Laurent de Kerchove

Repair-oriented classification of aortic insufficiency: impact on surgical techniques and clinical outcomes.

OBJECTIVE Valve repair for aortic insufficiency requires a tailored surgical approach determined by the leaflet and aortic disease. Over the past decade, we have developed a functional classification of AI, which guides repair strategy and can predict outcome. In this study, we analyze our experience with a systematic approach to aortic valve repair. METHODS From 1996 to 2007, 264 patients underwent elective aortic valve repair for aortic insufficiency (mean age - 54 +/- 16 years; 79% male). AV was tricuspid in 171 patients bicuspid in 90 and quadricuspid in 3. One hundred fifty three patients had type I dysfunction (aortic dilatation), 134 had type II (cusp prolapse), and 40 had type III (restrictive). Thirty six percent (96/264) of the patients had more than one identified mechanism. RESULTS In-hospital mortality was 1.1% (3/264). Six patients experienced early repair failure; 3 underwent re-repair. Functional classification predicted the necessary repair techniques in 82-100% of patients, with adjunctive techniques being employed in up to 35% of patients. Mid-term follow up (median [interquartile range]: 47 [29-73] months) revealed a late mortality rate of 4.2% (11/261, 10 cardiac). Five year overall survival was 95 +/- 3%. Ten patients underwent aortic valve reoperation (1 re-repair). Freedoms from recurrent Al (>2+) and from AV reoperation at 5 years was 88 +/- 3% and 92 +/- 4% respectively and patients with type I (82 +/- 9%; 93 +/- 5%) or II (95 +/- 5%; 94 +/- 6%) had better outcomes compared to type III (76 +/- 17%; 84 +/- 13%). CONCLUSION Aortic valve repair is an acceptable therapeutic option for patients with aortic insufficiency. This functional classification allows a systematic approach to the repair of Al and can help to predict the surgical techniques required as well as the durability of repair. Restrictive cusp motion (type III), due to fibrosis or calcification, is an important predictor for recurrent Al following AV repair.

Repair of regurgitant bicuspid aortic valves: A systematic approach

OBJECTIVE Patients with bicuspid aortic valves can present with aortic insufficiency caused by cusp disease or the aortic root pathology. We present our 13-year experience with a functional and systematic approach to bicuspid aortic valve repair. METHODS Between 1995 and 2008, 122 consecutive patients (mean age, 44 +/- 11 years) with bicuspid aortic valves underwent non-emergency valve repair for isolated aortic insufficiency (43%), aortic root dilatation (14%), or both (43%). Preoperative echocardiography identified aortic dilatation (n = 75), cusp prolapse (n = 96), and cusp restriction (n = 45) as mechanisms of aortic insufficiency. Raphé repair (n = 98) was performed by shaving (21%) or resection with primary closure (60%) or pericardial patch (18%). Functional aortic annuloplasty was performed using subcommissural annuloplasty (n = 51), ascending aortic replacement (n = 17), or aortic root replacement (n = 54) using a reimplantation (76%) or remodeling technique (24%). RESULTS There was no operative mortality. Five patients underwent early aortic valve reoperation (3 re-repairs). At discharge, 93% of patients had aortic insufficiency grade 0/1 and 7% of patients had grade 2. Seven additional patients underwent aortic valve reoperation during follow-up (2 re-repairs). Overall survival was 97% +/- 3% at 8 years. At 5 and 8 years follow-up, freedom from aortic valve reoperation was 94% +/- 2% and 83% +/- 5%, respectively, and freedom from aortic valve replacement was 96% +/- 2% and 90% +/- 5%, respectively. Freedom from recurrent aortic insufficiency (>2+) was 94% +/- 3% at 5 years. Freedom from thromboembolism and bleeding was 96% +/- 2% at 8 years. CONCLUSION A systematic approach to bicuspid aortic valve repair yields good early and midterm results. Repair of bicuspid valves for aortic insufficiency is a feasible and attractive alternative to mechanical valve replacement in young patients.

Ross operation in the adult: long-term outcomes after root replacement and inclusion techniques.

