Valve-Sparing Aortic Root Replacement Technique: Valsalva Graft versus Two Straight Tubular Grafts

Background. There are many variations in valve-sparing aortic root replacement techniques. Our aim is to determine the impact of the graft on mid-term outcomes: Valsalva graft vs. two straight tubular grafts. Methods. From 2004 to 2020, 332 patients underwent valve-sparing aortic root replacement wi...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Alexander Makkinejad, Bailey Brown, Rana-Armaghan Ahmad, Joanna Hua, Xiaoting Wu, Shinichi Fukuhara, Karen Kim, Himanshu Patel, G. Michael Deeb, Bo Yang
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2023-01-01
Series:Cardiology Research and Practice
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2023/4076881
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850237642023632896
author Alexander Makkinejad
Bailey Brown
Rana-Armaghan Ahmad
Joanna Hua
Xiaoting Wu
Shinichi Fukuhara
Karen Kim
Himanshu Patel
G. Michael Deeb
Bo Yang
author_facet Alexander Makkinejad
Bailey Brown
Rana-Armaghan Ahmad
Joanna Hua
Xiaoting Wu
Shinichi Fukuhara
Karen Kim
Himanshu Patel
G. Michael Deeb
Bo Yang
author_sort Alexander Makkinejad
collection DOAJ
description Background. There are many variations in valve-sparing aortic root replacement techniques. Our aim is to determine the impact of the graft on mid-term outcomes: Valsalva graft vs. two straight tubular grafts. Methods. From 2004 to 2020, 332 patients underwent valve-sparing aortic root replacement with either a Valsalva graft (Valsalva group: n = 270) or two straight tubular grafts (two-graft group: n = 62). Data were obtained through chart review and the National Death Index. Primary outcomes were mid-term survival and freedom from reoperation. Results. The preoperative characteristics of the groups were similar, but the two-graft group had more type A dissections (32% vs. 19%) and emergent operations (26% vs. 15%) and was younger (45 vs. 50 years). Intraoperatively, the groups were similar, but the two-graft group had longer cross-clamp (245 vs. 215 minutes) and cardiopulmonary bypass times (284 vs. 255 minutes). Postoperative complications including reoperation for bleeding, stroke, pacemaker implantation, and renal failure were slightly more frequent in the Valsalva group, but the differences were not significant. Operative mortality was similar between the Valsalva and two-graft groups (0.7% vs. 0%). Five-year survival in the two-graft group was 100% compared to 96% in the Valsalva group (p=0.56). Five-year freedom from reoperation in the two-graft group was 100% compared to 93% in the Valsalva group (p=0.29). Conclusions. The Valsalva and two-graft techniques both have excellent short- and mid-term outcomes. The two-graft technique might have slightly better survival and freedom from reoperation, but a larger sample size and longer follow-up are needed to determine if these advantages are significant.
