Literature DB >> 29415381

Early and mid-term results of autograft rescue by Ross reversal: A one-valve disease need not become a two-valve disease.

Syed T Hussain1, David S Majdalany2, Aaron Dunn3, Robert D Stewart1, Hani K Najm1, Lars G Svensson1, Penny L Houghtaling4, Eugene H Blackstone5, Gösta B Pettersson6.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Risk of reoperation and loss of a second native valve are major drawbacks of the Ross operation. Rather than discarding the failed autograft, it can be placed back into the native pulmonary position by "Ross reversal." We review our early and mid-term results with this operation.
METHODS: From 2006 to 2017, 39 patients underwent reoperation for autograft dysfunction. The autograft was successfully rescued in 35 patients: by Ross reversal in 30, David procedure in 4, and autograft repair in 1. Medical records were reviewed for patient characteristics (mean age was 46 ± 13 years, range 18-67 years, and 23 were male), previous operations, indications for reoperation, hospital outcomes, and echocardiographic findings for the 30 patients undergoing successful Ross reversal. Follow-up was 4.1 ± 3.5 years (range 7 months-11 years).
RESULTS: Median interval between the original Ross procedure and Ross reversal was 12 years (range 5-19 years). Eight patients also had absolute indications for replacement of the pulmonary allograft. There was no operative mortality. One patient required reoperation for bleeding. Another had an abdominal aorta injury from use of an endoballoon clamp. There was no other major postoperative morbidity, and median postoperative hospital stay was 7.2 days (range 4-41 days). No patient required reoperation during follow-up. Twenty-four patients had acceptable pulmonary valve function, and 6 had clinically well-tolerated moderate or severe pulmonary regurgitation.
CONCLUSIONS: Ross reversal can be performed with low morbidity and acceptable pulmonary valve function, reducing patient risk of losing 2 native valves when the autograft fails in the aortic position.
Copyright © 2017 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Ross procedure/operation; Ross reversal; aortic valve replacement; autograft failure; autograft rescue; reoperation

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29415381     DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2017.09.134

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg        ISSN: 0022-5223            Impact factor:   5.209


  4 in total

1.  Age- and sex-matched controls should not be the standard for the Ross procedure.

Authors:  Lin Chen; Miza Salim Hammoud; Michael Jiang; Nadia H Bakir; Tara Karamlou
Journal:  JTCVS Open       Date:  2022-06-02

2.  The Ross reversal.

Authors:  Aaron J Weiss; Gosta B Pettersson
Journal:  JTCVS Tech       Date:  2021-02-12

3.  Commentary: The Ross reversal: An innovative and useful extension of the armamentarium for the failing Ross.

Authors:  Martin O Schmiady; Michael Hübler
Journal:  JTCVS Tech       Date:  2021-03-02

4.  Commentary: The Ross reversal: Should it be done, if so when?

Authors:  Charles A Mack; Leonard N Girardi
Journal:  JTCVS Tech       Date:  2021-03-04
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.