Early results of valve-sparing aortic root replacement in high-risk clinical scenarios.

BACKGROUND

The feasibility of valve-sparing aortic root procedures (David) in certain high-risk situations has been questioned. We sought to determine the safety of the David procedure in the following high-risk subgroups: acute type A dissection, severe aortic insufficiency (AI), and reoperations.

METHODS

From 2005 through 2007, 110 root replacements were performed for the above criteria: 73 root replacements with a composite valve-conduit (Bentall) and 37 David procedures. The reimplantation technique was used in all 37 David patients, with 7 requiring aortic cusp repair.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in preoperative or intraoperative variables between the groups, with the exception of cross-clamp time, which was longer for David patients. There was a slight, but nonsignificant increase in mortality among Bentall patients (8.2% [6 of 73]) compared with David patients (5.4% [2 of 37], p = 0.59]. There were no differences with respect to postoperative stroke, renal failure, or respiratory failure. Predischarge echocardiogram in the surviving 35 David patients demonstrated no AI in 25 patients and trace/mild AI in 10. Freedom from AVR at a mean follow-up of 8.8 months (range, 1 to 40) was 94.3% (33 of 35). One patient required AVR because of endocarditis at 9 months, and 1 had severe AI 13 months postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

Valve-sparing aortic root replacement can be performed safely in the setting of acute dissection, severe AI, and reoperations with acceptable early results. Long-term follow-up is needed to determine the durability of repair in these high-risk groups.