MANAGEMENT OF MECHANICAL AORTIC VALVE DYSFUNCTION IN THE SETTING OF PREGNANCY

Abstract Background This study aimed to confirm the safety and feasibility of simple pannus removal in patients with mechanical aortic valve dysfunction for pannus overgrowth by evaluating its early clinical outcomes. Methods From March 2015 to April 2019, 24 consecutive patients with mechanical aortic valve dysfunction due to subaortic pannus underwent reoperation. In 12 patients the repeat aortic valve replacement (AVR) was performed, and 12 received the simple pannus removal to preserve the previously implanted prosthesis. Results There was only 1 in-hospital death in simple pannus removal group. Significant differences were obtained between procedures in cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) and aortic cross-clamp time (128.7 vs 179.7 and 74.2 vs 132.7 mins, respectively, P < 0.05). The C-reactive protein (CRP) in simple pannus removal group was lower on the first day (0.13 ± 0.09 vs 0.31 ± 0.22 mg/dl, P < 0.05) and continued to be lower within 1 week after operation. There was no significant difference between procedures in aortic transvalvular peak velocity and transvalvular mean pressure gradient (TMPG) (2.6 ± 0.4 vs 2.5 ± 0.4 m/s and 13.2 ± 3.6 vs 11.6 ± 2.6 mmHg, respectively, P > 0.05) in echocardiography 1 week after operation. In addition, the aortic transvalvular peak velocity and TMPG in echocardiography 1 week after operation in pannus removal group between the repeat and initial surgery were not statistically significant (2.6 ± 0.4 vs. 2.5 ± 0.3 m/s, 13.2 ± 3.6 vs. 13.0 ± 3.5 mmHg, P > 0.05). Conclusions Simple pannus removal was a safe and effective procedure with satisfied early clinical outcomes for pannus overgrowth in mechanical aortic valve. However, further randomized and long-term follow-up studies were warranted to determine the clinical effects of the simple aortic pannus removal.

Download Full-text

Blockage of a Mechanical Aortic Valve Leaflet with BioGlue: A Case Report

The Heart Surgery Forum ◽

10.1532/hsf98.20121067 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 15 (6) ◽

pp. E310-E312 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Tone Gabrijelcic

Keyword(s):

Case Report ◽

Aortic Valve ◽

Valve Leaflet ◽

Aortic Valve Leaflet ◽

Mechanical Aortic Valve

Download Full-text

Passing a Mechanical Aortic Valve With a Short Tip Dilator to Facilitate Aortic Arch Endovascular Branched Repair

Journal of Endovascular Therapy ◽

10.1177/15266028211002506 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 152660282110025

Author(s):

Nikolaos Konstantinou ◽

Sven Peterss ◽

Jan Stana ◽

Barbara Rantner ◽

Ramin Banafsche ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Aortic Valve ◽

Aortic Arch ◽

Stent Graft ◽

Mechanical Valve ◽

Valve Prosthesis ◽

Proper Position ◽

Mechanical Aortic Valve ◽

Aortic Replacement ◽

Custom Made ◽

Aortic Valve Prosthesis

Purpose To present a novel technique to successfully cross a mechanical aortic valve prosthesis. Technique A 55-year-old female patient with genetically verified Marfan syndrome presented with a 5-cm anastomotic aneurysm of the proximal aortic arch after previous ascending aortic replacement due to a type A aortic dissection in 2007. The patient also underwent mechanical aortic valve replacement in 1991. A 3-stage hybrid repair was planned. The first 2 steps included debranching of the supra-aortic vessels. In the third procedure, a custom-made double branched endovascular stent-graft with a short 35-mm introducer tip was implanted. The mechanical valve was passed with the tip of the dilator on the lateral site of the leaflet, without destructing the valve and with only mild symptoms of aortic insufficiency, as one leaflet continued to work. This allowed the implantation of the stent-graft directly distally of the coronary arteries. Postoperative computed tomography angiography showed no endoleaks and patent coronary and supra-aortic vessels. Conclusion Passing a mechanical aortic valve prosthesis at the proper position is feasible and allows adequate endovascular treatment in complex arch anatomy. However, caution should be taken during positioning of the endovascular graft as the tip may potentially damage the valve prosthesis.

Download Full-text