Clifford W. Barlow

Modified technique for mitral repair without ring annuloplasty

Mitral valve repair is the procedure of choice to correct mitral regurgitation. Most operative techniques use an annuloplasty ring to provide stability and durability to the correction. We present a modification of existing repair techniques, without the use of an annuloplasty ring, in which plication sutures allow both annular remodeling and stability. Clinical and echocardiographic follow-up in our series of 60 patients with a mean follow-up of 29 months is presented.

Aortic Root Replacement Using a Biovalsalva Prosthesis in Comparison to a “Handsewn” Composite Bioprosthesis

Abstract  Background: The Biovalsalva aortic root prosthesis incorporates an Elan porcine stentless biological aortic valve suspended within a triple‐layered vascular conduit with preformed aortic sinuses of Valsalva. This study compared implantation of the Biovalsalva prosthesis with a “handsewn” composite bioprosthetic graft (CE Perimount bovine bioprosthesis anastomosed to a gelatin‐impregnated gelweave Dacron graft). Methods: Between December 2004 and January 2009, 39 patients underwent elective or urgent aortic root replacement (modified Bentall procedure with coronary button reimplantation) using a Biovalsalva (n = 21) or a handsewn bioprosthesis (n = 18) for aortic root dilatation. Results: There was no significant difference in the preoperative variables between the two study groups including age (70.7 ± 1.7 vs. 67.6 ± 2.9 years, p > 0.05). There was no in‐hospital mortality. Three patients in each group underwent concomitant aortic hemi‐arch replacement. Patients who underwent Biovalsalva implantation had a reduced need for transfusion of blood (1.25 ± 0.32 vs. 3.17 ± 0.71 units, p < 0.05) and fresh frozen plasma (2.78 ± 0.39 vs. 1.85 ± 0.31, p < 0.05), and reduced mediastinal blood loss (416 ± 52 vs. 583 ± 74 mL, p < 0.05) compared to those with a handsewn bioprosthesis. Cardiopulmonary bypass time (141 ± 6 vs. 170 ± 17 minutes, p = NS) and aortic cross‐clamp time (113 ± 6 vs. 115 ± 7 minutes, p = NS) were similar. Postoperative echocardiography demonstrated excellent hemodynamic function of the Biovalsalva prosthesis (mean size 25.1 ± 0.4 mm valved conduit) with a peak pressure gradient of 26.2 ± 1.9 mmHg and no or trivial valvular regurgitation. Conclusions: The Biovalsalva prosthesis should be considered for patients requiring a biological aortic root replacement. It offers an “off‐the‐shelf” preassembled composite biological valve conduit with excellent hemostatic and hemodynamic properties. (J Card Surg 2010;25:321‐326)

Management options for aorto-oesophageal fistula: case histories and review of the literature

Objective: An aorto-oesophageal fistula is a rare clinical entity, leading to life-threatening gastrointestinal bleeding. Thoracic aortic aneurysms are the most common cause of aorto-oesophageal fistulae; further causes involve foreign body ingestion, trauma (in most cases iatrogenic), carcinoma or, very rarely, aortitis tuberculotica. Methods: Due to its rarity, there are no large multicentre studies present to evaluate the efficacy of different therapeutic management options. Since it is associated with significant morbidity and mortality, we give a short summary of various treatment approaches performed in our clinical practice in the past three years. The most straightforward therapeutic option may be an endovascular aortic repair and subtotal oesophageal resection followed by gastro-oesophageal reconstruction, but other alternative treatment possibilities are also present, although with probable higher morbidity. Conclusions: Eliminating the source of bleeding as an emergency, resecting the oesophagus urgently to prevent sepsis and reconstructing the gastrointestinal continuity as an elective case after having the inflammatory processes settled seems to justify the endovascular aortic repair and subtotal oesophageal resection, followed by a gastro-oesophageal reconstruction, as an effective surgical approach.

Mitral valve replacement in severely calcified mitral valve annulus: a 10-year experience

OBJECTIVES Severe calcification in the mitral valve annulus is a challenging problem during mitral valve surgery. We describe our experience with mitral valve replacement in severely calcified mitral valve without decalcification of the annulus. METHODS Between April 2001 and July 2011, 61 patients underwent mitral valve replacement with severe mitral annulus calcification without decalcification of the annulus. This retrospective study was performed to assess the surgical and the long‐term postoperative outcomes in this group. RESULTS The mean age of the patients was 75.2 ± 9.2 years. Twenty‐four patients (53%) were in New York Heart Association Class III/IV. Twenty‐six patients (58%) had good left ventricular function. Mean logistic EuroSCORE was 8.75. Isolated mitral valve replacement was performed in 12 patients (27%). Coronary artery bypass grafting was done in 13 patients (29%). In‐hospital mortality was 4.9% (3 patients). Postoperative morbidity included re‐exploration for bleeding in 3 patients (7%) and transient renal impairment in 10 patients (22%). Three patients required intra‐aortic balloon pump (7%) for low cardiac output syndrome. Seven patients (16%) required permanent pacemaker, and 1 patient (2%) had thromboembolic event. The 1‐year survival was 93.3%, and the 5‐year survival was 78.8%. The mean echocardiography follow‐up was 40 months. There was no paravalvular leak detected in any patient in the long‐term follow‐up. None of the patients had valve‐related reoperation. CONCLUSIONS Mitral valve replacement without annular decalcification in severely calcified mitral valve annulus is a safe and an effective approach and has good long‐term outcome.

Initial experience with xenograft bioconduit for the treatment of complex prosthetic valve endocarditis

Introduction: The treatment of complex prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE) with aortic root abscess remains a surgical challenge. Several studies support the use of biological tissues to minimize the risk of recurrent infection. We present our initial surgical experience with the use of an aortic xenograft conduit for aortic valve and root replacement. Methods: Between October 2013 and August 2015, 15 xenograft bioconduits were implanted for complex PVE with abscess (13.3% female). In 6 patients, concomitant procedures were performed: coronary bypass (n=1), mitral valve replacement (n=5) and tricuspid annuloplasty (n=1). The mean age at operation was 60.3±15.5 years. The mean Logistic European system for cardiac operating risk evaluation (EuroSCORE) was 46.6±23.6. The median follow-up time was 607±328 days (range: 172-1074 days). Results: There were two in-hospital deaths (14.3% mortality), two strokes (14.3%) and seven patients required permanent pacemaker insertion for conduction abnormalities (46.7%). The mean length of hospital stay was 26 days. At pre-discharge echocardiography, the conduit mean gradient was 9.3±3.3mmHg and there was either none (n=6), trace (n=6) or mild aortic insufficiency (n=1). There was no incidence of mid-term death, prosthesis-related complications or recurrent endocarditis. Conclusions: Xenograft bioconduits may be safe and effective for aortic valve and root replacement for complex PVE with aortic root abscess. Although excess early mortality reflects the complexity of the patient population, there was good valve hemodynamics, with no incidence of recurrent endocarditis or prosthesis failure in the mid-term. Our data support the continued use and evaluation of this biological prosthesis in this high-risk patient cohort.

Open and closed distal anastomosis for acute type A aortic dissection repair: early and long-term outcomes from a contemporary series of 204 patients.

The current general consensus favours an open distal anastomosis for aortic dissection repair. A limited number of studies have compared the results between open and closed repair strategies.