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

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map 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 Author home page(s): Edward R. Nowicki Gösta B. Pettersson Nicholas G. Smedira Eric E. Roselli Eugene H. Blackstone Bruce W. Lytle Permission Requests Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Nowicki, E. R. Articles by Lytle, B. W. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Nowicki, E. R. Articles by Lytle, B. W. Related Collections Valve disease

---

Original Articles: Adult Cardiac

Aortic Allograft Valve Reoperation: Surgical Challenges and Patient Risks

^a Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
^b Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio

Accepted for publication January 28, 2008.

^_* Address correspondence to Dr Nowicki, Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Ave, Mail Stop JJ-40, Cleveland, OH 44195 (Email: nowicke{at}ccf.org).

Presented at the Forty-fourth Annual Meeting of The Society of Thoracic Surgeons, Fort Lauderdale, FL, Jan 28–30, 2008.

Background: Aortic valve allograft reoperation is a challenge for the surgeon and a risk to the patient. We examined our experience to identify these challenges and risks.

Methods: From April 1987 to January 2006, 130 patients underwent first-time allograft-related reoperations. Prior implant was subcoronary 32 (25%), inclusion-root 28 (22%), and root 70 (53%). Reoperative indications were technical failure 11 (8.4%), endocarditis 31 (24%), and structural valve deterioration 88 (68%). Reoperative technique was allograft repair 7 (5.4%), simple valve replacement 80 (62%), and root replacement 43 (33%). Median follow-up was 3.1 years.

Results: Surgical challenges: 10 adverse intraoperative events occurred (7.7%), 3 allograft specific, with rescue from all. Reoperative procedure was highly dependent on original implantation technique (31 of 43 root replacements after previous roots) and reoperative indication (24 of 43 root replacements for endocarditis). Implanted valve prostheses were small for patient size, less so in intact native roots (previous subcoronary or inclusion root) than retained allografts (Z-value, –1.1 versus –1.6; p = 0.08), but allograft root re-replacement allowed normal-sized valves. Patient risks: Relevant postoperative morbidities included reoperation for bleeding 7 (5.4%), new pacemaker 6 (5.2%), stroke 1 (0.8%), and no myocardial infarction. Hospital mortality was 3.8% (5 of 130), 6.5% (2 of 31) for endocarditis. Late patient survival was substantially worse for endocarditis than for structural valve deterioration (60% versus 90% at 5 years, p = 0.0006). Five-year freedom from further reoperation was 94%.

Conclusions: Surgical challenges, even with endocarditis, can be surmounted and patient risks minimized by thoughtful preparation and appropriate reoperative procedure. An intact native root maximizes surgical options.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. Schmoeckel, P. Boekstegers, K. Nikolaou, and B. Reichart First successful transapical aortic valve implantation after aortic allograft replacement J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., October 1, 2009; 138(4): 1016 - 1017. [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Vahanian, B. Iung, L. Piérard, R. Dion, and J. Pepper CHAPTER 21 Valvular Heart Disease ESC Textbook of Cardiovascular Medicine, January 1, 2009; 2(1): med-9780199566990-chapter - med-9780199566990-chapter. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]