• Ann. Thorac. Surg. · Sep 2012

    Comparative Study

    The valve-in-valve operation for aortic homograft dysfunction: a better option.

    • Zain Khalpey, Wernard Borstlap, Patrick O Myers, Jan D Schmitto, Siobhan McGurk, Ann Maloney, and Lawrence H Cohn.
    • Department of Cardiac Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts 02132, USA.
    • Ann. Thorac. Surg. 2012 Sep 1;94(3):731-5; discussion 735-6.

    BackgroundReoperations on dysfunctional aortic homografts often require root reconstruction with coronary reanastomosis. This is associated with substantial perioperative morbidity and mortality. Resecting compromised aortic homograft valve leaflets and seating a new valve within the homograft annulus avoids root reconstruction and is a viable alternative.MethodsWe retrospectively evaluated 50 patients undergoing reoperations on dysfunctional homografts between 1999 and 2011. Outcomes were compared between valve-in-valve (ViV) and aortic valve-prosthetic conduit (AVR-C) procedures.ResultsTwenty-eight patients underwent ViV, and 22 had AVR-C. Groups were similar in age, sex, and incidence of endocarditis and renal failure. Median time between homograft and index procedure was 8.5 years for AVR-C and 8 years for ViV patients (p=0.93). Patients undergoing AVR-C had longer cardiopulmonary bypass (282 versus 151 minutes; p<0.001) and cross-clamp (207 versus 106 minutes; p<0.001) times and received significantly more intraoperative red blood cell transfusions than ViV patients (36.4% versus 7.1%; p=0.014). Patients undergoing ViV had shorter intensive care unit stays (47 hours versus 67 hours for AVR-C; p=0.049) and fewer postoperative red blood cell transfusions (21.4% versus 54.5%; p=0.020). There were trends toward shorter ventilation times for ViV patients (6 hours versus 11 hours for AVR-C; p=0.077), shorter postoperative length of stay (7 days versus 9 days; p=0.092), and fewer readmissions (3.6% versus 19.0%; p 0.073). One operative mortality occurred in the AVR-C group.ConclusionsThe strategy of replacing aortic valve leaflets in a failed calcified homograft, with a valve seated inside the annulus, is a safe alternative to root reconstruction. Preserving root architecture and coronary buttons facilitates shorter cardiopulmonary bypass and cross-clamp times, and directly impacts transfusions, intensive care unit time, hospital stay, and readmission rates.Copyright © 2012 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.