Selection of prosthetic aortic valve and root replacement in patients younger than age 30 years.

Publication/Presentation Date

2-1-2019

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Long-term outcomes of prosthetic aortic valve/root replacement in patients aged 30 years or younger are not well understood. We report our single institutional experience in this young cohort.

METHODS: From 1998 to 2016, 99 patients (age range, 16-30 years) underwent aortic valve replacement (n = 57), aortic valve replacement and supracoronary ascending aorta replacement (n = 6), or aortic root replacement (n = 36). A prospectively maintained aortic valve database was retrospectively reviewed to complete longitudinal functional and clinical data. Total follow-up was 493 patient years.

RESULTS: Surgical indications included primary stenosis/insufficiency (52% [n = 51]), Marfan syndrome (10% [n = 10]), and endocarditis (33.3% [n = 33]). Fifty-eight patients (59%) underwent mechanical valve replacement, with 41 patients (41%) receiving a biologic/bioprosthetic valve. Twenty-five patients underwent aortic valve reoperation after index procedure with following indications: prosthesis-patient mismatch 1.0% (n = 1), prosthetic valve degeneration/dysfunction 10% (n = 10), connective tissue 2% (n = 2), and endocarditis 12% (n = 12). Mortality (30-day/in-hospital) and stroke rate were 3.0% (n = 3) and 1% (n = 1), respectively. One-, 5-, and 10-year actuarial freedom from aortic valve reoperation by valve type was 89.1%, 84.6%, and 69.4% for the Mechanical Valve group and 89.6%, 70.9%, and 57.6% for the Biologic/Bioprosthetic Valve group, respectively (log rank P = .279). Replacement valve size ≤21 mm was a significant risk factor for reoperation, and was associated with progression of mean aortic valve transvalvular gradients over follow-up. Valve type had no effect.

CONCLUSIONS: The choice of mechanical versus biologic/bioprosthetic valve does not affect freedom from reoperation or survival rates in this young cohort during mid- to long-term follow-up. Smaller aortic valve replacement size (≤21 mm) is a significant risk factor for reoperation and progression of mean aortic valve gradients.

Volume

157

Issue

2

First Page

714

Last Page

725

ISSN

1097-685X

Disciplines

Medicine and Health Sciences

PubMedID

30669231

Department(s)

Department of Surgery

Document Type

Article

Link to Full Text

Share

COinS