Key result
Following valve-sparing root reimplantation, patients with type Ib aortic insufficiency had significantly higher 10-year freedom from valve-related events than those with type III (80.7% vs 42.2%, P=0.01).
Why the study?
Valve repair for aortic insufficiency requires a tailored surgical approach, and long-term outcomes of aortic root reimplantation using a repair-oriented classification system needed evaluation.
What are the mid-term outcomes of valve-sparing root reimplantation with leaflet repair for different types of aortic insufficiency?
Cohort (n=197)
What are the mid-term outcomes of valve-sparing root reimplantation with leaflet repair for different types of aortic insufficiency?
Absolute Event Rate: 80.7% vs 42.2%
p-value: p=0.01
Valve-sparing root reimplantation with leaflet repair demonstrates durable mid-term outcomes, though durability varies significantly based on the underlying mechanism of aortic insufficiency.
Classifying AI may guide reimplantation strategy; leaves open prospective confirmation of outcome prediction.
OBJECTIVES: Valve repair for aortic insufficiency (AI) requires a tailored surgical approach determined by the leaflet and aortic disease. In this study, we used a repair-oriented system for the classification of AI, and we elucidated long-term outcomes of aortic root reimplantation with this classification system. METHODS: From 1999 to 2018, a total of 197 patients underwent elective reimplantation (mean age: 52.7 ± 17.7 years; 80% male). The aortic valve was tricuspid in 143 patients, bicuspid in 51 patients and quadricuspid in 3 patients. A total of 93 patients had type I AI (aortic dilatation), 57 patients had type II AI (cusp prolapse) and 47 patients had type III AI (restrictive). In total, 104 of the 264 patients (39%) had more than 1 identified mechanism. RESULTS: In-hospital mortality was 0.5% (1/197). Mid-term follow-up (mean follow-up duration: 5.5 years) revealed a late mortality rate of 4.2% (9/197). Aortic valve reoperation was performed on 16 patients (8.0%). Rates of freedom from aortic valve replacement and freedom from aortic valve-related events at 10 years of follow-up were 87.0 ± 4.0% and 60.6 ± 6.0%, respectively; patients with type Ib AI (98.3 ± 1.7%; 80.7 ± 7.5%) had better outcomes than patients with type III AI (59.6 ± 15.6%; 42.2 ± 13.1%, P = 0.01). In patients with types II and III AI who had bicuspid aortic valves, rates of freedom from aortic valve-related events at 5 years of follow-up were 95.2 ± 4.7% and 71.7 ± 9.1%, respectively (P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: This repair-oriented system for classifying AI could help to predict the durable aortic valve repair techniques. Patient selection according to the classification is particularly important for long-term durability. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: B190050.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yokawa et al. (2020) conducted a cohort in Aortic insufficiency (n=197). Type Ib aortic insufficiency vs. Type III aortic insufficiency was evaluated on Freedom from aortic valve-related events at 10 years (p=0.01). Following valve-sparing root reimplantation, patients with type Ib aortic insufficiency had significantly higher 10-year freedom from valve-related events than those with type III (80.7% vs 42.2%, P=0.01).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: