Key result
Aortic valve-sparing operations using autologous tissues provide an effective alternative to biological and mechanical prosthetics, with comparable long-term freedom from reoperations.
Why the study?
Reconstructive valve-sparing procedures on the aortic valve are dynamically developing, prompting a review of key technical aspects, anatomical considerations, and patient selection.
Are aortic valve-sparing operations safe and effective compared to biological and mechanical prosthetics?
Are aortic valve-sparing operations safe and effective compared to biological and mechanical prosthetics?
Aortic valve-sparing operations using autologous tissues are effective alternatives to classical prosthetics with comparable long-term outcomes.
Reconstructive valve-sparing procedures on the aortic valve are one of the most dynamically developing directions in the cardiac surgery. Today cardiac surgeons all over the world prefer the aortic valve sparingoperation using autologous tissues instead biological and mechanical prosthetics. The Ross, Yakub, David, Ozaki procedures have proved their effectives, and their indicators of long-term freedom from reoperations are not inferior to classical prosthetics. In this review the authors describe the key points of the native aortic valve reconstruction. Especially, from the surgical point of view the issues of anatomy of the aortic root and the determination of the optimal «patients» for the valve-sparing procedure are discussed. The principles of reconstruction of various variants of valve development, such as uni-, bi-, three-, and quadricuspid valve anatomy, are presented in details. The approaches to aortic valve repair are described step by step, including a description of the aortic root exposure technique, options for correcting prolapse, eliminating fenestration, and annuloplasty. The evaluation of literature data showed that the overall risks of aortic valve repair in isolation or as a component of a combined intervention are nothigher than in patients with biological or mechanical prosthetics. The violation of the orientation of the commissures, the use of a pericardialcatheter, long-term prolapse, as well as expansion of the annulus fibrous are considred as an independent risk factors of significant regurgitation and reoperations in the long term after reconstruction.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Комаров et al. (2021) conducted a review in Aortic valve pathology (regurgitation, stenosis). Aortic valve-sparing operations (reconstructive procedures) vs. Biological or mechanical prosthetics was evaluated. Aortic valve-sparing operations using autologous tissues provide an effective alternative to biological and mechanical prosthetics, with comparable long-term freedom from reoperations.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: