Department of Cardiac Surgery, Glenfield Hospital, Groby Road, Leicester, LE3 9QP, UK.
Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Campus Bio-Medico University of Rome, Via Álvaro del Portillo, 21, 00128, Rome, Italy.
J Cardiothorac Surg. 2023 Feb 1;18(1):51. doi: 10.1186/s13019-022-02051-x.
We compare the early and late outcomes of a modified aortic root remodelling (ARR) technique for aortic root replacement without mobilisation or reimplantation of the coronary ostia, with those of the modified Bentall-de Bono procedure.
A retrospective observational study was performed comprising 181 consecutive patients who underwent aortic root replacement with a modified Bentall-de Bono procedure (104 patients) or ARR (77 patients) between January 2013 and December 2019. Primary endpoints included hospital mortality and late survival. Secondary endpoints included incidence of post-operative complications and freedom from late re-operation.
ARR procedures were performed with shorter cross-clamp times and comparable cardiopulmonary bypass times to modified Bentall-de Bono procedures. The incidence of early post-complications was comparable between groups. 30-day mortality was numerically lower with ARR than the modified Bentall-de Bono procedure. Over 7-year follow-up, 4 patients (3.8%) required repeat aortic surgery after a modified Bentall-de Bono procedure, and none after ARR. Long-term mortality after ARR and after modified Bentall-de Bono procedures was 17.1% and 22.7%, respectively. The cumulative incidence of reintervention on the aortic root/valve was 3.2% after a modified Bentall-de Bono procedure and 0% after ARR. When adjusted for other independent risk factors, late mortality was not influenced by the procedure performed, although competing risk adjusted for age showed that the modified Bentall-de Bono procedure was associated with an increased risk of aortic root/aortic valve re-operation.
The modified ARR technique is associated with reduced myocardial ischaemia time, lower post-operative mortality and aortic re-intervention rates compared to a modified Bentall-de Bono procedure. It may be considered a safe and feasible procedure for aortic root/ascending aortic replacement offering good long-term outcomes.
我们比较了不移动或重新植入冠状动脉口的改良主动脉根部重建(ARR)技术与改良 Bentall-de Bono 手术治疗主动脉根部置换术的早期和晚期结果。
回顾性观察研究纳入了 2013 年 1 月至 2019 年 12 月期间接受改良 Bentall-de Bono 手术(104 例)或 ARR(77 例)治疗的 181 例连续主动脉根部置换术患者。主要终点包括院内死亡率和晚期生存率。次要终点包括术后并发症发生率和晚期免于再次手术的生存率。
ARR 手术的体外循环时间与改良 Bentall-de Bono 手术相当,但主动脉阻断时间更短。两组术后早期并发症发生率相当。ARR 的 30 天死亡率略低于改良 Bentall-de Bono 手术。7 年随访后,改良 Bentall-de Bono 手术后有 4 例(3.8%)患者需要再次主动脉手术,ARR 手术后无再次手术。ARR 和改良 Bentall-de Bono 手术后的长期死亡率分别为 17.1%和 22.7%。改良 Bentall-de Bono 手术后主动脉根部/瓣需要再次干预的累积发生率为 3.2%,ARR 手术后为 0%。在调整其他独立风险因素后,尽管考虑到年龄的竞争风险显示改良 Bentall-de Bono 手术与主动脉根部/主动脉瓣再次手术的风险增加,但手术方式并不影响晚期死亡率。
与改良 Bentall-de Bono 手术相比,改良 ARR 技术可减少心肌缺血时间,降低术后死亡率和主动脉再次介入率。对于主动脉根部/升主动脉置换术,它可能是一种安全可行的术式,可提供良好的长期结果。