BACKGROUND: Aortic valve-sparing operations for acute type A dissection are appealing and innovative but less well defined surgical techniques requiring further evaluation. METHODS: We reviewed all consecutive patients with acute type A dissection who underwent either the remodeling (group 1, n = 21) or the reimplantation valve-sparing technique (group 2, n = 15) since October 1994. Patients were followed up clinically and echocardiographically for as long as 41.3 months (group 1) and 87 months (group 2). RESULTS: Hospital mortality was 19% (n = 4) for group 1 and 20% (n = 3) for group 2. Permanent new neurologic symptomatology occurred in 1 patient (3.6%). Three patients in group 1 required reoperation owing to redissection. No patient had an aortic insufficiency of more than grade 1. No late neurologic or thrombembolic events occurred. There was no statistically significant difference between both groups with respect to clinical and hemodynamic data. CONCLUSIONS: Remodeling and reimplantation aortic valve-preserving operations in acute type A dissection can be performed with adequate perioperative risk and excellent midterm aortic valve function. We found no evidence of one technique being superior to the other, however durability of the remodeling technique needs critical consideration especially in Marfan syndrome and when glue is used.
BACKGROUND: Aortic valve-sparing operations for acute type A dissection are appealing and innovative but less well defined surgical techniques requiring further evaluation. METHODS: We reviewed all consecutive patients with acute type A dissection who underwent either the remodeling (group 1, n = 21) or the reimplantation valve-sparing technique (group 2, n = 15) since October 1994. Patients were followed up clinically and echocardiographically for as long as 41.3 months (group 1) and 87 months (group 2). RESULTS: Hospital mortality was 19% (n = 4) for group 1 and 20% (n = 3) for group 2. Permanent new neurologic symptomatology occurred in 1 patient (3.6%). Three patients in group 1 required reoperation owing to redissection. No patient had an aortic insufficiency of more than grade 1. No late neurologic or thrombembolic events occurred. There was no statistically significant difference between both groups with respect to clinical and hemodynamic data. CONCLUSIONS: Remodeling and reimplantation aortic valve-preserving operations in acute type A dissection can be performed with adequate perioperative risk and excellent midterm aortic valve function. We found no evidence of one technique being superior to the other, however durability of the remodeling technique needs critical consideration especially in Marfan syndrome and when glue is used.
Authors: Nadejda Monsefi; Patrick Primbs; Aleksandra Miskovic; Sandra Folkmann; Anton Moritz Journal: Langenbecks Arch Surg Date: 2014-07-15 Impact factor: 3.445
Authors: Hug Aubin; Payam Akhyari; Philipp Rellecke; Christina Pawlitza; George Petrov; Artur Lichtenberg; Hiroyuki Kamiya Journal: Front Surg Date: 2019-08-06