Why the study?
Does the Ross procedure using the root replacement technique provide durable valve function and growth in pediatric patients with aortic valve disease?
Does the Ross procedure using the root replacement technique provide durable valve function and growth in pediatric patients with aortic valve disease?
The Ross procedure in pediatric patients shows excellent mid-term survival and freedom from reoperation, with the pulmonary autograft demonstrating proportional growth with the patient.
Supports mid-term durability of pediatric Ross; extends cohort evidence but leaves open prospective randomized confirmation.
The Ross procedure is being used increasingly to treat aortic valve disease in pediatric patients; however, there is an ongoing dispute about the durability of the autograft. From November 1996 to September 2003, 32 pediatric patients (mean age, 11 +/- 4.5 years) underwent the Ross procedure for various aortic valve diseases, using the root replacement technique. Clinical and echocardiographic follow-up was performed early (within 30 days), at 3 to 6 months, and yearly after surgery. There were no perioperative deaths. The patients were followed-up for up to 7 years with a median interval of 36 months. Actuarial survival at 7 years was 96% +/- 3% and there was 100% freedom from re-operation for autograft valve dysfunction or any other cause. The autograft annulus and sinus increased significantly in size during follow-up and the increase in size paralleled the increase in body surface area, with no evidence of disproportional dilatation. The hemodynamics at the latest follow-up were also similar to those at the time of discharge after surgery. Pulmonary autograft replacement of the aortic valve appears to be the ideal solution in pediatric patients, because of relatively low operative risk, excellent late valve function, and real potential for growth.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Raja et al. (2004) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: