Why the study?
Young patients might benefit from a Ross procedure after aortic valve repair failure, provided it can be performed safely and with adequate durability.
Does the Ross operation provide safe and durable outcomes in young patients with failed prior aortic valve repair?
Does the Ross operation provide safe and durable outcomes in young patients with failed prior aortic valve repair?
The Ross operation is a safe and durable surgical option for young patients experiencing failure of a prior aortic valve repair, yielding excellent mid-term survival and low re-intervention rates.
Supports Ross after failed repair in young patients; extends observational data but leaves open randomized comparisons.
BACKGROUND: Repair failure remains one of the most important complications of aortic valve reconstruction. Young patients might benefit from a Ross procedure in such a scenario, provided it can be performed safely and with adequate durability. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and clinical outcomes of a Ross operation following a failed repair. METHODS: Between 1996 and 2019, 80 patients (male, 76%; mean age, 31±13 years) underwent a Ross procedure after a median of 6.6 (1.7-15.9) years following an initial aortic valve repair. The previous valve repair was performed for unicuspid (53%), bicuspid (39%), tricuspid (7%), and quadricuspid morphology (1%). Median follow-up after the Ross operation was 2.8 (0.964-13.25) years, mean 5±5 years (92% complete). RESULTS: Median cardiopulmonary bypass and cross-clamp times were 144 [106-154] minutes and 98 [79-113] minutes, respectively. Thirty-two patients (40%) required a concomitant procedure, most commonly, an ascending aortic replacement (n=23). There were no peri-operative deaths, myocardial infarctions, or neurological complications. There was one late death from a non-cardiac cause. At 10 years, overall survival was 99%±1%, similar to that of an age- and gender-matched population. Nine patients required re-intervention after their Ross procedure (five on the autograft and four on the pulmonary conduit). The autograft re-interventions were valve-sparing procedures in all patients. The cumulative incidence of re-intervention on the autograft at 8 years was 5.1%±3.1%. CONCLUSIONS: The stepwise strategy of an initial valve repair followed by Ross operation represents a safe and valid option for failed aortic valve repair. It is associated with low peri-operative morbidity. Mid-term survival is excellent, similar to that of a matched general population. The probability of re-intervention after the Ross procedure appears similar to that of a primary Ross operation, deeming it a warranted consideration in cases of failed aortic valve repair.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Abeln et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: