| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2003;125:789-796
© 2003 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery
Surgery for Acquired Cardiovascular Disease |
From the Divisions of Cardiovascular Surgery and Cardiology of Toronto General Hospital and University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Read at the Eighty-second Annual Meeting of The American Association for Thoracic Surgery, Washington, DC, May 5-8, 2002.
Received for publication May 5, 2002. Revisions requested Aug 1, 2002; revisions received Aug 9, 2002. Accepted for publication Aug 15, 2002. Address for reprints: Tirone E. David, MD, 200 Elizabeth St, 13EN-219, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5G 2C4 (E-mail: tirone.david{at}uhn.on.ca).
 |
Abstract |
|---|
 Top Abstract IntroductionPatients and methodsResultsDiscussionLimitations of the studyConclusionsAppendix: DiscussionReferences |
|---|
|
Introduction |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionPatients and methodsResultsDiscussionLimitations of the studyConclusionsAppendix: DiscussionReferences |
|---|
Until recently, composite replacement of the aortic valve and ascending aorta was the standard operation for aortic root aneurysm in patients with Marfan syndrome.
1 In the early 1990s two types of aortic valve-sparing operations were introduced to repair aortic root aneurysms: reimplantation of the aortic valve and remodeling of the aortic root. 2,3 Although these operations were rapidly incorporated into practice by some surgeons, 4-6 others remained skeptical, particularly for patients with Marfan syndrome because of abnormal fibrillin in the aortic cusps. 1,7 Abnormal fibrillin is also present in the leaflets of myxomatous mitral valve, 7 however, and yet the durability of mitral valve repair in this entity has been excellent. 8
It remains unknown whether aortic valve-sparing operations are better than aortic root replacement for patients with Marfan syndrome. 1,9 It is also unknown what type of aortic valve-sparing procedure is best suited for patients with Marfan syndrome. 4-6,9-12 It has been suggested that the remodeling procedure may better preserve aortic cusp motion, theoretically enhancing the durability of the repair. 11,12 Conversely, patients with Marfan syndrome often have annuloaortic ectasia, which genetic substrate probably has a temporal expression, and the aortic annulus may dilate after the remodeling procedure, with consequent failure of the repair. This study examines the clinical results of both types of aortic root surgery in patients with Marfan syndrome and compares the early and late echocardiographic findings of two types of aortic valve-sparing operation.
|
Patients and methods |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionPatients and methodsResultsDiscussionLimitations of the studyConclusionsAppendix: DiscussionReferences |
|---|
13 were reviewed. Pediatric patients are not operated on in our hospital, but an exception was made for a 12 year-old boy. There were 105 patients: 44 underwent aortic root replacement, and 61 underwent aortic valve-sparing operations. Aortic root replacement was performed throughout the period of study, which extended from 1979 to 2001, whereas aortic valve-sparing operations were performed from 1988 to 2001. Table 1 shows the clinical profiles of these two groups of patients. All patients underwent transthoracic echocardiography before surgery. Coronary angiography was performed in older patients.
|
Since 1988, aortic valve-sparing operations were performed whenever the aortic cusps were normal or amenable to repair. Two techniques, reimplantation of the aortic valve and remodeling of the aortic root, were initially used without any particular selection criterion, but only the first procedure was used during the last 2 years of the study period. Technical details of these operations have been published elsewhere. 14,15 Reimplantation of the aortic valve was used in 39 patients and remodeling of the aortic root was used in 22. Age, functional class, size of the aortic root, severity of aortic insufficiency (AI), and ventricular function were identical in these two subgroups, but all patients with acute type A aortic dissection had the reimplantation technique. Six patients (4 in the reimplantation subgroup and 2 in the remodeling subgroup) underwent repair of elongated aortic cusps with a double layer of a 6-0 expanded polytetrafluoroethylene suture. 15 The mitral valve was repaired in 8 patients (4 in the reimplantation subgroup and 4 in the remodeling subgroup). The transverse arch was replaced in 1 patient who underwent the remodeling procedure, and coronary artery bypass grafting was performed in 4 patients, 2 from each subgroup.
Echocardiography
Intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography was used in all patients who underwent aortic valve-sparing operations. A transthoracic study was also performed before discharge from hospital. The first postoperative and most recent echocardiographic studies were analyzed, and the offline measurements of the aortic annulus, the neoaortic sinuses, and the aortic graft diameters from these two examinations were compared. The diameter of the neoaortic sinuses was measured approximately 1.5 cm above the aortic annulus. All measurements were performed during diastole and are presented as the mean value of two consecutive cardiac cycles. Morphologic assessment of the aortic cusps included extent and degree of calcification and thickening. AI was estimated as none (grade 0), trivial (grade 1), mild (grade 2), moderate (grade 3), or severe (grade 4) on the basis of information from color flow mapping and continuous-wave Doppler echocardiography. 16,17
Follow-up
Patients were seen annually by the referring cardiologist, and ongoing records were maintained in our Adult Congenital Heart Clinic. Echocardiography was performed annually. For this study follow-up was closed on February 28, 2002, and was 100% complete. The mean follow-ups were 75 ± 54 months for patients who underwent aortic root replacement and 49 ± 38 months for patients who underwent aortic valve-sparing operations (P = .01). The mean follow-ups were 44 ± 43 months for patients with the reimplantation technique and 63 ± 24 months for those with the remodeling procedure (P = .05).
Statistical analysis
Comparisons between the two main groups and subgroups were made with unpaired t tests for continuous variables and 
2 or Fisher exact tests for categoric variables. Estimates for long-term survival or freedom from morbid events were made by the Kaplan-Meier method. Differences between survival curves were evaluated with the log-rank statistic.
|
Results |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionPatients and methodsResultsDiscussionLimitations of the studyConclusionsAppendix: DiscussionReferences |
|---|
Nine patients required reexploration of the mediastinum for bleeding, 4 with aortic root replacement and 5 with aortic valve-sparing operations (3% in the reimplantation subgroup and 18% in the remodeling subgroup, P = .01). Two patients who underwent aortic root replacement had strokes, with complete neurologic resolution. Blood transfusion or blood products were needed in 32% of patients who underwent aortic root replacement and in 23% of those who underwent aortic valve-sparing operations. There were no cases of wound infection, myocardial infarction, renal or respiratory failure, or any other postoperative complication.
There were 7 late deaths, 5 in the aortic root replacement group and 2 in the aortic valve-sparing group. The deaths in the aortic root replacement group were due to rupture of the false lumen in 2 patients, congestive heart failure in 1 patient, prosthetic valve endocarditis in 1 patient, and complications of vertebral column surgery in 1 patient. The 2 deaths in the aortic valve-sparing group were due to acute type B aortic dissection with rupture in 1 case and chronic obstructive lung disease in 1 case. Figure 1 shows the survivals of both groups of patients; at 10 years the survivals were 87% ± 7% in the aortic root replacement group and 96% ± 3% in the aortic valve-sparing group (P = .3).
|
There were 4 episodes of prosthetic valve endocarditis in 3 patients who underwent aortic root replacement. One patient, whose condition was deemed inoperable, died. He was an elderly man who had undergone aortic root and mitral valve replacement twice before and had multiple comorbid conditions. The other 2 patients underwent reoperative aortic root replacement (1 patient had 2 reoperations 4 years apart) and survived. The 10-year freedom from prosthetic valve endocarditis after aortic root replacement was 88% ± 7%. One paraplegic patient who underwent an aortic valve-sparing operation acquired infective endocarditis with an aortic root abscess with Streptococcus faecalis 11 years after the operation. He underwent aortic root replacement with a homograft and survived.
Five patients required reoperative aortic root replacement, and 2 of them underwent this twice. Three reoperations (in 2 patients) were because of prosthetic valve endocarditis and 4 reoperations (in 3 patients) were because of biologic valve failure. Only 1 patient who underwent an aortic valve sparing-operation needed aortic root replacement for an aortic root abscess 11 years after the operation. This patient had undergone the remodeling procedure. Figure 2 shows the freedom from aortic root reoperation. The 10-year freedoms from reoperation on the aortic root were 75% ± 9% for patients who underwent aortic root replacement and 100% for those who underwent aortic valve-sparing operations (P = .01). For the 26 patients who underwent aortic root replacement with mechanical valves, the freedom from reoperation was 92% ± 6%.
|
|
Echocardiography after aortic valve-sparing operations
Table 2 shows AI grades early and late after the operation in patients who underwent aortic valve-sparing operations. Figure 4 shows freedom from AI greater than 2+ for all patients who had aortic valve sparing. Figure 5 shows the freedoms from AI greater than 2+ in the two subgroups through 8 years only because of the small number of patients at risk.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionPatients and methodsResultsDiscussionLimitations of the studyConclusionsAppendix: DiscussionReferences |
|---|
18,19 Aortic root replacement dramatically improves the survival of these patients. 1 In a recent report by Gott and associates 20 on the results of aortic root replacement in 271 patients with Marfan syndrome, there was no operative mortality among 235 patients operated on electively, and operative mortality was only 5.6% among 36 patients operated on urgently. Twenty-four patients who underwent aortic valve-sparing operations were included in that study. The 5- and 10-year survivals was 89% and 81%, respectively. One suspects that most patients received mechanical heart valves and required anticoagulation with warfarin sodium. Only 2 patients died as consequence of oral anticoagulation therapy. At 10 years the freedom from thromboembolic complications was 93%. These rates of thromboembolic and hemorrhagic events are certainly lower than in other reports on aortic valve replacement with mechanical valves. 21,22 The differences could be due to the young age of patients with Marfan syndrome and to other anatomic factors, such as the absence of suture knots on the sewing ring of commercially available valved conduits. Eleven patients had endocarditis develop, and the freedom from prosthetic valve endocarditis was 94% at 10 years. 20 The results of aortic root replacement in our series were similar to those reported by Gott and associates. 20 Dysrhythmias (possibly sudden death), dissection or rupture of the remaining aorta, and valve-related complications were the principal causes of death in Gott and colleagues' study 20 as well as in our patients. 1
The results of aortic valve-sparing operations in patients with Marfan syndrome have been excellent in our institution. Although the long-term survival of these patients was similar to that of patients who underwent aortic root replacement, there was a higher freedom from valve-related morbidity and mortality after aortic valve-sparing operations than after aortic root replacement, as shown in Figure 3
. It is unlikely that the preoperative differences in clinical profile accounted for these differences in outcomes. The lack of anticoagulation and the lower incidence of endocarditis may account for some of the differences. We firmly believe that the aortic valve, as well as the mitral valve, should be preserved whenever possible in patients with Marfan syndrome. We consider aortic root replacement and aortic valve-sparing operations not as competitive procedures but as complementary procedures. Aortic valve-sparing procedures should be reserved for patients who have normal aortic cusps, whereas aortic root replacement should be used for those who have abnormal aortic cusps.
We began to perform aortic valve-sparing operations in patients with aortic root aneurysms in 1988. Since then we have replaced the aortic root only if the aortic cusps are abnormal. We started with the reimplantation technique but soon began to use the remodeling procedure because of the theoretic importance of recreating aortic sinuses. 4,12 Later we added an aortic annuloplasty to the remodeling procedure in patients with annuloaortic ectasia or Marfan syndrome in the hopes of preventing future dilation of the aortic annulus. 14 Although the results of both procedures have been satisfactory, we believe that the aortic annulus dilates in a large proportion of patients with Marfan syndrome who had an annulus of normal diameter at the time of surgery. Indeed, we documented a significant increase in the diameter of the aortic annulus in half of 22 patients who underwent remodeling of the aortic root. To our surprise, aortic annuloplasty had no effect on the late dilation, probably because the connective tissue between suture lines dilated or the annuloplasty sutures slowly cut through the abnormal fibrous tissue of the left ventricular outflow tract. We could not establish a relationship between dilation of the aortic annulus and the development of AI in our patients, probably because of a small sample size. As shown in Figure 5 and in Table 3, however, reimplantation of the aortic valve appears to be more stable as far as the lack of AI is concerned.
In a report by Birks and coworkers 23 on 82 patients with Marfan syndrome who underwent the remodeling procedure, the 10-year survival was 84%, and the freedom from reoperation on the aortic root was 83%. At the latest follow-up of patients who were alive without reoperation, 22% had moderate AI. Although no information was given regarding the mechanism of AI, it is conceivable that most failures were due to late dilation of the aortic annulus, because only 2 patients had moderate AI soon after the operation.
The technique of reimplantation of the aortic valve prevents annular dilation because the entire aortic valve is secured inside a tubular Dacron graft. The main shortcoming of this technique is the elimination of the sinuses of Valsalva, which may be important for normal cusp motion and durability. 4,12 This may be true, but it has not become evident during the first decade of follow-up. It is possible to create neoaortic sinuses with the reimplantation technique. All that is required is to use graft larger than needed and tailor it as the operation is done. The diameter of the graft is first reduced at the level where it is secured to the left ventricular outflow tract. Then, after the aortic valve is resuspended inside the graft, the spaces between commissures are plicated to reduce the diameter of the sinotubular junction as desired at the same time as the neoaortic sinuses are created. One may also use a graft with neoaortic sinuses, which has been developed by De Paulis and associates 24 and is now commercially available. We prefer, however, to tailor our own.
|
Limitations of the study |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionPatients and methodsResultsDiscussionLimitations of the studyConclusionsAppendix: DiscussionReferences |
|---|
|
Conclusions |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionPatients and methodsResultsDiscussionLimitations of the studyConclusionsAppendix: DiscussionReferences |
|---|
|
Appendix: Discussion |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionPatients and methodsResultsDiscussionLimitations of the studyConclusionsAppendix: DiscussionReferences |
|---|
The first question relates to the pattern of survival, with 10-year survivals of 96% and 87%. Although statistically there was not a significant difference, the lack of significance was probably, as indicated in the text, due to the small number of repair patients, with only 2 patients followed up for 10 years. If this trend were to continue, however, it might become significant, and we do look forward to further reports about this. The second question related to the pattern of survival is whether de Oliveira and colleagues have considered, in view of the very young age of these patients, comparing this pattern of survival with age-matched control subjects from the general population?
