No abstract

Our new repair-oriented BAV classification. Range of commissural orientation 120 to 180 . CENTRAL MESSAGEWe present our new repairoriented BAV classification, which better describes the complex 3-dimensional geometry/anatomy of BAV and aims at facilitating surgical repair.See Commentaries on pages 93 and 95.

OBJECTIVES To compare long-term outcomes after bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) repair utilizing the Cabrol annuloplasty versus valve sparing Reimplantation technique. METHODS From 1996 to 2018, 340 consecutive patients underwent BAV repair. Eighty underwent Cabrol annuloplasty and 189 underwent Reimplantation. Exclusion criteria were re-repairs (n = 6), active endocarditis (n = 4), no annuloplasty (n = 41) and ring or suture annuloplasty (n = 20). We compared both groups for survival, reoperations, valve related events and recurrent severe aortic regurgitation (AR > 2+). Inverse probability weighting (IPW) was used to balance the 2 groups. Cox regression analysis was used to identify outcome predictors. RESULTS After weighting, pre- and intraoperative characteristics were similar between groups, except for aorta replacement techniques and operative time, which was longer in the Reimplantation group (P < 0.001). At 12 years, overall survival was similar between groups (IPW: Cabrol 97 ± 2% vs Reimplantation 94 ± 3%, P = 0.52). Freedom from reoperation and freedom from AR > 2+ were significantly lower in the Cabrol group (reoperation IPW: 69 ± 9% vs 91 ± 4%, P = 0.004 and AR > 2+ IPW: 71 ± 8% vs 97 ± 2%, P < 0.001). The Reimplantation technique was the only independent predictor of reoperation (hazard ratio 0.31; confidence interval 0.19–0.7; P = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS In this study, comparing 2 annuloplasty strategies for BAV repair, we found statistically significant differences in long-term durability favouring the Reimplantation technique, and no differences in overall survival. The results support our current strategy of Reimplantation technique and repair of AR in patients with BAV. Cabrol annuloplasty is obsolete and should be generally abandoned in patients undergoing BAV repair for AR.

OBJECTIVES Our goal was to analyse the influence of preoperative aortic regurgitation (AR) on the necessity of cusp repair during valve-sparing reimplantation (VSR). We focused on patients with tricuspid aortic valves (TAV) and evaluated the impact of AR and cusp repair on long-term outcomes. METHODS From March 1998 to December 2018, a total of 512 consecutive patients underwent VSR at our institution; of these, 303 had a TAV. The mean age was 53 ± 15 years, and the median follow-up was 6.12 years. The rate and type of cusp repair were analysed based on preoperative AR. Time-to-event analysis was performed, as well as risk of death, reoperation and AR recurrence. RESULTS Cusp repair was necessary in 168 (55.4%) patients; the rate rose significantly as AR grade increased (P < 0.001). In-hospital mortality was 1% (n = 3). At 5 and 10 years, overall survival was 92 ± 2% and 75 ± 5%, respectively. Freedom from valve reoperation was 95 ± 2% and 90 ± 3%. Freedom from AR >2+ and AR >1+ at 10 years was 88 ± 4% and 70.4 ± 4.6%, respectively. Independent predictors of death included age, New York Heart Association functional class and type-A aortic dissection. Predictors of AR greater than mild included previous cardiac surgery and severe preoperative AR. CONCLUSION In patients with TAV receiving VSR, the necessity of cusp repair increased with the degree of preoperative AR. Preoperative AR and cusp repair do not impact long-term survival and aortic valve reoperation, but severe preoperative AR and multiple cusp repair increase the risk of recurrent moderate-to-severe AR. Overall, cusp repair seems to attenuate the negative impact of preoperative AR for at least 1 decade in a majority of patients.