Key result
The David and Yacoub valve-sparing aortic root replacement procedures demonstrated similar 10-year all-cause death rates (9.3% vs 8.8%; P=0.54).
Why the study?
Does the David procedure improve long-term outcomes compared to the Yacoub procedure or composite root replacement in patients undergoing elective aortic root replacement?
Cohort (n=646)
Yes
Does the David procedure improve long-term outcomes compared to the Yacoub procedure or composite root replacement in patients undergoing elective aortic root replacement?
The David and Yacoub valve-sparing aortic root replacement procedures offer comparable long-term outcomes and may provide survival and stroke benefits over composite root replacement.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports elective VSARR over CRR in suitable patients; extends observational evidence for comparable David and Yacoub outcomes.
OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to compare long-term outcomes of the David and Yacoub valve-sparing aortic root replacement (VSARR) procedures in a nationwide, low-volume setting. METHODS: All patients undergoing elective VSARR in Denmark between January 2010 and April 2022 were identified using the Danish registries. The primary end-point was all-cause death. Secondary end-points included stroke, reoperation, a composite of death or reoperation, and long-term echocardiographic outcomes. Analyses were performed in both crude and propensity score-matched (PSM) populations and compared with outcomes from a control group comprised of all elective composite root replacement procedures performed at the contributing centres in the study period. RESULTS: A total of 160 patients underwent VSARR (median age; David vs Yacoub; 49.7 [SD 14.1] years vs 51.5 [SD 14.3] years; P = .42) with the David (n = 92, 57.5%; median follow-up 8.2 [SD 3.6] years) or Yacoub (n = 68, 42.5%; median follow-up 7.1 [SD 2.4] years) procedure. Ten-year all-cause death was similar (David 9.3% [95% CI: 2.3-15.2] vs Yacoub 8.8% [95% CI: 3.6-20.6]; log-rank P = .54). Reoperation rates (log-rank P = .12), stroke incidence (P = .41), and the composite end-point of death or reoperation (log-rank P = .63) were comparable, with consistent findings in the PSM cohort. Long-term echocardiographic follow-up demonstrated no difference in recurrent regurgitation, stenosis, or valve-related complications. Compared to elective composite root replacement (CRR) (n = 486), VSARR demonstrated lower rate of all-cause death (P = .027) and stroke (P = .026), while reoperation rate was higher (13.8% vs 4.3%; P < .001). However, the risk of reoperation was comparable between procedures when accounting for competing risk of death (log-rank P = .17). CONCLUSIONS: Long-term outcomes following elective VSARR using the David and Yacoub procedure were comparable. VSARR was associated with lower risk of all-cause death and stroke compared to elective CRR, supporting the two VSARR procedures as durable options when performed in experienced centres with careful patient selection, even in low-volume settings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ravn et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Aortic root disease requiring replacement (n=646). David procedure vs. Yacoub procedure was evaluated on All-cause death (p=.54). The David and Yacoub valve-sparing aortic root replacement procedures demonstrated similar 10-year all-cause death rates (9.3% vs 8.8%; P=0.54).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: