Key result
Ross II mitral replacement enables uncomplicated survival to discharge in a 76-day-old infant.
Why the study?
Surgical options for mitral valve replacement in very small infants are limited due to the lack of suitable prosthetic valves and high risks associated with mechanical valves.
Can mitral valve replacement with a pulmonary autograft be successfully performed in a small infant with severe mitral stenoinsufficiency?
Case Report (n=1)
Can mitral valve replacement with a pulmonary autograft be successfully performed in a small infant with severe mitral stenoinsufficiency?
This case demonstrates the technical feasibility of using a pulmonary autograft for mitral valve replacement in a very small infant where prosthetic valves are not an option.
May offer an option for infants too small for prostheses; leaves open durability and comparative outcomes.
A 76-day-old infant weighing 3.4 kg was referred for surgical intervention for severe mitral valve stenoinsufficiency caused by leaflet fibrosis and calcification. He had experienced a cerebral infarction in the left middle cerebral artery territory, which was deemed attributable to an embolism of a calcified particle from the dysmorphic mitral valve. Because mitral valve replacement using a prosthetic valve was not feasible in this small baby, mitral valve replacement with a pulmonary autograft was performed. After a brief period of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support, he was weaned from ECMO and was discharged home without further cardiovascular complications.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jeong et al. (2018) conducted a case report in Severe mitral valve stenoinsufficiency (n=1). Mitral valve replacement with a pulmonary autograft (Ross II operation) was evaluated on Survival to hospital discharge. Mitral valve replacement with a pulmonary autograft was successfully performed in a 76-day-old infant with severe mitral stenoinsufficiency, allowing for hospital discharge without complications.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: