Cargando…

Is aortic valve-sparing root reimplantation (David-I) justified in cardiac redo surgery?

OBJECTIVES: Aortic valve-sparing root reimplantation (AVSRR) is a complex procedure, which offers the benefit of preserving the native aortic valve. Cardiac redo surgery is complex and time-consuming, and it is not known if David procedure is safe or beneficial in this context. METHODS: Between 1993...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Beckmann, Erik, Kaufeld, Tim, Martens, Andreas, Rudolph, Linda, Krüger, Heike, Natanov, Ruslan, Haverich, Axel, Shrestha, Malakh Lal
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9714593/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35325135
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/icvts/ivac058
_version_ 1784842262586327040
author Beckmann, Erik
Kaufeld, Tim
Martens, Andreas
Rudolph, Linda
Krüger, Heike
Natanov, Ruslan
Haverich, Axel
Shrestha, Malakh Lal
author_facet Beckmann, Erik
Kaufeld, Tim
Martens, Andreas
Rudolph, Linda
Krüger, Heike
Natanov, Ruslan
Haverich, Axel
Shrestha, Malakh Lal
author_sort Beckmann, Erik
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Aortic valve-sparing root reimplantation (AVSRR) is a complex procedure, which offers the benefit of preserving the native aortic valve. Cardiac redo surgery is complex and time-consuming, and it is not known if David procedure is safe or beneficial in this context. METHODS: Between 1993 and 2019, we performed a total of 544 elective AVSRR operations at our centre. Patients were assigned to either group A (n = 30, redo) or group B (n = 514, first-time sternotomy). RESULTS: Aortic cross-clamp time was higher in the redo group (173[62] vs 125[31], P < 0.001). Cardiopulmonary bypass time was higher in the redo group as well (250[78] vs 179[51], P < 0.001). There were significantly more concomitant total arch replacements in the redo group (43.3% vs 5.8%, P < 0.001) using the ‘beating heart’ technique (20.0% vs 1.9%, P < 0.001). In-hospital mortality was comparable in both groups (3.3% vs 1.8%, P = 0.44). The rates for perioperative complications in terms of permanent neurological deficit and rethoracotomy were comparable between the 2 groups, too. Follow-up was complete for 99.6% of all patients and comprised a total of 584 patient-years. The 1-, 5-, 10- and 15-year survival rates were 90%, 81%, 60% and 55%, in group A (redo) and 96%, 90%, 78% and 67% in group B (native, P = 0.16), respectively. The rates for freedom from valve-related reoperation at 1, 5, 10 and 15 years after initial surgery were 96%, 92%, 92% and 92% in group A (redo) and 97%, 92%, 87% and 84% in group B (native, P = 0.52), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Despite significantly more concomitant total arch replacements in the redo group, early mortality was comparable in both groups. We conclude that AVSRR can be performed in redo cardiac surgery without compromising the early postoperative outcome. Careful patient assessment and selection are mandatory when evaluating patients with a history of previous cardiac surgery for David procedure.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9714593
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97145932022-12-02 Is aortic valve-sparing root reimplantation (David-I) justified in cardiac redo surgery? Beckmann, Erik Kaufeld, Tim Martens, Andreas Rudolph, Linda Krüger, Heike Natanov, Ruslan Haverich, Axel Shrestha, Malakh Lal Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg Vascular OBJECTIVES: Aortic valve-sparing root reimplantation (AVSRR) is a complex procedure, which offers the benefit of preserving the native aortic valve. Cardiac redo surgery is complex and time-consuming, and it is not known if David procedure is safe or beneficial in this context. METHODS: Between 1993 and 2019, we performed a total of 544 elective AVSRR operations at our centre. Patients were assigned to either group A (n = 30, redo) or group B (n = 514, first-time sternotomy). RESULTS: Aortic cross-clamp time was higher in the redo group (173[62] vs 125[31], P < 0.001). Cardiopulmonary bypass time was higher in the redo group as well (250[78] vs 179[51], P < 0.001). There were significantly more concomitant total arch replacements in the redo group (43.3% vs 5.8%, P < 0.001) using the ‘beating heart’ technique (20.0% vs 1.9%, P < 0.001). In-hospital mortality was comparable in both groups (3.3% vs 1.8%, P = 0.44). The rates for perioperative complications in terms of permanent neurological deficit and rethoracotomy were comparable between the 2 groups, too. Follow-up was complete for 99.6% of all patients and comprised a total of 584 patient-years. The 1-, 5-, 10- and 15-year survival rates were 90%, 81%, 60% and 55%, in group A (redo) and 96%, 90%, 78% and 67% in group B (native, P = 0.16), respectively. The rates for freedom from valve-related reoperation at 1, 5, 10 and 15 years after initial surgery were 96%, 92%, 92% and 92% in group A (redo) and 97%, 92%, 87% and 84% in group B (native, P = 0.52), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Despite significantly more concomitant total arch replacements in the redo group, early mortality was comparable in both groups. We conclude that AVSRR can be performed in redo cardiac surgery without compromising the early postoperative outcome. Careful patient assessment and selection are mandatory when evaluating patients with a history of previous cardiac surgery for David procedure. Oxford University Press 2022-03-24 /pmc/articles/PMC9714593/ /pubmed/35325135 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/icvts/ivac058 Text en © The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Vascular
Beckmann, Erik
Kaufeld, Tim
Martens, Andreas
Rudolph, Linda
Krüger, Heike
Natanov, Ruslan
Haverich, Axel
Shrestha, Malakh Lal
Is aortic valve-sparing root reimplantation (David-I) justified in cardiac redo surgery?
title Is aortic valve-sparing root reimplantation (David-I) justified in cardiac redo surgery?
title_full Is aortic valve-sparing root reimplantation (David-I) justified in cardiac redo surgery?
title_fullStr Is aortic valve-sparing root reimplantation (David-I) justified in cardiac redo surgery?
title_full_unstemmed Is aortic valve-sparing root reimplantation (David-I) justified in cardiac redo surgery?
title_short Is aortic valve-sparing root reimplantation (David-I) justified in cardiac redo surgery?
title_sort is aortic valve-sparing root reimplantation (david-i) justified in cardiac redo surgery?
topic Vascular
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9714593/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35325135
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/icvts/ivac058
work_keys_str_mv AT beckmannerik isaorticvalvesparingrootreimplantationdavidijustifiedincardiacredosurgery
AT kaufeldtim isaorticvalvesparingrootreimplantationdavidijustifiedincardiacredosurgery
AT martensandreas isaorticvalvesparingrootreimplantationdavidijustifiedincardiacredosurgery
AT rudolphlinda isaorticvalvesparingrootreimplantationdavidijustifiedincardiacredosurgery
AT krugerheike isaorticvalvesparingrootreimplantationdavidijustifiedincardiacredosurgery
AT natanovruslan isaorticvalvesparingrootreimplantationdavidijustifiedincardiacredosurgery
AT haverichaxel isaorticvalvesparingrootreimplantationdavidijustifiedincardiacredosurgery
AT shresthamalakhlal isaorticvalvesparingrootreimplantationdavidijustifiedincardiacredosurgery