HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Personal Folders Download to citation manager Permission Requests Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Kallenbach, K. Articles by Harringer, W. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Kallenbach, K. Articles by Harringer, W. Related Collections Great vessels Valve disease

Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2001;20:77-81
© 2001 Elsevier Science NL

Valve sparing aortic root reconstruction versus composite replacement – perioperative course and early complications

Hannover Medical School, Division of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Hannover, Germany

Received 10 November 2000; received in revised form 23 March 2001; accepted 9 April 2001.

Corresponding author. Tel.: +49-511-532-6581; fax: +49-511-532-5404
e-mail: kallenbach{at}thg.mh-hannover.de

Objective: In patients with aneurysm of the ascending aorta, dilatation of the sinotubular junction is the major cause of aortic valve regurgitation. Valve sparing aortic root replacement in patients without valvular structural defects offers a new form of treatment. The aim of this study was the assessment of the perioperative course and early complications of this method compared to composite replacement in a large single center cohort. Methods: From 1992 to 1999, valve sparing replacement of the ascending aorta (recon) has been performed in 78 patients, while 269 patients underwent replacement by a composite graft (comp). A comparison of matched pairs (n=52) with respect to age, gender, presence of Marfan's syndrome, aortic dissection as well as date of surgery, was chosen. Aortic insufficiency was 2.8±0.7 for recon vs. 2.2±1.1 for comp preoperatively. Course and length of hospitalization, echocardiographic follow-up, complications, and mortality were compared at 1-year follow-up. Results: There were no operative deaths. During follow-up, one patient (2%) died 5 months postoperatively (recon) vs. two patients (3.9%) in the comp group. Bypass-time (123±31 vs. 153±31 min, P<0.0001) and cross-clamp-time (82±22 vs. 120±23 min, P<0.0001) were significantly shorter in comp. Stay in ICU (1.9±1.6 for recon vs. 2.3±2.1 days for comp) and post-op hospitalization (18.3±5.7 vs. 21.2±11.1 days) were comparable. Improvement of NYHA-class was significant after both operations (recon 2.6±0.8 vs. 1.3±0.5 and for comp 2.4±0.6 vs. 1.5±0.7, both P<0.0001). One patient (1.9%) in the recon group had to be reoperated for valve failure. Thrombembolic or bleeding complications were observed in 6 patients (12%) in comp, zero in recon (P=0.027). Conclusion: Valve sparing aortic root reconstruction is feasible with low perioperative morbidity and mortality and good early results. Major advantages of recon are significant reduction of thrombembolic and anticoagulation related complications as opposed to longer cross-clamp and bypass times as well as a valve failure in one patient. Further follow-up is needed to confirm our data in a long-term perspective.

Key Words: Aorta • Valves • Aneurysm • Composite • Reconstruction

This article has been cited by other articles:

				D. C. Miller Valve-Sparing Aortic Root Replacement: Current State of the Art and Where Are We Headed? Ann. Thorac. Surg., February 1, 2007; 83(2): S736 - S739. [Full Text] [PDF]

				N C Radu, E W M Kirsch, M-L Hillion, F Lagneau, L Drouet, and D Loisance Embolic and bleeding events after modified Bentall procedure in selected patients Heart, January 1, 2007; 93(1): 107 - 112. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. Kallenbach, R.G. Leyh, R. Salcher, M. Karck, C. Hagl, and A. Haverich Acute aortic dissection versus aortic root aneurysm: comparison of indications for valve sparing aortic root reconstruction Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., May 1, 2004; 25(5): 663 - 670. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Karck, K. Kallenbach, C. Hagl, C. Rhein, R. Leyh, and A. Haverich Aortic root surgery in Marfan syndrome: Comparison of aortic valve-sparing reimplantation versus composite grafting J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., February 1, 2004; 127(2): 391 - 398. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. C. Miller Valve-sparing aortic root replacement in patients with the Marfan syndrome J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., April 1, 2003; 125(4): 773 - 778. [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. Kallenbach, C. Hagl, T. Walles, R. G. Leyh, K. Pethig, A. Haverich, and W. Harringer Results of valve-sparing aortic root reconstruction in 158 consecutive patients Ann. Thorac. Surg., December 1, 2002; 74(6): 2026 - 2033. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. Kallenbach, M. Karck, R. G. Leyh, C. Hagl, T. Walles, W. Harringer, and A. Haverich Valve-sparing aortic root reconstruction in patients with significant aortic insufficiency Ann. Thorac. Surg., November 1, 2002; 74(5): S1765 - 1768. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. Kallenbach, K. Pethig, R.G. Leyh, D. Baric, A. Haverich, and W. Harringer Acute dissection of the ascending aorta: first results of emergency valve sparing aortic root reconstruction Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., August 1, 2002; 22(2): 218 - 222. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]