BACKGROUND Dilatation of the pulmonary autograft is a major concern after root replacement for the Ross operation. The inclusion technique would avoid this drawback, but few data are available on the long-term results of this technique. We retrospectively analyze long-term results of both techniques. METHODS Of 218 patients undergoing the Ross operation between 1991 and 2006, 148 (68%) had root replacement and 70 (32%) underwent the inclusion technique. The mean age of the patients was 40 +/- 10 years (range, 16 to 64). Mean follow-up was 94 +/- 44 months (range, 13 to 196). Echocardiographic controls were available in 197 patients. Proximal aorta dilatation was defined as diameter > 40 mm. RESULTS In the root and inclusion groups, 10-year overall survival was 94% +/- 4% and 97% +/- 4%, respectively. Freedom from autograft reoperation was 81% +/- 10% and 84% +/- 13%, respectively. Main cause of reoperation was autograft dilatation in the root group (13 of 16) and valve prolapse in the inclusion group (5 of 6). Freedom from proximal aorta dilatation was 57% +/- 12% and 80% +/- 15%, respectively. In the root group, dilatations (n = 48) affected systematically the autograft sinuses or sinotubular junction, whereas in the inclusion group, dilatations (n = 10) affected principally the ascending aorta (8 of 10). Freedom from severe autograft regurgitation was 86% +/- 9% and 83% +/- 13%, respectively. Root technique, follow-up length, and preoperative aortic valve regurgitation were predictors of proximal aorta dilatation. CONCLUSIONS In the long term, both techniques showed excellent survival and similar rates of autograft failure. For root replacement, autograft dilatation was the main cause of failure. For the inclusion technique, the autograft, but not the ascending aorta, was protected against dilatation and autograft valve prolapse was the main cause of failure.

Effects of Preoperative Aortic Insufficiency on Outcome After Aortic Valve–Sparing Surgery

Background— The presence of significant preoperative aortic insufficiency (AI) or the need for cusp repair has been suggested as a risk factor for poorer outcomes after aortic valve (AV)–sparing surgery. We analyzed the influence of these factors on the mid-term outcomes of AV surgery. Methods and Results— Between 1996 and 2008, 164 consecutive patients underwent elective AV-sparing surgery. Severe preoperative AI (grade ≥3+) was present in 93 patients (57%), and 54 (33%) had a bicuspid valve. Root repair was performed with either the reimplantation (74%) or the remodeling (26%) technique, and cusp repair was performed in 90 patients (55%). Mean clinical follow-up was 57 months. Hospital mortality was 0.6%. Cusp repair was required in 52% of the patients with preoperative AI ≤2+ and in 57% of those with AI ≥3+ (P=0.6). Cusp repair was required more frequently in bicuspid versus tricuspid valves (91% versus 38%, P<0.001). Overall survival at 8 years was 88±8%. Freedom from AV reoperation at 8 years was similar with preoperative AI ≤2+ versus preoperative AI ≥3+ (89±11% versus 90±7%, P=0.7) and with versus without cusp repair (84±17% versus 92±8%, P=0.5). Freedom from recurrent AI (grade ≥3+) at 5 years was also similar between groups (90±10% versus 89±8%, P=0.9, and 90±8% versus 89±9%, P=0.8, respectively). By multivariate analyses, predictors of recurrent AI ≥2+ were preoperative left ventricle end-diastolic diameter and AI >1+ on discharge echocardiography. Conclusions— With a systematic approach to cusp assessment and repair, AV-sparing surgery for root pathology has an acceptable mid-term outcome, irrespective of preoperative AI or need for cusp repair.

Risk of Valve-Related Events After Aortic Valve Repair

BACKGROUND The impetus for aortic valve (AV) repair is to decrease valve-related complications in comparison to prosthetic valve replacement. However, relatively few data are available to confirm this hypothesis. We analyzed valve-related complications in a large series of patients undergoing AV repair. METHODS Between 1995 and 2010, 475 patients underwent elective AV repair for aortic insufficiency or aortic aneurysm. The mean age was 53 years, and 81% were male. Valve-related outcomes were defined as per published guidelines. Survival and freedom from valve-related events were reported using the Kaplan-Meier method and linearized event rates. Clinical follow-up was 98.3% complete with a mean follow-up time of 4.6 years. RESULTS Thirty-day mortality was 0.8% (n = 4). At 10 years, overall survival was 73% ± 5%, freedom from cardiac death was 81% ± 4%, and freedom from valve-related death was 90% ± 3%. Freedom from significant aortic insufficiency was 84% ± 3%. A total of 28 patients needed early (n = 7) or late (n = 21) AV reoperation; all of them survived reoperation, and 8 had repeat repair. Ten-year freedom from AV reoperation was 86% ± 3%, and freedom from AV replacement was 90% ± 3%. Freedom from AV reoperation was similar in tricuspid and bicuspid valve. During the follow-up period, linearized rate of thromboembolic event, bleeding, and AV endocarditis was 1.1%, 0.23%, and 0.19% per year, respectively. Ten-year freedom from valve-related events including AV reoperation, thromboembolic event, bleeding, and endocarditis was 74% ± 3%. CONCLUSIONS The current findings confirm that AV repair is associated with low mortality, acceptable durability, and a low risk of valve-related events.

