (168.5 ± 41.7 vs. 110.3 ± 51.1 min; p = 0.001), cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) (245.0 ± 62.4 vs. 211.8 ± 123 min; p = 0.029) and total operation time (383.8 ± 88.5 vs. 312.8 ± 144.8; p = 0.047) were significantly longer in the David-group as compared to the non-David group, there was no difference in major complication rate as well as 30-day (17.9 vs. 23.5%; p = 0.645) and 5-year mortality (28.6 vs. 35.3%) between groups.Conclusions: This small series indicates that the David procedure may be safe and feasible as a primary surgical treatment strategy for AADA.

This meta-analysis aimed to compare the midterm clinical outcomes of reimplantation versus remodeling techniques for valve-sparing aortic root replacement (VSARR) in patients with connective tissue disorders (CTDs). Studies were screened and identified after the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines from the PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase databases. Forest plots were produced using Review Manager 5.3 (Cochrane, UK). Studies comparing early and midterm clinical outcomes of reimplantation versus remodeling VSARR in patients with CTD with a mean age ≥18 years were included. The sensitivity analysis excluded studies and subgroups of patients that received ring or suture annuloplasty in addition to remodeling surgery. The study selection identified 9 eligible studies. After analysis of the study period and location for patient crossover, 7 retrospective studies consisting of 597 patients (301 reimplantation and 296 remodeling) were pooled. The pooling revealed no significant difference in postoperative mortality (estimated mean follow-up of 10.5 years) (odds ratio [OR] 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.30 to 1.48, I 2  = 30%, p = 0.32), reoperation (OR 0.35, CI 0.04 to 3.30, I 2  = 81%, p = 0.36), or occurrence of postoperative aortic regurgitation of ≥2 (OR 0.56, CI 0.31 to 1.02, I 2  = 47%, p = 0.06). The sensitivity analysis excluding annuloplasty demonstrated improved mortality (OR 0.19, CI 0.06 to 0.64, I 2  = 0%, p = 0.007) and decreased aortic regurgitation of ≥2 (OR 0.23, CI 0.10 to 0.53, I 2  = 47%, p = 0.0005) in reimplantation VSARR. The rates of reoperation remained insignificant in the sensitivity analysis (OR 0.43, CI 0.05 to 3.53, I 2  = 71%, p = 0.43). In conclusion, this meta-analysis has demonstrated no significant difference in the midterm clinical outcomes of reimplantation versus remodeling techniques of VSARR. The sensitivity analysis excluding studies and patient subgroups that received remodeling and annuloplasty suggests remodeling alone to be inferior to reimplantation in patients with CTDs. Further research is required to assess remodeling and annuloplasty against reimplantation in patients of this demographic because the current body of knowledge does not allow sufficient analysis., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors have no competing interest to declare., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The optimal conduit for valve-sparing aortic root replacement is still debated, with several conduit variations available, ranging from straight tubular grafts to Valsalva grafts. Benefits of neosinus reconstruction include enhanced flow profiles and improved hemodynamics. Curiously, however, some clinical data suggest that straight grafts may have greater long-term durability. In this study, we hypothesized that straight tubular grafts may help maintain the native cylindrical position of the aortic valve commissures radially, resulting in preserved leaflet coaptation, reduced stresses, and potentially improved valve performance. Using 3D printing, a left heart simulator with a valve-sparing root replacement model and a physiologic coronary circulation was constructed. Aortic valves were dissected from fresh porcine hearts and reimplanted into either straight tubular grafts (n = 6) or Valsalva grafts (n = 6). Conduits were mounted into the heart simulator and hemodynamic, echocardiographic, and high-speed videometric data were collected. Hemodynamic parameters and coronary blood flow were similar between straight and Valsalva grafts, although the former were associated with lower regurgitant fractions, less peak intercommissural radial separation, preserved leaflet coaptation, decreased leaflet velocities, and lower relative leaflet forces compared with Valsalva grafts. Valsalva grafts and straight grafts perform equally well in terms of gross hemodyanics and coronary blood flow. Interestingly, however, the biomechanics of these 2 conduits differ considerably, with straight grafts providing increased radial commissural stability and leaflet coaptation. Further investigation into how these parameters influence clinical outcomes is warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Objective Valve-sparing root replacement is an attractive alternative to composite mechanical or biologic prostheses for aortic root aneurysms in children. Data on outcomes in pediatric patients are limited. We present our institutional experience with 100 consecutive pediatric valve-sparing aortic root procedures. Methods All children who underwent valve-sparing root replacement at our institution from May 1997 to August 2017 were identified, and echocardiographic and clinical data were reviewed. The primary end point was mortality, and secondary end points included complications, further interventions, and subsequent valvular dysfunction. Results Median age at operation was 13.6 years (interquartile range, 9.42-15.9); 51 patients (51%) had Marfan syndrome, and 39 patients (39%) had Loeys–Dietz syndrome. Mean preoperative maximum sinus diameter was 4.4 ± 0.71 cm (z score 7.3 [5.7-9.3]). Most patients (n = 80, 80%) underwent reimplantation procedures with a Valsalva graft. Four patients (4%) underwent David I reimplantation with a straight-tube graft, 13 patients (13%) underwent a Yacoub remodeling procedure, and 3 patients (3%) underwent a Florida sleeve procedure. Perioperative valve-sparing root replacement mortality was 2% (n = 2). Six patients required late reintervention for development of pseudoaneurysms. Eight patients underwent additional aortic surgery. Average time to reoperation was 7.23 ± 4.56 years. Of the 84 patients undergoing a reimplantation procedure, 5 (5.9%) underwent late valve replacement versus 5 (33.3%) of the 15 patients who received a remodeling procedure (P =.001). Conclusions Valve-sparing root replacement is a safe and effective option for children with aortic root aneurysms in children. The reimplantation procedure is preferred. Late aortic insufficiency and pseudoaneurysm formation remain late concerns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Keywords: Valve-sparing aortic root replacement; Aortic valve reimplantation; David procedure; Valsalva graft EN Valve-sparing aortic root replacement Aortic valve reimplantation David procedure Valsalva graft 1 2 2 04/04/23 20230301 NES 230301 The introduction of the aortic valve (AV) reimplantation, also called David procedure, by David and Feindel in 1992 have placed a milestone for AV sparing [[1]]. Valve-sparing aortic root replacement, Aortic valve reimplantation, David procedure, Valsalva graft. [Extracted from the article]

