Aortic valve performance after remodelling versus reimplantation in a propensity-matched comparison

Result code in IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00023884%3A_____%2F24%3A00010012" target="_blank" >RIV/00023884:_____/24:00010012 - isvavai.cz</a>

Alternative codes found

RIV/00216224:14110/24:00136840 RIV/00216208:11110/24:10482743 RIV/00216208:11130/24:10482743 RIV/00216208:11150/24:10482743 and 3 more

Result on the web

<a href="https://academic.oup.com/ejcts/article/66/2/ezae234/7727652?login=true" target="_blank" >https://academic.oup.com/ejcts/article/66/2/ezae234/7727652?login=true</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ejcts/ezae234" target="_blank" >10.1093/ejcts/ezae234</a>

Result language

angličtina

Original language name

Aortic valve performance after remodelling versus reimplantation in a propensity-matched comparison

Original language description

OBJECTIVES: Both aortic root remodelling and aortic valve (AV) reimplantation have been used for valve-sparing root replacement in patients with aortic root aneurysm with or without aortic regurgitation. There is no clear evidence to support one technique over the another. This study aimed to compare remodelling with basal ring annuloplasty versus reimplantation on a multicentre level with the use of propensity-score matching. METHODS: This was a retrospective international multicentre study of patients undergoing remodelling or reimplantation between 2010 and 2021. Twenty-three preoperative covariates (including root dimensions and valve characteristics) were used for propensity-score matching. Perioperative outcomes were analysed along with longer-term freedom from AV reoperation/reintervention and other major valve-related events. RESULTS: Throughout the study period, 297 patients underwent remodelling and 281 had reimplantation. Using propensity-score matching, 112 pairs were selected and further compared. We did not find a statistically significant difference in perioperative outcomes between the matched groups. Patients after remodelling had significantly higher reintervention risk than after reimplantation over the median follow-up of 6 years (P = 0.016). The remodelling technique (P = 0.02), need for decalcification (P = 0.03) and degree of immediate postoperative AV regurgitation (P < 0.001) were defined as independent risk factors for later AV reintervention. After exclusion of patients with worse than mild AV regurgitation immediately after repair, both techniques functioned comparably (P = 0.089). CONCLUSIONS: AV reimplantation was associated with better valve function in longer-term postoperatively than remodelling. If optimal immediate repair outcome was achieved, both techniques provided comparable AV function.

Czech name

—

Czech description

—

Type

J_imp - Article in a specialist periodical, which is included in the Web of Science database

CEP classification

—

OECD FORD branch

30201 - Cardiac and Cardiovascular systems

Project

—

Continuities

N - Vyzkumna aktivita podporovana z neverejnych zdroju

Publication year

2024

Confidentiality

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Name of the periodical

European Journal Of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery

ISSN

1010-7940

e-ISSN

—

Volume of the periodical

66

Issue of the periodical within the volume

2

Country of publishing house

GB - UNITED KINGDOM

Number of pages

9

Pages from-to

—

UT code for WoS article

001284515800001

EID of the result in the Scopus database

2-s2.0-85199794600