Casidhe-Nicole Bethancourt1, David Blitzer2, Tsuyoshi Yamabe3, Yanling Zhao2, Stephanie Nguyen2, Suzuka Nitta2, Saveliy Kelebeyev1, Michael A Borger4, Paul A Kurlansky2, Isaac George2, Craig Smith2, Hiroo Takayama5. 1. Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, New York; Division of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery, NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York. 2. Division of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery, NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York. 3. Division of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery, NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York; Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Shonan-Kamakura General Hospital, Kamakura, Kanagawa, Japan. 4. Department of Cardiac Surgery, Leipzig Heart Center, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany. 5. Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, New York; Division of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery, NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York. Electronic address: ht2225@cumc.columbia.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This large cohort, single-center study compared the 10-year survival and freedom from aortic valve reintervention between valve-sparing root replacement (VSRR) and bioprosthetic Bentall (bio-Bentall). METHODS: All patients undergoing elective VSRR or bio-Bentall for aortic root aneurysm between March 2005 through October 2019 were retrospectively reviewed (N = 796; n = 360 for VSRR). Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) balanced clinical variables between groups. Mean follow-up was 58.0 ± 45.4 months (range, 0-167 months). RESULTS: After IPTW adjustment, 10-year survival did not differ between VSRR (87.0%) and bio-Bentall (92.7%, P = 0.780). Cumulative incidence of aortic valve reintervention was 5.9% for VSRR (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.9%-10.4%) and 10.6% for bio-Bentall (95% CI, 6.2%-16.4%; P = .798). A Fine and Gray competing risk regression model identified age at operation (subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR], 0.97; 95% CI, 0.95-0.99; P = .015), body surface area (sHR, 6.21; 95% CI, 1.97-19.59; P = .002), and bicuspid aortic valve (sHR, 2.15; 95% CI, 1.04-4.44; P = .038) as independently associated with aortic valve reintervention. For patients aged 50 years or younger, the cumulative incidence of aortic valve reintervention was 16.2% for VSRR (95% CI, 7.0%-28.8%) and 17.8% for bio-Bentall (95% CI, 6.9%-32.8%; P = .363). CONCLUSIONS: VSRR and bio-Bentall show similar excellent survival and freedom from aortic reintervention rates up to 10 years; however, a durable valve solution for young patients with bicuspid aortic valve remains a challenge.
BACKGROUND: This large cohort, single-center study compared the 10-year survival and freedom from aortic valve reintervention between valve-sparing root replacement (VSRR) and bioprosthetic Bentall (bio-Bentall). METHODS: All patients undergoing elective VSRR or bio-Bentall for aortic root aneurysm between March 2005 through October 2019 were retrospectively reviewed (N = 796; n = 360 for VSRR). Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) balanced clinical variables between groups. Mean follow-up was 58.0 ± 45.4 months (range, 0-167 months). RESULTS: After IPTW adjustment, 10-year survival did not differ between VSRR (87.0%) and bio-Bentall (92.7%, P = 0.780). Cumulative incidence of aortic valve reintervention was 5.9% for VSRR (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.9%-10.4%) and 10.6% for bio-Bentall (95% CI, 6.2%-16.4%; P = .798). A Fine and Gray competing risk regression model identified age at operation (subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR], 0.97; 95% CI, 0.95-0.99; P = .015), body surface area (sHR, 6.21; 95% CI, 1.97-19.59; P = .002), and bicuspid aortic valve (sHR, 2.15; 95% CI, 1.04-4.44; P = .038) as independently associated with aortic valve reintervention. For patients aged 50 years or younger, the cumulative incidence of aortic valve reintervention was 16.2% for VSRR (95% CI, 7.0%-28.8%) and 17.8% for bio-Bentall (95% CI, 6.9%-32.8%; P = .363). CONCLUSIONS: VSRR and bio-Bentall show similar excellent survival and freedom from aortic reintervention rates up to 10 years; however, a durable valve solution for young patients with bicuspid aortic valve remains a challenge.
Authors: Megan M Chung; William C Erwin; Yuming Ning; Yanling Zhao; Christine Chan; Alex D'Angelo; Alexander Kossar; Jessica Spellman; Paul Kurlansky; Hiroo Takayama Journal: JTCVS Open Date: 2022-04-23