Aortic valve repair in adults: long-term clinical outcomes and echocardiographic evolution in different valve repair techniques

Publication date

2025-03-01

Authors

Zito, Francesco
Veen, Kevin M.
Melina, Giovanni
Lansac, Emmanuel
Schäfers, Hans Joachim
de Kerchove, Laurent
Takkenberg, Johanna J.M.
Kluin, Jolanda
Mokhles, Mostafa M

Editors

Advisors

Supervisors

Document Type

Article

Collections

Open Access logo

License

cc_by_nc

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Aortic valve repair/sparing techniques have been established as effective treatments for aortic regurgitation and/or aortic aneurysms. However, concerns remain regarding long-term durability, reproducibility and patient selection. This study aims to asses long-term clinical and echocardiographic outcomes, with a focus on aortic regurgitation grade and left ventricular ejection fraction evolution, in adults undergoing these procedures. METHODS: Adult patients in the Heart Valve Society Aortic Valve Database, undergoing any aortic valve repair/sparing technique were included. Time-to-event analyses were used for clinical outcomes and mixed-effects models for left ventricular ejection fraction and aortic regurgitation grade evolution. Techniques: isolated valve repair (group 1), ascending aortic replacement + valve repair (group 2), partial-root replacement ± valve repair (group 3) and valve-sparing root replacement ± valve repair (group 4). RESULTS: Survival at 10 years was comparable to survival of the matched-general-population in each group. The 10-year cumulative incidence of reintervention was 19.5% [95% confidence interval (CI) 16.70-22.40%] in group 1 [including only double external annuloplasty in group 1; reintervention was not significantly different between techniques (P = 0.112)]; 13.8% (95% CI 10.10-18.10%) in group 2; 12.7% (95% CI 5.50-22.90%) in group 3; and 8.5% (95% CI 7.00-10.10%) in group 4 (P < 0.001). Severe preoperative aortic regurgitation grade [hazard ratio 1.95 (95% CI 1.19-3.21), P < 0.001] and left ventricular end-diastolic diameter [hazard ratio 1.03 (95% CI 1.00-1.05), P < 0.001] were predictive of reintervention in group 4; patch use was a predictor in all groups. The predicted left ventricular ejection fraction (%) initially increased (P < 0.001) and then stabilized. CONCLUSIONS: This study found that aortic valve repair/sparing techniques provide viable and effective treatment options that should be considered for all eligible patients with aortic regurgitation and/or aortic root/ascending aortic aneurysms, given their potential to restore life expectancy and provide good haemodynamic outcomes with an acceptable hazard of reintervention.

Keywords

Aortic regurgitation, Aortic valve repair, Aortic valve sparing surgery, Surgery, Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine, Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine, Journal Article

Citation

Zito, F, Veen, K M, Melina, G, Lansac, E, Schäfers, H J, de Kerchove, L, Takkenberg, J J M, Kluin, J & Mokhles, M M 2025, 'Aortic valve repair in adults : long-term clinical outcomes and echocardiographic evolution in different valve repair techniques', European Journal of Cardio-thoracic Surgery, vol. 67, no. 3, ezaf020. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejcts/ezaf020