The next question relates to the indication for operation. What were the incidences of acute and chronic dissection in this series? This could have an important bearing on both the early and long-term results. In a previously reported series of patients with Marfan syndrome undergoing repair at our center, we observed an incidence of 35% of dissection, which did indeed influence both the early and long-term results. So I would like to know whether de Oliveira and colleagues looked at that. Equally, did they consider prophylactic repair, particularly in view of the very good results, for high-risk patients with aneurysms of the aortic root before there is significant regurgitation? Prophylaxis might be particularly relevant for patients known to be at high risk, as indicated by several prognostic indicators. This could avoid dissection, which is catastrophic, both in the early and longer term. It could also, importantly, halt the progressive changes in the cusps, because aortic regurgitation has been shown to increase the amount of matrix metalloproteinases, which cause the cusps to shrink. What was the cutoff point in terms of size, if prophylactic repair was indeed used?
Another point has to do with endocarditis. The authors stated that there was no incidence of endocarditis and that there were no reoperations in the repair group, but then somewhere else in the article they did mention that a patient with repair required replacement of the root. How do they reconcile those two statements? Also, what was the indication for the use of a prosthetic valve, a homograft, or an unstented xenograft? Was there a rationale behind the choice?
In a larger series from our center of remodeling operations, we have confirmed the results of this study. In particular, we have seen that the results depend critically on timing of the operation but equally, as de Oliveira and colleagues stress in the article, on technical details. For example, during the last 4 years or so we have introduced several technical refinements in the remodeling operation. The first is undersizing of the graft, which we think is really important; the second is insertion of the top of the commissures within the Dacron polyester fabric graft. The third, which is probably the most important, is in the length and shape of the tongues of the Dacron polyester fabric tube, which we think should be as long as possible and tapering at its end. This has the effect of remodeling of the sinuses. By the way, all the diseased aortic wall is excised in the remodeling operation. This is essential, and the stitches have to be in the annulus. But a thin, long tongue would reshape the sinuses and form a vortex, which in effect pushes the bottom of the sinuses inward.
Dr de Oliveira. Starting with the first question, yes, we believe that with a larger sample size the difference in survival between root replacement and valve sparing operations will become significant. The lower risk of infective endocarditis and the absence of anticoagulation therapy after preservation of the native valve are important factors associated with lower morbidity and mortality after valve-sparing operations.
We did not attempt to match the patients in this study with the general population to compare the long-term survival because of the relatively small sample size.
As far as aortic dissection is concerned, there were 15 cases of acute aortic dissection; 9 of these patients had undergone valve-sparing operations with reimplantation of the aortic valve and 6 had undergone root replacement. We believe that reimplantation of the aortic valve gives a more stable repair and is associated with a lower risk of postoperative bleeding. There were 4 chronic dissections, and these patients all had undergone root replacement.
Regarding prophylactic surgery in high-risk patients, such as female patients during child-bearing age and patients with a family history of aortic dissection, we tend to be more aggressive and to recommend repair when the root reaches 45 mm, whereas we use 50 mm to recommend surgery in other patients. We should try to avoid dissection and aortic complications in this very young group of patients because of the negative effect on operative mortality and long-term survival. In most series, including ours, an important cause of late death has been rupture of the false lumen. In our series 4 patients required reoperation on the residual aorta because of expansion or rupture of the false lumen. One patient died, and 1 had paraplegia develop.
With respect to the issue of infective endocarditis, there were 5 episodes of endocarditis: 4 after root replacement and 1 after remodeling. The latter occurred 11 years after the operation. That is why the freedom from endocarditis was 100% at 10 years.
Finally, I can only speculate on the indications for using homograft or bioprosthetic valves. They probably were used because the patients did not wish to take anticoagulant. I thank you again for your comments and questions.
Dr Hartzell V. Schaff (Rochester, Minn). Technique is terribly important, but did you look at the outcome related to the degree of preoperative aortic valve regurgitation? What degree of preoperative aortic regurgitation would make you hesitant to try to preserve the valve?
Dr de Oliveira. There was a correlation between the size of the aortic root and the probability of preserving the valve. If the root was less than 5 cm in diameter, most cusps were normal. If the root was between 5 and 6 cm, about 50% of them were normal. If the aneurysm was more than 6 cm, then most cusps were abnormal, and those patients were more likely to undergo aortic root replacement. Is that the answer to your question?
Dr Schaff. Not directly. The question is the degree of aortic valve regurgitation, understanding that the larger annuli will have more leakage. Is there a degree of aortic valve regurgitation about which you would worry?
Dr de Oliveira. We did not look at that specifically, but I believe that the more severe the degree of AI, the less the chance to repair the valves. The cusps will more likely become thinner and fenestrated, making the repair more difficult and risky. However, 6 of our patients had prolapse of one cusp and yet were amenable to repair with good results.
|
References |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionPatients and methodsResultsDiscussionLimitations of the studyConclusionsAppendix: DiscussionReferences |
|---|
Related Article
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  E. Navarra, G. El Khoury, D. Glineur, M. Boodhwani, M. Van Dyck, J.-L. Vanoverschelde, P. Noirhomme, and L. de Kerchove Effect of annulus dimension and annuloplasty on bicuspid aortic valve repair Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, March 8, 2013; (2013) ezt045v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Leontyev, C. Trommer, S. Subramanian, S. Lehmann, Y. Dmitrieva, M. Misfeld, F. W. Mohr, and M. A. Borger The outcome after aortic valve-sparing (David) operation in 179 patients: a single-centre experience Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, August 1, 2012; 42(2): 261 - 267. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 B. G. Leshnower, R. A. Guyton, R. J. Myung, J. D. Puskas, P. D. Kilgo, L. McPherson, and E. P. Chen Expanding the indications for the David V aortic root replacement: Early results J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., April 1, 2012; 143(4): 879 - 884. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 H. Shimizu, H. Kasahara, A. Nemoto, K. Yamabe, T. Ueda, and R. Yozu Can early aortic root surgery prevent further aortic dissection in Marfan syndrome? Interact CardioVasc Thorac Surg, February 1, 2012; 14(2): 171 - 175. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Shrestha, H. Baraki, I. Maeding, S. Fitzner, S. Sarikouch, N. Khaladj, C. Hagl, and A. Haverich Long-term results after aortic valve-sparing operation (David I) Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, January 1, 2012; 41(1): 56 - 62. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 H. Tanaka, H. Ogino, H. Matsuda, K. Minatoya, H. Sasaki, and Y. Iba Midterm Outcome of Valve-Sparing Aortic Root Replacement in Inherited Connective Tissue Disorders Ann. Thorac. Surg., November 1, 2011; 92(5): 1646 - 1650. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
N. D. Patel, G. J. Arnaoutakis, T. J. George, J. G. Allen, D. E. Alejo, H. C. Dietz, D. E. Cameron, and L. A. Vricella Valve-Sparing Aortic Root Replacement in Loeys-Dietz Syndrome Ann. Thorac. Surg., August 1, 2011; 92(2): 556 - 561. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 U. Benedetto, G. Melina, J. J. M. Takkenberg, A. Roscitano, E. Angeloni, and R. Sinatra Surgical management of aortic root disease in Marfan syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis Heart, June 15, 2011; 97(12): 955 - 958. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. E. David The aortic valve-sparing operation J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., March 1, 2011; 141(3): 613 - 615. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 E. Lansac, I. Di Centa, E. Arnaud-Crozat, O. Bouchot, F. Doguet, R. Hacini, R. Demaria, D. Chatel, G. Sleilaty, and M. Debauchez Remodeling of the aortic root combined to an expansible aortic ring annuloplasty MMCTS, January 1, 2011; 2011(0401): mmcts.2006.001958 - mmcts.2006.001958. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. E. David, M. Maganti, and S. Armstrong Aortic root aneurysm: Principles of repair and long-term follow-up J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., December 1, 2010; 140(6_suppl): S14 - S19. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Y. Miyahara, S. Kasahara, M. Takagaki, and S. Sano Successful aortic reimplantation in a three-year-old child with Marfan syndrome Interact CardioVasc Thorac Surg, August 1, 2010; 11(2): 218 - 220. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. Kerendi, R. A. Guyton, J. D. Vega, P. D. Kilgo, and E. P. Chen Early Results of Valve-Sparing Aortic Root Replacement in High-Risk Clinical Scenarios Ann. Thorac. Surg., February 1, 2010; 89(2): 471 - 478. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Forteza, J. De Diego, J. Centeno, M. J. Lopez, E. Perez, C. Martin, V. Sanchez, J. J. Rufilanchas, and J. Cortina Aortic Valve-Sparing in 37 Patients With Marfan Syndrome: Midterm Results With David Operation Ann. Thorac. Surg., January 1, 2010; 89(1): 93 - 96. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Sauer, M. A. Borger, J. Seeburger, and F. W. Mohr Successful Surgical Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation, Mitral Regurgitation, and Aortic Root Aneurysm in a Patient With Classical Type Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome Ann. Thorac. Surg., January 1, 2010; 89(1): 273 - 275. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Ono, H. Goerler, D. Boethig, M. Westhoff-Bleck, and T. Breymann Current Surgical Management of Ascending Aortic Aneurysm in Children and Young Adults Ann. Thorac. Surg., November 1, 2009; 88(5): 1527 - 1533. