Aortic annulus elevation for aortic valve and root replacement

Aortic valve and root replacements require an in-depth understanding of the aortic root and annulus. Both structures can be asymmetric at times, and this needs to be recognized and taken into consideration when peforming valve-sparing operations or other root-replacement procedures. Moreover, the geometry of the aortic annulus can be altered, and when performing an aortic root replacement this can distort the geometry of a neo-aortic valve for instance, and lead to valve dysfunction, which is difficult to reverse. We are describing an altered aortic annulus, which required modification through annulus elevation before proceeding with aortic root replacement with a graft-reinforced pulmonary-autograft.

Aortic Root Enlargement during Aortic Valve Replacement in Adults

Aortic valve replacement is a gold standard in the treatment of patients with severe aortic stenosis or combined aortic pathology. However, aortic valve pathology is often associated with a narrow aortic orifice, particularly in patients with severe aortic stenosis. In 1978, Rahimtoola first described the term of prosthesis-patient mismatch. He noted that effective orifice area of the prosthesis is smaller than that of the native valve. To minimize this complication, there are several surgical strategies: aortic root enlargement (ARE), implantation of a frameless biological prosthesis in the native position, neocuspidalization procedure, Ross procedure, aortic root replacement with xenograft or homograft. ARE is an excellent option, however, some authors outline additional perioperative risks. The aim. To analyze immediate results of ARE during isolated aortic valve replacement and in cases when it is combined with other heart pathologies. Materials and methods. Our study included 63 patients who underwent ARE. Isolated aortic valve replacement was performed in the majority of cases, but often aortic root replacement procedure was combined with coronary artery bypass grafting. Results and discussion. One of 63 patients died (hospital mortality 1.6%) at an early hospital stage (30 postoperative days). Measurement of the aortic valve ring was performed by two methods, through preoperative echocardiography and perioperative measurement using a valve sizer. However, perioperative dimension was chosen as the basis for the calculations. In 62 patients, the perioperative diameter of the aortic valve ring ranged from 19 to 23 mm, only one patient had a diameter of 24 mm. According to our findings, ARE enabled to achieve an average aortic ring size increase of 2.68 cm2 (from 1.5 to 3.4 cm2) and to prevent prosthesis-patient mismatch in 42 (66.7%) cases. Conclusions. Prosthesis-patient mismatch is considered a serious complication in the postoperative period. Narrow aortic root is a common pathology that should be considered during surgery. ARE is a safe procedure and is not associated with an increased risk of mortality and complications.

Association of sleep apnoea risk and aortic enlargement in Marfan syndrome

BackgroundMarfan syndrome (MFS) is a connective tissue disorder characterised by complex aortic pathology and a high prevalence of obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA). OSA produces intrathoracic transmural stresses that may accelerate aortic injury. The current study was designed to examine the associations between OSA risk and markers of aortic enlargement in MFS.MethodConsecutive patients with MFS were recruited at Johns Hopkins if they completed a STOP-BANG survey. Composite survey scores were categorised into those with low OSA risk (STOP-BANG <3) and high OSA risk (STOP-BANG ≥3). Participants’ aortic data were collated to ascertain aortic root diameter, dilatation and prior aortic root replacement. Regression analyses were used to examine associations between OSA risk strata and these aortic parameters.ResultsOf the 89 participants studied, 28% had a high OSA risk and 32% had aortic grafts. Persons with high OSA risk had greater aortic root diameter (mm) (ß=4.13, SE=1.81, p=0.027) and aortic root dilatation (ß=2.80, SE=1.34, p=0.046) compared with those with low OSA risk . In addition, the odds of prior aortic root replacement was three times greater in those with high OSA risk compared with those with low OSA risk.ConclusionIn MFS, high OSA risk is associated with aortic enlargement and a threefold increased risk of having had prior aortic root replacement. These findings invite further exploration of the relationship between OSA and aortic disease in MFS, and studies to clarify whether targeted interventions for OSA might mitigate aortic disease progression in MFS.Registration numberIRB00157483.

How We Perform a David Procedure With an Upper Hemisternotomy Approach

Objective Valve-sparing aortic root replacement (David procedure) is the technique of choice in appropriately selected patients with aortic root aneurysms. These procedures are seldom performed in a minimally invasive fashion. We describe our systematic approach to the David procedure using an upper hemisternotomy (UHS). Methods: Our method involves a J-type UHS exiting the right third or fourth intercostal space. Ascending aortic and femoral venous cannulation are performed using the Seldinger technique under transesophageal echocardiographic guidance. Between August 2005 and August 2014, 27 patients underwent an isolated elective David procedure using a full sternotomy (FS). Sixteen underwent an isolated elective UHS David procedure from May 2015 to February 2019. Perioperative safety outcomes were compared between the 2 cohorts. Results: The UHS and FS David cohorts were primarily male (87.5% and 85.2%, respectively) and 51 and 50 years old on average, respectively. Custodiol-histidine-tryptophan-ketoglutarate cardioplegia (93.8% vs 37.0%, P < 0.001) and Cor-Knot (100% vs 0%, P < 0.001) were used significantly more in the UHS David cohort. There were no significant differences in cardiopulmonary bypass (200 [183–208] vs 212 [183–223] min, P = 0.309) and aortic cross-clamp (169 [155–179] vs 188 [155–199] min, P = 0.128) times in the UHS and FS cohorts. There were no instances of hospital or 30-day mortality in either cohort. Intensive care unit and hospital stays were comparable between the 2 cohorts. Conclusions: The David procedure via UHS is a safe and reproducible technique for aortic root replacement.