Objective: The study objective was to determine repair durability and survival in patients with and without connective tissue disorders undergoing concomitant aortic valve reimplantation and mitral valve repair., Methods: From 2002 to 2019, 68 patients underwent concomitant aortic valve reimplantation and mitral valve repair, including 27 patients with Marfan syndrome (39.7%). Follow-up echocardiograms were analyzed using nonlinear multiphase mixed-effects cumulative logistic regression. The regurgitation grade over time was estimated by averaging patient-specific profiles. Survival and freedom from reoperation were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method., Results: At 7 years, 11% of patients had aortic insufficiency greater than mild (severe in 2 patients). There was no difference in greater than mild aortic insufficiency between patients with or without Marfan syndrome ( P  = .37). Twenty percent of patients had progressed to mitral regurgitation greater than mild (severe in only 1 patient). The prevalence of recurrent mitral regurgitation was higher in those without Marfan syndrome, with greater than mild regurgitation increasing to 24% by 2 years and remaining constant thereafter ( P  = .04). Freedom from reoperation on the aortic valve or mitral valve was 83% at 10 years and did not differ between Marfan syndrome groups. There were no cases of perioperative mortality. Survival at 5 and 10 years was 94% and 87%, respectively, without a difference between those with and without Marfan syndrome., Conclusions: Patients can undergo a total repair strategy using combined aortic valve reimplantation and mitral valve repair procedures with a low risk of mortality and complications, with favorable freedom from both residual valve regurgitation and reoperation., Competing Interests: D.J.P.B.: Consultant/speaker: Medtronic, Edwards Lifesciences. M.Y.D.: Consultant: Medtronic, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cytokinetics, Tenaya Therapeutics. A.M.G.: Consultant: Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott, Medtronic, AtriCure, ClearFlow, Artivion. E.E.R.: Consultant: Artivion, Edwards Lifesciences, WL Gore, Medtronic; Speaker: Artivion, Cook, Corcym, Edwards Lifesciences, WL Gore, JenaValve, Terumo Aortic; License: Artivion. P.R.V.: Speaker: Artivion, Edwards Lifesciences. All other authors reported no conflicts of interest. The Journal policy requires editors and reviewers to disclose conflicts of interest and to decline handling or reviewing manuscripts for which they may have a conflict of interest. The editors and reviewers of this article have no conflicts of interest., (© 2023 The Author(s).)

Objective: During aortic valve reimplantation, cusp repair may be needed to produce a competent valve. We investigated whether the need for aortic valve cusp repair affects aortic valve reimplantation durability., Methods: Patients with tricuspid aortic valves who underwent aortic valve reimplantation from January 2002 to January 2020 at a single center were retrospectively analyzed. Propensity matching was used to compare outcomes between patients who did and did not require aortic valve cusp repair., Results: Cusp repair was performed in 181 of 756 patients (24%). Patients who required cusp repair were more often male, were older, had more aortic valve regurgitation, and less often had connective tissue disease. Patients who underwent cusp repair had longer aortic clamp time (124 ± 43 minutes vs 107 ± 36 minutes, P  = .001). In-hospital outcomes were similar between groups and with no operative deaths. A total of 98.3% of patients with cusp repair and 99.3% of patients without cusp repair had mild or less aortic regurgitation at discharge. The median follow-up was 3.9 and 3.2 years for the cusp repair and no cusp repair groups, respectively. At 10 years, estimated prevalence of moderate or more aortic regurgitation was 12% for patients with cusp repair and 7.0% for patients without cusp repair ( P  = .30). Mean aortic valve gradients were 6.2 mm Hg and 8.0 mm Hg, respectively ( P  = .01). Ten-year freedom from reoperation was 99% versus 99% ( P  = .64) in the matched cohort and 97% versus 97%, respectively ( P  = .30), in the unmatched cohort. Survival at 10 years was 98% after cusp repair and 93% without cusp repair ( P  = .05)., Conclusions: Aortic valve reimplantation for patients with tricuspid aortic valves has excellent long-term results. Need for aortic valve cusp repair does not affect long-term outcomes and should not deter surgeons from performing valve-sparing surgery., (© 2023 The Author(s).)

Valve sparing aortic root replacement remains a complex procedure despite various improvements that have been made to this operation. Specifically, a hemostatic proximal anastomosis is one of the most important factors for successful completion of the operation without complication. Here we describe a double mattress suture line technique, which facilitates a secure and hemostatic proximal suture line. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]