4.5 Article

Matched comparison between external aortic root support and valve-sparing root replacement

Journal

HEART
Volume 109, Issue 11, Pages 832-838

Publisher

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/heartjnl-2022-321840

Keywords

Aortic Aneurysm; Marfan Syndrome; Aortic Valve Insufficiency

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study compared the efficacy of PEARS and VSRR in treating syndromic root aneurysms using propensity score analysis. The results showed that both methods have favorable mid-term survival, freedom from reintervention, and preservation of valve function.
ObjectivesDifferences in indication and technique make a randomised comparison between valve-sparing root replacement (VSRR) and personalised external aortic root support (PEARS) challenging. We performed a propensity score (PS)-matched comparison of PEARS and VSRR for syndromic root aneurysm. MethodsPatients in the PEARS 200 Database and Aortic Valve Insufficiency and ascending aorta Aneurysm InternATiOnal Registry (undergoing VSRR) with connective tissue disease operated electively for root aneurysm <60 mm with aortic regurgitation (AR) <1/4 were included. Using a PS analysis, 80 patients in each cohort were matched. Survival, freedom from reintervention and from AR >= 2/4 were estimated using a Kaplan-Meier analysis. ResultsMedian follow-up was 25 and 55 months for 159 PEARS and 142 VSRR patients. Seven (4.4%) patients undergoing PEARS required an intervention for coronary injury or impingement, resulting in one death (0.6%). After VSRR, there were no early deaths, 10 (7%) reinterventions for bleeding and 1 coronary intervention. Survival for matched cohorts at 5 years was similar (PEARS 98% vs VSRR 99%, p=0.99). There was no difference in freedom from valve or ascending aortic/arch reintervention between matched groups. Freedom from AR >= 2/4 at 5 years in the matched cohorts was 97% for PEARS vs 92% for VSRR (p=0.55). There were no type A dissections. ConclusionsVSRR and PEARS offer favourable mid-term survival, freedom from reintervention and preservation of valve function. Both treatments deserve their place in the surgical repertoire, depending on a patient's disease stage. This study is limited by its retrospective nature and different follow-ups in both cohorts.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available