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 Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Personal Folders Download to citation manager Author home page(s): David N. Campbell David R. Clarke Steven P. Goldberg Max B. Mitchell Permission Requests Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Scott, D. J. Articles by Mitchell, M. B. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Scott, D. J. Articles by Mitchell, M. B. Related Collections Congenital - acyanotic

---

Original Articles: Pediatric Cardiac

Twenty-Year Surgical Experience With Congenital Supravalvar Aortic Stenosis

^a The Children's Hospital Heart Institute, Aurora, Colorado
^b University of Colorado Denver Health Sciences Center, Aurora, Colorado

Accepted for publication January 30, 2009.

^_* Address correspondence to Dr Mitchell, 13123 E 16th Ave, Box B200, Aurora, CO 80045 (Email: mitchell.max{at}tchden.org).

Presented at the Fifty-fifth Annual Meeting of the Southern Thoracic Surgical Association, Austin, TX, Nov 5–8, 2008.

Background: Congenital supravalvar aortic stenosis (SVAS) is an arteriopathy associated with Williams-Beuren syndrome and other elastin gene deletions. Our objectives were to review outcomes of congenital SVAS repair and to compare prosthetic patch repair techniques to all-autologous slide aortoplasty.

Methods: Congenital SVAS repairs from 1988 to 2008 were retrospectively reviewed. Peak instantaneous gradients were estimated by Doppler interrogation. Variables were compared by either Student's t test or Fisher's exact test. Risk factors were analyzed by ² test. Survival was estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method.

Results: Of 25 primary SVAS repairs, there were 10 all-autologous slide aortoplasties and 15 prosthetic patch aortoplasties. The prosthetic patch group included the Doty technique (n = 9), patch-augmented slide aortoplasty (n = 3), modified Brom technique (n = 1), interposition graft (n = 1), and two-sinus patch with transverse arch augmentation (n = 1). There was 1 early and 1 late death. Cumulative survival for all patients was 96% at 5 and 10 years. Event-free survival did not differ between groups (p = 0.481). There were 2 late reoperations (both were prosthetic patch patients with bicuspid aortic valve: 1 with recurrent aortic valve stenosis and 1 with aortic insufficiency). Bicuspid aortic valve was the only risk factor for reoperation (p = 0.003). Three patients weighing less than 10 kg with diffuse disease underwent attempted slide aortoplasty: 2 required patch augmentation and 1 had a recurrent gradient in less than 1 year postoperatively.

Conclusions: Outcomes after SVAS repair were good by any technique. No advantage to all-autologous slide aortoplasty was apparent at current follow-up. Based on our experience, slide aortoplasty is not recommended for small patients with diffuse disease.