Survival benefit of multiple arterial grafting in a 25-year single-institutional experience: the importance of the third arterial graft

OBJECTIVES The long-term advantages of multiple arterial grafts, particularly a third arterial conduit, for coronary artery bypass (CABG) are not clear. This study was designed to test whether multiple arterial grafts would provide better long-term outcomes when compared with approaches using fewer arterial conduits. METHODS Between 1985 and 1995, prospective data were collected for 588 patients undergoing isolated CABG at our institution. We examined long-term survival and freedom from cardiac death. The primary analysis compared patients receiving bilateral internal thoracic artery (BITA) vs. single ITA (SITA). In a subgroup analysis, BITA patients receiving a right gastroepiploic artery (RGEA) were compared with those receiving a saphenous vein graft (SVG) as a third conduit. Cox proportional hazard modelling was used to adjust for relevant confounders. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to create survival curves over the follow-up period. RESULTS The mean age was 59 ± 9 years and 49% received BITA. Mean follow-up was 16.1 ± 5.4 years. Multivariable analysis revealed that overall survival [hazard ratio (HR): 0.74, P = 0.017] and cardiac survival (HR: 0.61, P = 0.004) was significantly improved in the presence of BITA compared with SITA. The survival at 10 and 20 years was 90.2 ± 3.4 and 56.9 ± 6.4% for the BITA vs. 82 ± 4.4 and 40.9 ± 6% for the SITA, respectively. In the subgroup of BITA patients, those receiving the RGEA as a third conduit had superior overall survival (HR: 0.41, P = 0.0032) and cardiac survival (HR: 0.18, P = 0.004) compared with those receiving an SVG. The survival at 10 and 20 years was 98.9 ± 2 and 68.9 ± 18% for the BITA/RGEA vs. 87.2 ± 4.6 and 50.3 ± 7% for the BITA/SVG, respectively. CONCLUSIONS In a single-institution experience, the use of multiple arterial grafting is independently associated with superior outcomes. Furthermore, the use of a third arterial conduit (RGEA) targeted to the right coronary artery should be considered to improve long-term survival.

Cusp Prolapse Repair in Trileaflet Aortic Valves: Free Margin Plication and Free Margin Resuspension Techniques

BACKGROUND Cusp prolapse management is important in aortic valve (AV) sparing and repair to achieve durable results. We analyzed the midterm outcomes of two different techniques for trileaflet AV prolapse repair. METHODS Between 1996 and 2008, 376 patients underwent elective AV repair: 88 with trileaflet AV (23%) had cusp prolapse repair, plication technique was performed in 34 (39%), resuspension technique in 33 (37%) and plication plus resuspension in 21 (24%). One cusp was repaired in 55 (62%), 2 cusps in 18 (21%), and 3 cusps in 15 (17%). RESULTS No hospital deaths occurred. Patients undergoing resuspension with or without plication had more preoperative aortic insufficiency (AI; p = 0.01) and multiple cusp prolapses (p = 0.01). During follow-up (median, 41 months), 4 deaths occurred and 2 were cardiac related. Overall survival at 5 years was 95% +/- 5%. Two patients needed AV reoperation because of recurrent AI or AI plus AV stenosis. Recurrent AI grade > or =3+ developed in 4 patients; 1 with moderate AV stenosis. Freedom from reoperation at 5 years was 100% for plication, 96% +/- 4% for resuspension, and 93% +/- 7% for plication plus resuspension (p = 0.6); respective freedom from AI > or =3+ at 3 years was 100%, 92% +/- 8%, and 89% +/- 11% (p = 0.8). CONCLUSIONS Cusp plication or resuspension are efficient and durable techniques to correct cusp prolapse in the trileaflet AV. Plication is typically the first choice because of its ease of use and lower risk of overcorrection; however, free margin resuspension is useful in specific situations.

