Why the study?
Short- and long-term outcomes of patients with moderate-to-severe aortic insufficiency undergoing either Bentall aortic root replacement or valve-sparing root replacement required examination.
Does valve-sparing root replacement compared to Bentall aortic root replacement improve outcomes in adult patients with root pathology and moderate-to-severe aortic insufficiency?
Population
1527 adult patients with moderate-to-severe AI (195 propensity-matched pairs)
Comparison
Bentall ARR vs VSRR
Design
Two-centre retrospective propensity-matched study
Key result
Bentall aortic root replacement and valve-sparing root replacement showed similar 10-year survival (84% vs 82%, P=0.69), though Bentall ARR had less recurrence of moderate-to-severe AI (1.6% vs 14%, P=0.002).
Authors
Loading...
Similar survival supports individualized root replacement choice; leaves open durability questions for prospective confirmation.
Cohort (n=1,527)
Yes
Does valve-sparing root replacement compared to Bentall aortic root replacement improve outcomes in adult patients with root pathology and moderate-to-severe aortic insufficiency?
Absolute Event Rate: 84% vs 82%
p-value: p=0.69
Both Bentall and valve-sparing aortic root replacement offer acceptable and similar long-term survival for root pathology with moderate-to-severe AI, though Bentall is associated with lower rates of recurrent AI.
Norton et al. (2023) conducted a cohort in Moderate-to-severe aortic insufficiency with root pathology (n=1,527). Bentall aortic root replacement (ARR) vs. Valve-sparing root replacement (VSRR) was evaluated on 10-year survival (p=0.69). Bentall aortic root replacement and valve-sparing root replacement showed similar 10-year survival (84% vs 82%, P=0.69), though Bentall ARR had less recurrence of moderate-to-severe AI (1.6% vs 14%, P=0.002).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: