Reoperative aortic root replacement in patients with previous aortic root or aortic valve procedures

14Citations
Citations of this article
10Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: Generalization of standardized surgical techniques to treat aortic valve (AV) and aortic root diseases has benefited large numbers of patients. As a consequence of the proliferation of patients receiving aortic root surgeries, surgeons are more frequently challenged by reoperative aortic root procedures. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of redo-aortic root replacement (ARR). Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 66 patients (36 male; mean age, 44.5±9.5 years) who underwent redo-ARR following AV or aortic root procedures between April 1995 and June 2015. Results: Emergency surgeries comprised 43.9% (n=29). Indications for the redo-ARR were aneurysm (n=12), pseudoaneurysm (n=1), or dissection (n=6) of the residual native aortic sinus in 19 patients (28.8%), native AV dysfunction in 8 patients (12.1%), structural dysfunction of an implanted bioprosthetic AV in 19 patients (28.8%), and infection of previously replaced AV or proximal aortic grafts in 30 patients (45.5%). There were 3 early deaths (4.5%). During follow- up (median, 54.65 months; quartile 1-3, 17.93 to 95.71 months), there were 14 late deaths (21.2%), and 9 valve-related complications including reoperation of the aortic root in 1 patient, infective endocarditis in 3 patients, and hemorrhagic events in 5 patients. Overall survival and event-free survival rates at 5 years were 81.5%±5.1% and 76.4%±5.4%, respectively. Conclusion: Despite technical challenges and a high rate of emergency conditions in patients requiring redo-ARR, early and late outcomes were acceptable in these patients.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Chong, B. K., Jung, S. H., Choo, S. J., Chung, C. H., Lee, J. W., & Kim, J. B. (2016). Reoperative aortic root replacement in patients with previous aortic root or aortic valve procedures. Korean Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 49(4), 250–257. https://doi.org/10.5090/kjtcs.2016.49.4.250

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free