Key result
Congenital aortopathy yields comparable long-term reoperation rates to noncongenital disease after valve-sparing root replacement.
Why the study?
Long-term outcomes of valve-sparing root replacement in patients with congenital aortopathy were not well established.
Does valve-sparing root replacement provide comparable long-term survival and freedom from aortic valve reoperation in patients with congenital versus noncongenital aortopathy?
Cohort (n=107)
No
Does valve-sparing root replacement provide comparable long-term survival and freedom from aortic valve reoperation in patients with congenital versus noncongenital aortopathy?
Valve-sparing root replacement provides excellent long-term survival and freedom from reoperation in patients with congenital aortopathy, comparable to those with noncongenital disease, though long-term stroke risk may warrant extended antithrombotic strategies.
May support valve-sparing root replacement in congenital aortopathy; extends observational data but leaves open randomized confirmation.
Background: The objective of this study was to evaluate long-term outcomes for valve-sparing root replacement (VSRR) in patients with congenital aortopathy. Methods: In 107 patients undergoing VSRR in an elective setting with preoperative data from 1998 to 2022, information about operative strategy and postoperative course was collected. Patients were assigned to the congenital aortopathy group if a genetic mutation was confirmed or if a bicuspid aortic valve was present and compared with patients with tricuspid aortic valve. Long-term follow-up was obtained through outpatient visits or by telephone interviews. Early survival was excellent with no in-hospital death. Postoperative echocardiography showed a good result, with aortic regurgitation being mild or less in 93% (n = 99). Nevertheless, aortic valve reoperation was needed in 7% of patients. Rates of transient ischemic attacks (2%), strokes (5%), and need for pacemaker implantation (4%) during follow-up were comparable between groups. There was no difference in long-term outcome or need for aortic valve reoperation between the groups. Conclusions: VSRR in congenital aortopathy patients has good long-term results. During follow-up, the rate of thromboembolic events might have an impact on optimal medical therapy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gasser et al. (2024) conducted a cohort in Aortic root aneurysm (n=107). Congenital aortopathy (bicuspid aortic valve or genetic mutation) vs. Noncongenital aortopathy (tricuspid aortic valve without confirmed genetic mutation) was evaluated on Aortic valve reoperation during follow-up (p=0.366). Congenital aortopathy was associated with comparable long-term outcomes to noncongenital disease following valve-sparing root replacement, with no significant difference in aortic valve reoperation rates (5% vs 10%, p=0.366).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: