HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Personal Folders Download to citation manager Permission Requests Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Jones, E. L. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Jones, E. L.

The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, Vol 48, 26-32, Copyright © 1989 by The Society of Thoracic Surgeons

ARTICLES

Freehand homograft aortic valve replacement--the learning curve: a technical analysis of the first 31 patients

EL Jones
Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia.

The technique for implanting the homograft aortic valve is significantly more complex than that of either the bioprosthetic or mechanical valve. During development of the procedure, errors of technique were committed; a critical analysis of the learning experience is presented. In the initial 31 patients, the following problems were encountered: mitral stenosis secondary to inadequate debulking of the homograft (1 patient), prolapse of a single homograft leaflet necessitating valve replacement three days later (1 patient), incorrect homograft orientation with torsion in a calcified aorta necessitating subsequent replacement (1 patient), and aortic sinus perforation (thawing injury) (1 patient). In addition, another 4 patients had diastolic murmurs thought to be secondary to inadequate tension setting of the homograft commissural posts. From this experience, several important technical considerations for homograft replacement of the aortic valve were noted: use of interrupted subannular sutures; careful inspection for aortic perforation (thawing); extensive trimming of the homograft septum and mitral remnant; orientation of the homograft to the recipient aorta to obtain the best commissural and sinus alignment; selection of another type of valve if the size of the recipient annulus is greater than 27 mm; retention of the homograft sinus, which orients to the recipient non- coronary sinus (for a calcified aorta); and exaggerated tension on the homograft commissural posts before initiation of the second suture line. There has been 1 hospital death and no late deaths. Adherence to rigid principles of technique has resulted in no further valve replacements and no incidences of valvular leakage at early or late follow-up.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A.C. Yankah, H. Klose, M. Musci, H. Siniawski, and R. Hetzer Geometric mismatch between homograft (allograft) and native aortic root: a 14-year clinical experience Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., October 1, 2001; 20(4): 835 - 841. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. P. Willems, J. J. M. Takkenberg, E. W. Steyerberg, V. E. Kleyburg-Linkers, J. R. T. C. Roelandt, E. Bos, and L. A. van Herwerden Human Tissue Valves in Aortic Position : Determinants of Reoperation and Valve Regurgitation Circulation, March 20, 2001; 103(11): 1515 - 1521. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. L. Jones, V. B. Shah, J. S. Shanewise, T. D. Martin, R. P. Martin, J. A. Coto, R. Broniec, and Y. Shen Should the Freehand Allograft Be Abandoned as a Reliable Alternative for Aortic Valve Replacement? Ann. Thorac. Surg., June 1, 1995; 59(6): 1397 - 1403. [Abstract] [Full Text]