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. M. Sheikh and T. E. David Aortic Valve-Sparing Operations: Dealing With the Coronary Artery That is Too Close to the Aortic Annulus Ann. Thorac. Surg., September 1, 2009; 88(3): 1026 - 1028. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. S. Jeong, K.-H. Kim, and H. Ahn Long-Term Results of the Leaflet Extension Technique in Aortic Regurgitation: Thirteen Years of Experience in a Single Center Ann. Thorac. Surg., July 1, 2009; 88(1): 83 - 89. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. D. Everitt, N. Pinto, J. A. Hawkins, M. B. Mitchell, P. C. Kouretas, and A. T. Yetman Cardiovascular surgery in children with Marfan syndrome or Loeys-Dietz syndrome J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., June 1, 2009; 137(6): 1327 - 1333. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
I. V. Volguina, D. C. Miller, S. A. LeMaire, L. C. Palmero, X. L. Wang, H. M. Connolly, T. M. Sundt III, J. E. Bavaria, H. C. Dietz, D. M. Milewicz, et al. Valve-sparing and valve-replacing techniques for aortic root replacement in patients with Marfan syndrome: Analysis of early outcome. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., May 1, 2009; 137(5): 1124 - 1132. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. J. Hess Jr, P. K. Harman, C. T. Klodell, T. M. Beaver, M. T. Bologna, P. Mikhail, C. G. Tribble, and T. D. Martin Early Outcomes Using the Florida Sleeve Repair for Correction of Aortic Insufficiency due to Root Aneurysms Ann. Thorac. Surg., April 1, 2009; 87(4): 1161 - 1169. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. Formigari, G. Michielon, M. C. Digilio, G. Piacentini, A. Carotti, A. Giardini, R. M. Di Donato, and B. Marino Genetic syndromes and congenital heart defects: how is surgical management affected? Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, April 1, 2009; 35(4): 606 - 614. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
I. V. Volguina, D. C. Miller, S. A. LeMaire, L. C. Palmero, X. L. Wang, H. M. Connolly, T. M. Sundt III, J. E. Bavaria, H. C. Dietz, D. M. Milewicz, et al. Valve-sparing and valve-replacing techniques for aortic root replacement in patients with Marfan syndrome: analysis of early outcome. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., March 1, 2009; 137(3): 641 - 649. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Komiya, N. Tamura, G. Sakaguchi, and T. Kobayashi Modified partial aortic root remodeling in acute type A aortic dissection Interact CardioVasc Thorac Surg, March 1, 2009; 8(3): 306 - 309. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. Goland and U. Elkayam Cardiovascular Problems in Pregnant Women With Marfan Syndrome Circulation, February 3, 2009; 119(4): 619 - 623. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Hanke, E. I. Charitos, U. Stierle, D. Robinson, A. Gorski, H.-H. Sievers, and M. Misfeld Factors associated with the development of aortic valve regurgitation over time after two different techniques of valve-sparing aortic root surgery J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., February 1, 2009; 137(2): 314 - 319. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Tourmousoglou and C. Rokkas Is aortic valve-sparing operation or replacement with a composite graft the best option for aortic root and ascending aortic aneurysm? Interact CardioVasc Thorac Surg, January 1, 2009; 8(1): 134 - 147. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. Roubertie, W. B. Ali, O. Raisky, D. Tamisier, D. Sidi, and P. R. Vouhe Aortic root replacement in children: a word of caution about valve-sparing procedures Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, January 1, 2009; 35(1): 136 - 140. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 C. A. Nienaber, I. Akin, R. Erbel, and A. Haverich CHAPTER 31 Diseases of the Aorta and Trauma to the Aorta and the Heart ESC Textbook of Cardiovascular Medicine, January 1, 2009; 2(1): med-9780199566990-chapter - med-9780199566990-chapter. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. Girdauskas, T. Kuntze, M. A. Borger, V. Falk, and F. W. Mohr Distal Aortic Reinterventions After Root Surgery in Marfan Patients Ann. Thorac. Surg., December 1, 2008; 86(6): 1815 - 1819. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Katayama, N. Umetani, S. Sugiura, and T. Hisada The sinus of Valsalva relieves abnormal stress on aortic valve leaflets by facilitating smooth closure. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., December 1, 2008; 136(6): 1528 - 1535. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. J. J. Aalberts, T. W. Waterbolk, J. P. van Tintelen, H. L. Hillege, P. W. Boonstra, and M. P. van den Berg Prophylactic aortic root surgery in patients with Marfan syndrome: 10 years' experience with a protocol based on body surface area Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, September 1, 2008; 34(3): 589 - 594. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