Repair of aortic leaflet prolapse: a ten-year experience §

OBJECTIVE Leaflet plication (PL), triangular resection (TR), resuspension with running suture of Gore-Tex (GTx) and extension with autologous pericardial patch (PP) are different techniques to repair aortic leaflet prolapse (LP) for aortic insufficiency (AI). In this study, we report and compare the early and mid-term results of these techniques for aortic valve repair. METHODS From 1996 to 2006, 298 patients underwent elective aortic valve (AV) repair. In 146 of them, prolapse of one (n=72) or more than one leaflet (n=74) was found. LP was defined either as a longer or lower leaflet free margin compared to the other leaflet(s) or a relatively low coaptation level of all leaflets. When leaflet tissues were of good quality (thin and pliable), prolapse was treated by GTx (n=39), PL (n=25) or GTx+PL (n=23). When leaflet tissues were of poor quality (thickened, calcified), prolapse was treated by TR or PP (n=13) or TR or PP+GTx (n=47). RESULTS There was no hospital mortality. During the initial hospitalization two patients required reoperation for recurrent AI and one for aorto-right ventricular fistula; of them, two were re-repaired. Median follow-up was 35 months (range 9-136). Three patients needed late reoperation for recurrent AI. At 4 years, overall survival was 99+/-1% and freedom from reoperation and from recurrent AI (grade >2) was 94+/-5% and 91+/-7% respectively. Freedom from recurrent AI was similar in patients having one versus more than one LP repair (88+/-11% vs 92+/-8%, p=0.2) and among the different techniques used to repair leaflet of good quality (PL: 95+/-8% vs GTx: 83+/-18% vs PL+GTx: 100%; p=0.37). When leaflet resection was needed, the addition of GTx significantly reduced the recurrence of AI (TR or PP: 82+/-18% vs TR or PP+GTx: 97+/-4%; p=0.026). CONCLUSIONS Leaflet plication and Gore-Tex resuspension are both effective and durable techniques for aortic leaflet prolapse repair. The addition of Gore-Tex to triangular resection and pericardial patch repair techniques is efficient to reinforce the suture line and to improve the outcome of the repair. Multiple leaflet prolapse is not a prohibitive factor for successful repair even in the absence of a clear reference level such as a normal leaflet, as long as normal anatomical coaptation is achieved.

Aortic root replacement using the reimplantation technique: tips and tricks.

Aortic valve (AV) sparing procedures are increasingly being used to treat aortic root pathology. Reimplantation of the aortic valve, first described by Dr Tirone David, is a technically demanding procedure whose long-term results are critically dependent on perfect intraoperative restoration of valve anatomy and function. There exists significant variation in how this procedure is performed by different surgeons, which is likely contributory to the heterogeneity in reported results. We describe a systematic approach to aortic valve reimplantation procedure focusing on key technical aspects.

Effect of annulus dimension and annuloplasty on bicuspid aortic valve repair

OBJECTIVES We have recently shown that valve sparing reimplantation (VSR) improves the durability of bicuspid aortic valve repair in comparison with subcommissural annuloplasty. The aim of this study was to assess the degree of annular reduction provided by these techniques and to correlate these findings with repair durability. METHODS From 1995 to 2010, 161 patients underwent bicuspid valve repair. We included only patients with subcommissural annuloplasty or reimplantation having intraoperative pre- and post-repair transoesophageal echocardiography images. Pre- and post-repair ventriculo-aortic junction (VAJ) diameters were measured on long axis views. Inclusion criteria were met by 53 patients with subcommissual annuloplasty and 65 with reimplantation. Median follow-up was 53 months in the subcommissual annuloplasty group and 42 months in the reimplantation group. Follow-up completeness was 100% in subcommissural annuloplasty and 94% in reimplantation. RESULTS There was no operative or late mortality. Mean preoperative VAJ was similar in both groups (reimplantation: 28 ± 3 mm vs subcommissural annuloplasty: 28 ± 3, P = 0.16). Preoperative VAJ was larger in patients <40 years and with aortic regurgitation (AR) ≥ 3+ (P < 0.01). Mean postoperative VAJ was smaller in reimplantation compared with subcommissural annuloplasty (21 ± 2 mm vs 24 ± 3 mm, P < 0.01). In univariate analyses, subcommissural annuloplasty, preoperative VAJ ≥ 30 mm, postoperative VAJ ≥ 25 mm and cusp repair with patch were predictive of recurrent AR > 1+. In the subcommissural annuloplasty group, VAJ≥ 30 mm preoperatively and ≥ 25 mm postoperatively were associated with decreased 6 years freedom from recurrent AR>1+ (<30 mm: 74% vs ≥ 30 mm: 39%, P = 0.01; <25 mm: 80% vs ≥ 25 mm 31%, P = 0.02) In the reimplantation group, VAJ dimension had no effect on recurrent AR >1+ (P = 0.93). CONCLUSIONS In bicuspid aortic valve repair, the circumferential annuloplasty of VSR offers greater reduction of VAJ compared with the non-circumferential annuloplasty provided by the subcommissural annuloplasty. The degree and extent of VAJ reduction in reimplantation seem to be factors among others that positively influence repair durability particularly in patients with a large VAJ (≥ 30 mm).