TY - JOUR
T1 - Aortic valve repair in adults
T2 - long-term clinical outcomes and echocardiographic evolution in different valve repair techniques
AU - Zito, Francesco
AU - Veen, Kevin M.
AU - Melina, Giovanni
AU - Lansac, Emmanuel
AU - Schäfers, Hans Joachim
AU - de Kerchove, Laurent
AU - Takkenberg, Johanna J.M.
AU - Kluin, Jolanda
AU - Mokhles, M. Mostafa
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2025. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery.
PY - 2025/3/1
Y1 - 2025/3/1
N2 - OBJECTIVES: Aortic valve repair/sparing techniques have been established as effective treatments for aortic regurgitation and/or aortic aneurysms. However, concerns remain regarding long-term durability, reproducibility and patient selection. This study aims to asses long-term clinical and echocardiographic outcomes, with a focus on aortic regurgitation grade and left ventricular ejection fraction evolution, in adults undergoing these procedures. METHODS: Adult patients in the Heart Valve Society Aortic Valve Database, undergoing any aortic valve repair/sparing technique were included. Time-to-event analyses were used for clinical outcomes and mixed-effects models for left ventricular ejection fraction and aortic regurgitation grade evolution. Techniques: isolated valve repair (group 1), ascending aortic replacement + valve repair (group 2), partial-root replacement ± valve repair (group 3) and valve-sparing root replacement ± valve repair (group 4). RESULTS: Survival at 10 years was comparable to survival of the matched-general-population in each group. The 10-year cumulative incidence of reintervention was 19.5% [95% confidence interval (CI) 16.70–22.40%] in group 1 [including only double external annuloplasty in group 1; reintervention was not significantly different between techniques (P = 0.112)]; 13.8% (95% CI 10.10–18.10%) in group 2; 12.7% (95% CI 5.50–22.90%) in group 3; and 8.5% (95% CI 7.00–10.10%) in group 4 (P < 0.001). Severe preoperative aortic regurgitation grade [hazard ratio 1.95 (95% CI 1.19–3.21), P < 0.001] and left ventricular end-diastolic diameter [hazard ratio 1.03 (95% CI 1.00–1.05), P < 0.001] were predictive of reintervention in group 4; patch use was a predictor in all groups. The predicted left ventricular ejection fraction (%) initially increased (P < 0.001) and then stabilized. CONCLUSIONS: This study found that aortic valve repair/sparing techniques provide viable and effective treatment options that should be considered for all eligible patients with aortic regurgitation and/or aortic root/ascending aortic aneurysms, given their potential to restore life expectancy and provide good haemodynamic outcomes with an acceptable hazard of reintervention.
AB - OBJECTIVES: Aortic valve repair/sparing techniques have been established as effective treatments for aortic regurgitation and/or aortic aneurysms. However, concerns remain regarding long-term durability, reproducibility and patient selection. This study aims to asses long-term clinical and echocardiographic outcomes, with a focus on aortic regurgitation grade and left ventricular ejection fraction evolution, in adults undergoing these procedures. METHODS: Adult patients in the Heart Valve Society Aortic Valve Database, undergoing any aortic valve repair/sparing technique were included. Time-to-event analyses were used for clinical outcomes and mixed-effects models for left ventricular ejection fraction and aortic regurgitation grade evolution. Techniques: isolated valve repair (group 1), ascending aortic replacement + valve repair (group 2), partial-root replacement ± valve repair (group 3) and valve-sparing root replacement ± valve repair (group 4). RESULTS: Survival at 10 years was comparable to survival of the matched-general-population in each group. The 10-year cumulative incidence of reintervention was 19.5% [95% confidence interval (CI) 16.70–22.40%] in group 1 [including only double external annuloplasty in group 1; reintervention was not significantly different between techniques (P = 0.112)]; 13.8% (95% CI 10.10–18.10%) in group 2; 12.7% (95% CI 5.50–22.90%) in group 3; and 8.5% (95% CI 7.00–10.10%) in group 4 (P < 0.001). Severe preoperative aortic regurgitation grade [hazard ratio 1.95 (95% CI 1.19–3.21), P < 0.001] and left ventricular end-diastolic diameter [hazard ratio 1.03 (95% CI 1.00–1.05), P < 0.001] were predictive of reintervention in group 4; patch use was a predictor in all groups. The predicted left ventricular ejection fraction (%) initially increased (P < 0.001) and then stabilized. CONCLUSIONS: This study found that aortic valve repair/sparing techniques provide viable and effective treatment options that should be considered for all eligible patients with aortic regurgitation and/or aortic root/ascending aortic aneurysms, given their potential to restore life expectancy and provide good haemodynamic outcomes with an acceptable hazard of reintervention.
KW - Aortic regurgitation
KW - Aortic valve repair
KW - Aortic valve sparing surgery
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=86000334237&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1093/ejcts/ezaf020
DO - 10.1093/ejcts/ezaf020
M3 - Article
C2 - 39871613
AN - SCOPUS:86000334237
SN - 1010-7940
VL - 67
JO - European Journal of Cardio-thoracic Surgery
JF - European Journal of Cardio-thoracic Surgery
IS - 3
M1 - ezaf020
ER -