July 3, 2012Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic SurgeryOpen Access

Outcomes of aortic valve repair according to valve morphology and surgical techniques

Q: What is the clinical evidence from this study?

Study design: Observational. Population: Aortic insufficiency (n=216). Intervention: Aortic valve repair vs. Different valve morphologies and repair techniques. Primary outcome: Freedom from valve-related events (p=<0.01).

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Key result

Aortic valve repair resulted in 91.5% overall late survival, with freedom from valve-related events differing significantly between bicuspid and tricuspid valves (P<0.01).

Why the study?

Do aortic valve morphology and specific surgical repair techniques affect long-term clinical outcomes in patients with aortic insufficiency?

Population

216 patients with aortic insufficiency undergoing aortic valve repair, mean age 53 ± 15 years. Valve…

Comparison

Aortic valve repair using various techniques… vs Comparisons between different valve morphologies…

Design

Cohort

Follow-up

mean 42 ± 16 months

Authors

KFKhalil FattouchCardiac Surgery GMGiacomo MuranaCardiac Surgery SCSebastiano CastrovinciUniversity of Palermo

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Aortic valve repair may warrant morphology-specific caution in aortic insufficiency; this cohort study leaves open randomized comparisons of long-term durability.

Study Design

Type

Observational (n=216)

Multicenter

Structured PICO

Do aortic valve morphology and specific surgical repair techniques affect long-term clinical outcomes in patients with aortic insufficiency?

Population

216 patients with aortic insufficiency undergoing aortic valve repair, mean age 53 ± 15 years. Valve dysfunctions: type I (25.5%), type II (58.3%), type III (16.2%). 27.7% had bicuspid valves.

Intervention

Aortic valve repair using various techniques (sub-commissural plasty, plication, free-edge reinforcement, resection of raphe plus re-suturing, chordae technique) with or without concomitant procedures (e.g., root re-implantation).

Comparator

Comparisons between different valve morphologies (bicuspid vs. tricuspid, type I+II vs. type III) and surgical techniques (e.g., chordae/plication vs. free-edge reinforcement, isolated repair vs. repair plus root re-implantation).

Outcome

Long-term clinical outcomes including survival, freedom from valve-related events, and recurrent aortic insufficiency.hard clinical

Main Result

p-value: p=<0.01

Aortic valve repair is a safe surgical option, with better outcomes observed in tricuspid valves, type I/II dysfunction, and when associated with root re-implantation, whereas calcified bicuspid valves have poor results.

Cite This Study

Fattouch et al. (2012) conducted an observational in Aortic insufficiency (n=216). Aortic valve repair vs. Different valve morphologies and repair techniques was evaluated on Freedom from valve-related events (p=<0.01). Aortic valve repair resulted in 91.5% overall late survival, with freedom from valve-related events differing significantly between bicuspid and tricuspid valves (P<0.01).

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a09082aea37c9c7dbe46b7d https://doi.org/10.1093/icvts/ivs195

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

July 3, 2012Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic SurgeryOpen Access

Outcomes of aortic valve repair according to valve morphology and surgical techniques

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Key result

Aortic valve repair resulted in 91.5% overall late survival, with freedom from valve-related events differing significantly between bicuspid and tricuspid valves (P<0.01).

Why the study?

Do aortic valve morphology and specific surgical repair techniques affect long-term clinical outcomes in patients with aortic insufficiency?

Population

216 patients with aortic insufficiency undergoing aortic valve repair, mean age 53 ± 15 years. Valve…

Comparison

Aortic valve repair using various techniques… vs Comparisons between different valve morphologies…

Design

Cohort

Follow-up

mean 42 ± 16 months

Authors

KFKhalil FattouchCardiac Surgery GMGiacomo MuranaCardiac Surgery SCSebastiano CastrovinciUniversity of Palermo

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Aortic valve repair may warrant morphology-specific caution in aortic insufficiency; this cohort study leaves open randomized comparisons of long-term durability.

Study Design

Type

Observational (n=216)

Multicenter

Structured PICO

Do aortic valve morphology and specific surgical repair techniques affect long-term clinical outcomes in patients with aortic insufficiency?

Population

216 patients with aortic insufficiency undergoing aortic valve repair, mean age 53 ± 15 years. Valve dysfunctions: type I (25.5%), type II (58.3%), type III (16.2%). 27.7% had bicuspid valves.

Intervention

Comparator

Outcome

Long-term clinical outcomes including survival, freedom from valve-related events, and recurrent aortic insufficiency.hard clinical

Main Result

p-value: p=<0.01

Cite This Study

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a09082aea37c9c7dbe46b7d https://doi.org/10.1093/icvts/ivs195

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark