OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to evaluate operative techniques and long-term results after aortic valve or root repair in patients aged 75 years or more. METHODS: Between November 2002 and January 2016, a total of 815 patients underwent aortic valve or root repair. Among them were 100 patients aged 75 years or more (mean, 78 ± 3; range, 75-88 years), including 17 patients operated on an emergency basis because of acute aortic dissection. None/trivial, mild, moderate, and severe insufficiency grades were presented in 9, 23, 27, and 41 patients, respectively. The surgery comprised root repair, cusp repair, and a combination of both in 45, 16, and 39 patients, respectively. RESULTS: Early (30-day) mortality and the rate of permanent neurologic deficit were 2% for each. The follow-up was 99% complete, resulting in 427 patient/years. During the follow-up period (mean duration, 4.3 ± 3.2; range, 0.02-11.1 years), only 1 patient developed a relevant aortic insufficiency and required aortic valve reoperation. There were 24 late deaths, which occurred on average 50.0 ± 40.6 months (range, 2.4-135.0) after surgery at the average patient age of 82 ± 5 years (range, 75-90). Estimated survival at 5 and 8 years was 76.4% ± 5.1% and 71.3% ± 5.9%, respectively, and was similar to those of the sex- and age-matched general population. CONCLUSIONS: Reconstructive aortic valve surgery is a suitable and justifiable surgical option in selected elderly patients undergoing operation by surgeons with considerable experience in this kind of surgery. It offers low cardiac and valve-related mortality and morbidity, leading to life expectancy applicable to the patients' ages.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to evaluate operative techniques and long-term results after aortic valve or root repair in patients aged 75 years or more. METHODS: Between November 2002 and January 2016, a total of 815 patients underwent aortic valve or root repair. Among them were 100 patients aged 75 years or more (mean, 78 ± 3; range, 75-88 years), including 17 patients operated on an emergency basis because of acute aortic dissection. None/trivial, mild, moderate, and severe insufficiency grades were presented in 9, 23, 27, and 41 patients, respectively. The surgery comprised root repair, cusp repair, and a combination of both in 45, 16, and 39 patients, respectively. RESULTS: Early (30-day) mortality and the rate of permanent neurologic deficit were 2% for each. The follow-up was 99% complete, resulting in 427 patient/years. During the follow-up period (mean duration, 4.3 ± 3.2; range, 0.02-11.1 years), only 1 patient developed a relevant aortic insufficiency and required aortic valve reoperation. There were 24 late deaths, which occurred on average 50.0 ± 40.6 months (range, 2.4-135.0) after surgery at the average patient age of 82 ± 5 years (range, 75-90). Estimated survival at 5 and 8 years was 76.4% ± 5.1% and 71.3% ± 5.9%, respectively, and was similar to those of the sex- and age-matched general population. CONCLUSIONS: Reconstructive aortic valve surgery is a suitable and justifiable surgical option in selected elderly patients undergoing operation by surgeons with considerable experience in this kind of surgery. It offers low cardiac and valve-related mortality and morbidity, leading to life expectancy applicable to the patients' ages.