N. D. Patel, E. S. Weiss, D. E. Alejo, L. U. Nwakanma, J. A. Williams, H. C. Dietz, P. J. Spevak, V. L. Gott, L. A. Vricella, and D. E. Cameron Aortic Root Operations for Marfan Syndrome: A Comparison of the Bentall and Valve-Sparing Procedures Ann. Thorac. Surg., June 1, 2008; 85(6): 2003 - 2011. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 H. Ogino, K. Minatoya, H. Matsuda, and H. Sasaki Easy Technique for Placing Anchoring Sutures for Aortic Root Reimplantation Asian Cardiovascular and Thoracic Annals, April 1, 2008; 16(2): 162 - 163. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 T. E. David Aortic Valve Repair and Aortic Valve Sparing Operations , January 1, 2008; 3(2008): 935 - 948. [Full Text]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. Aicher, F. Langer, H. Lausberg, B. Bierbach, and H.-J. Schafers Aortic root remodeling: Ten-year experience with 274 patients. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., October 1, 2007; 134(4): 909 - 915. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. S. Kalkat, I. Rahman, K. Kotidis, B. Davies, and R. S. Bonser Presentation and outcome of Marfan's syndrome patients with dissection and thoraco-abdominal aortic aneurysm Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, August 1, 2007; 32(2): 250 - 254. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. Graham Stuart and A. Williams Marfan's syndrome and the heart Arch. Dis. Child., April 1, 2007; 92(4): 351 - 356. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. G. Svensson, E. H. Blackstone, J. Feng, D. de Oliveira, A. M. Gillinov, M. Thamilarasan, R. A. Grimm, B. Griffin, D. Hammer, T. Williams, et al. Are Marfan Syndrome and Marfanoid Patients Distinguishable on Long-Term Follow-Up? Ann. Thorac. Surg., March 1, 2007; 83(3): 1067 - 1074. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. E. David, C. M. Feindel, G. D. Webb, J. M. Colman, S. Armstrong, and M. Maganti Aortic Valve Preservation in Patients With Aortic Root Aneurysm: Results of the Reimplantation Technique Ann. Thorac. Surg., February 1, 2007; 83(2): S732 - S735. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. C. Miller Valve-Sparing Aortic Root Replacement: Current State of the Art and Where Are We Headed? Ann. Thorac. Surg., February 1, 2007; 83(2): S736 - S739. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. W. Erasmi, H.-H. Sievers, J.F. M. Bechtel, T. Hanke, U. Stierle, and M. Misfeld Remodeling or Reimplantation for Valve-Sparing Aortic Root Surgery? Ann. Thorac. Surg., February 1, 2007; 83(2): S752 - S756. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. Kallenbach, H. Baraki, N. Khaladj, H. Kamiya, C. Hagl, A. Haverich, and M. Karck Aortic Valve-Sparing Operation in Marfan Syndrome: What Do We Know After a Decade? Ann. Thorac. Surg., February 1, 2007; 83(2): S764 - S768. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. Settepani, W. Y. Szeto, D. Pacini, R. De Paulis, L. Chiariello, R. Di Bartolomeo, R. Gallotti, and J. E. Bavaria Reimplantation Valve-Sparing Aortic Root Replacement in Marfan Syndrome Using the Valsalva Conduit: An Intercontinental Multicenter Study Ann. Thorac. Surg., February 1, 2007; 83(2): S769 - S773. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
N C Radu, E W M Kirsch, M-L Hillion, F Lagneau, L Drouet, and D Loisance Embolic and bleeding events after modified Bentall procedure in selected patients Heart, January 1, 2007; 93(1): 107 - 112. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. Kallenbach, M. Karck, and A. Haverich Valve-sparing aortic root replacement: the inclusion (David) technique MMCTS, January 1, 2007; 2007(0507): mmcts.2006.001917 - mmcts.2006.001917. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. Pacini, F. Settepani, R. De Paulis, A. Loforte, S. Nardella, D. Ornaghi, R. Gallotti, L. Chiariello, and R. Di Bartolomeo Early results of valve-sparing reimplantation procedure using the Valsalva conduit: a multicenter study. Ann. Thorac. Surg., September 1, 2006; 82(3): 865 - 871. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. E. David, C. M. Feindel, G. D. Webb, J. M. Colman, S. Armstrong, and M. Maganti Long-term results of aortic valve-sparing operations for aortic root aneurysm. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., August 1, 2006; 132(2): 347 - 354. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. F. Lausberg, D. Aicher, F. Langer, and H.-J. Schafers Aortic valve repair with autologous pericardial patch Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, August 1, 2006; 30(2): 244 - 249. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. A. LeMaire, S. A. Carter, I. V. Volguina, A. T. Laux, D. M. Milewicz, G. W. Borsato, C. K. Cheung, J. Bozinovski, J. M. Markesino, W. K. Vaughn, et al. Spectrum of Aortic Operations in 300 Patients With Confirmed or Suspected Marfan Syndrome Ann. Thorac. Surg., June 1, 2006; 81(6): 2063 - 2078. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. Erbel and H. Eggebrecht Aortic dimensions and the risk of dissection Heart, January 1, 2006; 92(1): 137 - 142. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. F. Lausberg and H.-J. Schafers Valve sparing aortic replacement - root remodeling MMCTS, January 1, 2006; 2006(1110): mmcts.2006.001982 - mmcts.2006.001982. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. A. Vricella, J. A. Williams, W. J. Ravekes, K. W. Holmes, H. C. Dietz, V. L. Gott, and D. E. Cameron Early Experience With Valve-Sparing Aortic Root Replacement in Children Ann. Thorac. Surg., November 1, 2005; 80(5): 1622 - 1627. