Key result
Reimplantation links to lower rates of significant aortic insufficiency in children vs remodeling, with 0% incidence.
Why the study?
Mid- and late-term results of valve-sparing root replacement (VSRR) in children with aortic aneurysm are not yet known.
Does valve-sparing root replacement, specifically reimplantation versus remodeling, provide safe and durable outcomes in children with aortic aneurysms?
Cohort (n=56)
No
Does valve-sparing root replacement, specifically reimplantation versus remodeling, provide safe and durable outcomes in children with aortic aneurysms?
Absolute Event Rate: 0% vs 33.3%
In children with connective tissue disorders undergoing valve-sparing root replacement, the reimplantation technique is superior to remodeling in preventing late aortic insufficiency.
Reimplantation may reduce late reintervention for aortic insufficiency versus remodeling in children; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective validation.
Valve-sparing root replacement (VSRR) is an attractive option for aortic aneurysm in children with low-operative risk, but mid- and late-term results are not yet known. Between 1997 and 2009, 56 children (mean age 11.5 years) underwent VSRR at our institution. Twenty-six (46.4%) had Marfan syndrome and 24 (42.8%) had Loeys-Dietz syndrome. Mean preoperative max sinus diameter was 4.2±0.8 cm (Z-score 7.7±2.9). Five (8.9%) had >2+ aortic insufficiency (AI). Two (3.6%) underwent David I reimplantation with a straight-tube, 12 (21.4%) had a Yacoub remodeling procedure, and 42 (75.0%) had reimplantation using a Valsalva-graft. There were one (1.8%) operative and three (5.4%) late deaths. One patient required reoperation for bleeding and one required late repair of a distal pseudoaneurysm. Mean follow-up was 5.2 years (range 0-12 years). No patients suffered thromboembolic events or had endocarditis. Of the 12 remodeling patients, four (33.3%) developed >2+ AI and required aortic valve repair or replacement. No patient developed >2+ AI after reimplantation. VSRR in children is a safe alternative to aortic root replacement with mechanical or biological prostheses. In this particular group of patients with connective tissue disorders and proclivity toward annular dilation and late AI, reimplantation is superior to remodeling.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Patel et al. (2010) conducted a cohort in aortic aneurysm (n=56). Valve-sparing root replacement (reimplantation) vs. Yacoub remodeling procedure was evaluated on Development of >2+ aortic insufficiency. Valve-sparing root replacement using reimplantation resulted in 0% of children developing >2+ aortic insufficiency, compared to 33.3% of those who underwent the remodeling procedure.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: