BACKGROUND: Valve-sparing root replacement is controversial in patients with significant aortic insufficiency (AI) because the aortic valve cusps often require repair, which may potentially jeopardize long-term valve function. The purpose of this study was to evaluate valve function and left ventricular reverse remodeling in patients undergoing valve-sparing root replacement in the setting of significant AI. METHODS: A review of the Emory Aortic Surgery database between 2004 and 2012 identified 616 aortic root replacements. Of these procedures, 169 were performed for patients with 3+ or greater AI. Fifty-one patients (30%) underwent a David V procedure. Echocardiography was used to evaluate the degree of AI, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter, and left ventricular end-systolic diameter. RESULTS: The mean echocardiographic follow-up was 18 ± 21 months (range, 1 to 89). Patients undergoing valve-sparing root replacement had an increase in ejection fraction (preoperative 51% ± 7% versus postoperative 57% ± 6%, p < 0.01) and a reduction in left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (preoperative 58 ± 8 mm versus postoperative 48 ± 6 mm, p < 0.01) and left ventricular end-systolic diameter (preoperative 40 ± 8 mm versus postoperative 32 ± 6 mm, p < 0.01). During the follow-up period, freedom from greater than 1+ AI was 96%, and freedom from aortic valve replacement was 98%. The addition of cusp repair did not represent a significant risk factor for recurrent postoperative AI (p = 0.21). CONCLUSIONS: The David V technique produces significant left ventricular reverse remodeling and improved ventricular function in patients with chronic severe AI. Long-term data and close follow-up will be paramount in evaluating the durability of valve repair in this patient population.
BACKGROUND: Valve-sparing root replacement is controversial in patients with significant aortic insufficiency (AI) because the aortic valve cusps often require repair, which may potentially jeopardize long-term valve function. The purpose of this study was to evaluate valve function and left ventricular reverse remodeling in patients undergoing valve-sparing root replacement in the setting of significant AI. METHODS: A review of the Emory Aortic Surgery database between 2004 and 2012 identified 616 aortic root replacements. Of these procedures, 169 were performed for patients with 3+ or greater AI. Fifty-one patients (30%) underwent a David V procedure. Echocardiography was used to evaluate the degree of AI, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter, and left ventricular end-systolic diameter. RESULTS: The mean echocardiographic follow-up was 18 ± 21 months (range, 1 to 89). Patients undergoing valve-sparing root replacement had an increase in ejection fraction (preoperative 51% ± 7% versus postoperative 57% ± 6%, p < 0.01) and a reduction in left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (preoperative 58 ± 8 mm versus postoperative 48 ± 6 mm, p < 0.01) and left ventricular end-systolic diameter (preoperative 40 ± 8 mm versus postoperative 32 ± 6 mm, p < 0.01). During the follow-up period, freedom from greater than 1+ AI was 96%, and freedom from aortic valve replacement was 98%. The addition of cusp repair did not represent a significant risk factor for recurrent postoperative AI (p = 0.21). CONCLUSIONS: The David V technique produces significant left ventricular reverse remodeling and improved ventricular function in patients with chronic severe AI. Long-term data and close follow-up will be paramount in evaluating the durability of valve repair in this patient population.