format Article
id doaj-art-1c883c7149094c4bbadff0dcd328ff88
institution OA Journals
issn 2090-0597
language English
publishDate 2023-01-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series Cardiology Research and Practice
spelling doaj-art-1c883c7149094c4bbadff0dcd328ff882025-08-20T02:01:42ZengWileyCardiology Research and Practice2090-05972023-01-01202310.1155/2023/4076881Valve-Sparing Aortic Root Replacement Technique: Valsalva Graft versus Two Straight Tubular GraftsAlexander Makkinejad0Bailey Brown1Rana-Armaghan Ahmad2Joanna Hua3Xiaoting Wu4Shinichi Fukuhara5Karen Kim6Himanshu Patel7G. Michael Deeb8Bo Yang9Department of Cardiac SurgeryDepartment of Cardiac SurgeryDepartment of Cardiac SurgeryDepartment of Cardiac SurgeryDepartment of Cardiac SurgeryDepartment of Cardiac SurgeryDepartment of Cardiac SurgeryDepartment of Cardiac SurgeryDepartment of Cardiac SurgeryDepartment of Cardiac SurgeryBackground. There are many variations in valve-sparing aortic root replacement techniques. Our aim is to determine the impact of the graft on mid-term outcomes: Valsalva graft vs. two straight tubular grafts. Methods. From 2004 to 2020, 332 patients underwent valve-sparing aortic root replacement with either a Valsalva graft (Valsalva group: n = 270) or two straight tubular grafts (two-graft group: n = 62). Data were obtained through chart review and the National Death Index. Primary outcomes were mid-term survival and freedom from reoperation. Results. The preoperative characteristics of the groups were similar, but the two-graft group had more type A dissections (32% vs. 19%) and emergent operations (26% vs. 15%) and was younger (45 vs. 50 years). Intraoperatively, the groups were similar, but the two-graft group had longer cross-clamp (245 vs. 215 minutes) and cardiopulmonary bypass times (284 vs. 255 minutes). Postoperative complications including reoperation for bleeding, stroke, pacemaker implantation, and renal failure were slightly more frequent in the Valsalva group, but the differences were not significant. Operative mortality was similar between the Valsalva and two-graft groups (0.7% vs. 0%). Five-year survival in the two-graft group was 100% compared to 96% in the Valsalva group (p=0.56). Five-year freedom from reoperation in the two-graft group was 100% compared to 93% in the Valsalva group (p=0.29). Conclusions. The Valsalva and two-graft techniques both have excellent short- and mid-term outcomes. The two-graft technique might have slightly better survival and freedom from reoperation, but a larger sample size and longer follow-up are needed to determine if these advantages are significant.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2023/4076881
spellingShingle Alexander Makkinejad
Bailey Brown
Rana-Armaghan Ahmad
Joanna Hua
Xiaoting Wu
Shinichi Fukuhara
Karen Kim
Himanshu Patel
G. Michael Deeb
Bo Yang
Valve-Sparing Aortic Root Replacement Technique: Valsalva Graft versus Two Straight Tubular Grafts
Cardiology Research and Practice
title Valve-Sparing Aortic Root Replacement Technique: Valsalva Graft versus Two Straight Tubular Grafts
title_full Valve-Sparing Aortic Root Replacement Technique: Valsalva Graft versus Two Straight Tubular Grafts
title_fullStr Valve-Sparing Aortic Root Replacement Technique: Valsalva Graft versus Two Straight Tubular Grafts
title_full_unstemmed Valve-Sparing Aortic Root Replacement Technique: Valsalva Graft versus Two Straight Tubular Grafts
title_short Valve-Sparing Aortic Root Replacement Technique: Valsalva Graft versus Two Straight Tubular Grafts
title_sort valve sparing aortic root replacement technique valsalva graft versus two straight tubular grafts
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2023/4076881
work_keys_str_mv AT alexandermakkinejad valvesparingaorticrootreplacementtechniquevalsalvagraftversustwostraighttubulargrafts
AT baileybrown valvesparingaorticrootreplacementtechniquevalsalvagraftversustwostraighttubulargrafts
AT ranaarmaghanahmad valvesparingaorticrootreplacementtechniquevalsalvagraftversustwostraighttubulargrafts
AT joannahua valvesparingaorticrootreplacementtechniquevalsalvagraftversustwostraighttubulargrafts
AT xiaotingwu valvesparingaorticrootreplacementtechniquevalsalvagraftversustwostraighttubulargrafts
AT shinichifukuhara valvesparingaorticrootreplacementtechniquevalsalvagraftversustwostraighttubulargrafts
AT karenkim valvesparingaorticrootreplacementtechniquevalsalvagraftversustwostraighttubulargrafts
AT himanshupatel valvesparingaorticrootreplacementtechniquevalsalvagraftversustwostraighttubulargrafts
AT gmichaeldeeb valvesparingaorticrootreplacementtechniquevalsalvagraftversustwostraighttubulargrafts
AT boyang valvesparingaorticrootreplacementtechniquevalsalvagraftversustwostraighttubulargrafts