Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia.
Department of Biostatistics, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia.
Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2021 Autumn;33(3):627-634. doi: 10.1053/j.semtcvs.2020.12.004. Epub 2021 Jan 11.
The David V valve-sparing root replacement (VSRR) is well-established for the treatment of aortic insufficiency (AI) and advanced root aortopathy. The impact of cusp repair in trileaflet aortic valve (TAV) patients, however, with preoperative moderate-severe AI and an eccentric jet is unclear. This study compares outcomes in TAV patients with pre-operative AI >2+ based on jet centricity and cusp repair status. Review of a single institutional database identified 309 consecutive patients undergoing VSRR from 2005 to 2018. Of these, 51 patients had TAV with AI >2+: 25 concentric and 26 eccentric jets. Mean follow-up was 58 (SD = 44) months. Echocardiographic parameters were compared pre- and post-operatively. Kaplan-Meier analysis, longitudinal mixed modeling, and cumulative incidence were used to compare long-term survival, recurrence of AI >1+, and valve specific re-intervention, respectively. The mean age was 48 (SD = 12) years and 84% were male. Differences in preoperative comorbidities and echocardiographic parameters between groups were not statistically significant. Postoperative outcomes were similar in concentric vs. eccentric and cusp vs. no cusp repair. Recurrence of AI>1+ was minimal and unrelated to jet centricity (concentric = 1, eccentric = 3) and cusp repair (no cusp repair = 1, cusp repair = 3) long-term. Aortic valve replacement cumulative incidence was 0% for central and 5% for eccentric at 3-, 5-, and 10-years, respectively. Long-term mortality was similar regardless of jet centricity and cusp repair. In appropriately selected TAV patients with preoperative AI >2+, current results suggest VSRR provides a durable repair regardless of jet centricity or the need for cusp repair based on low rates of reintervention reported.
David V 保留瓣膜的主动脉根部替换术(VSRR)在治疗主动脉瓣关闭不全(AI)和晚期根部主动脉病变方面已得到广泛应用。然而,对于术前存在中重度 AI 且射流呈偏心性的三叶式主动脉瓣(TAV)患者,行瓣叶修复的效果尚不清楚。本研究比较了基于射流中心性和瓣叶修复情况,术前 AI>2+的 TAV 患者的治疗结果。回顾单中心数据库,纳入 2005 年至 2018 年期间行 VSRR 的 309 例连续患者,其中 51 例为 TAV 合并 AI>2+:25 例为同心射流,26 例为偏心射流。平均随访时间为 58(SD=44)个月。比较术前和术后的超声心动图参数。使用 Kaplan-Meier 分析、纵向混合模型和累积发生率分别比较长期生存率、AI>1+的复发和瓣膜特异性再干预。患者的平均年龄为 48(SD=12)岁,84%为男性。两组患者的术前合并症和超声心动图参数差异无统计学意义。同心射流与偏心射流以及瓣叶修复与无瓣叶修复之间的术后结果相似。AI>1+的复发率较低,与射流中心性(同心射流 1 例,偏心射流 3 例)和瓣叶修复(无瓣叶修复 1 例,瓣叶修复 3 例)无关。3 年、5 年和 10 年时,中心射流的主动脉瓣置换累积发生率为 0%,偏心射流为 5%。无论射流中心性还是瓣叶修复,长期死亡率相似。在适当选择的术前 AI>2+的 TAV 患者中,目前的结果表明,VSRR 提供了持久的修复效果,无论射流中心性如何,也无需根据报告的再干预率低而进行瓣叶修复。