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. M. Albes, U. A. Stock, and M. Hartrumpf Restitution of the Aortic Valve: What is New, What is Proven, and What is Obsolete? Ann. Thorac. Surg., October 1, 2005; 80(4): 1540 - 1549. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. Kallenbach, M. Karck, D. Pak, R. Salcher, N. Khaladj, R. Leyh, C. Hagl, and A. Haverich Decade of Aortic Valve Sparing Reimplantation: Are We Pushing the Limits Too Far? Circulation, August 30, 2005; 112(9_suppl): I-253 - I-259. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Markl, M. T. Draney, D. C. Miller, J. M. Levin, E. E. Williamson, N. J. Pelc, D. H. Liang, and R. J. Herfkens Time-resolved three-dimensional magnetic resonance velocity mapping of aortic flow in healthy volunteers and patients after valve-sparing aortic root replacement J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., August 1, 2005; 130(2): 456 - 463. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 L. J. Meijboom, F. E. Vos, J. Timmermans, G. H. Boers, A. H. Zwinderman, and B. J.M. Mulder Pregnancy and aortic root growth in the Marfan syndrome: a prospective study Eur. Heart J., May 1, 2005; 26(9): 914 - 920. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. Maselli, A. Montalto, G. Santise, G. Minardi, C. Manzara, and F. Musumeci A normogram to anticipate dimension of neo-sinuses of valsalva in valve-sparing aortic operations Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, May 1, 2005; 27(5): 831 - 835. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. M. Milewicz, H. C. Dietz, and D. C. Miller Treatment of Aortic Disease in Patients With Marfan Syndrome Circulation, March 22, 2005; 111(11): e150 - e157. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
V. Anttila, M. Piaszczynski, B. Mora, I. Hagino, R. V. Lacro, D. Zurakowski, and R. A. Jonas Improved outcome with composite graft versus homograft root replacement for children with aortic root aneurysms Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, March 1, 2005; 27(3): 420 - 424. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. De Paulis, R. Scaffa, S. Forlani, and L. Chiariello The Valsalva graft in aortic valve repair and replacement MMCTS, January 1, 2005; 2005(1129): mmcts.2004.000992 - mmcts.2004.000992. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. Demers and D. C. Miller Simple Modification of "T. David-V" Valve-Sparing Aortic Root Replacement to Create Graft Pseudosinuses Ann. Thorac. Surg., October 1, 2004; 78(4): 1479 - 1481. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. J. Zehr, T. A. Orszulak, C. J. Mullany, A. Matloobi, R. C. Daly, J. A. Dearani, T. M. Sundt III, F. J. Puga, G. K. Danielson, and H. V. Schaff Surgery for Aneurysms of the Aortic Root: A 30-Year Experience Circulation, September 14, 2004; 110(11): 1364 - 1371. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. Kallenbach, T. Oelze, R. Salcher, C. Hagl, M. Karck, R. G. Leyh, and A. Haverich Evolving Strategies for Treatment of Acute Aortic Dissection Type A Circulation, September 14, 2004; 110(11_suppl_1): II-243 - II-249. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Sioris, T. E. David, J. Ivanov, S. Armstrong, and C. M. Feindel Clinical outcomes after separate and composite replacement of the aortic valve and ascending aorta J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., August 1, 2004; 128(2): 260 - 265. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. Furukawa, H. Ohteki, Z.-L. Cao, Y. Narita, Y. Okazaki, S. Ohtsubo, and T. Itoh Evaluation of native valve-sparing aortic root reconstruction with direct imaging-- reimplantation or remodeling? Ann. Thorac. Surg., May 1, 2004; 77(5): 1636 - 1641. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. Kallenbach, R. G. Leyh, R. Salcher, M. Karck, C. Hagl, and A. Haverich Acute aortic dissection versus aortic root aneurysm: comparison of indications for valve sparing aortic root reconstruction Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, May 1, 2004; 25(5): 663 - 670. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Karck, K. Kallenbach, C. Hagl, C. Rhein, R. Leyh, and A. Haverich Aortic root surgery in Marfan syndrome: Comparison of aortic valve-sparing reimplantation versus composite grafting J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., February 1, 2004; 127(2): 391 - 398. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Del Campo Aortic insufficiency in patients with Marfan syndrome: A surgical dilemma J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., January 1, 2004; 127(1): 303 - 304. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Carrel, P. Berdat, M. Pavlovic, S. Sukhanov, L. Englberger, and J.-P. Pfammatter Surgery of the dilated aortic root and ascending aorta in pediatric patients: techniques and results Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, August 1, 2003; 24(2): 249 - 254. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. C. Miller Valve-sparing aortic root replacement in patients with the Marfan syndrome J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., April 1, 2003; 125(4): 773 - 778. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| ANN THORAC SURG | ASIAN CARDIOVASC THORAC ANN | EUR J CARDIOTHORAC SURG |
| J THORAC CARDIOVASC SURG | ICVTS | ALL CTSNet JOURNALS |
