These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Early and 1-year outcomes of aortic root surgery in patients with Marfan syndrome: a prospective, multicenter, comparative study.
    Author: Coselli JS, Volguina IV, LeMaire SA, Sundt TM, Connolly HM, Stephens EH, Schaff HV, Milewicz DM, Vricella LA, Dietz HC, Minard CG, Miller DC, Aortic Valve Operative Outcomes in Marfan Patients Study Group.
    Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg; 2014 Jun; 147(6):1758-66, 1767.e1-4. PubMed ID: 24655904.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: To compare the 1-year results after aortic valve-sparing (AVS) or valve-replacing (AVR) aortic root replacement from a prospective, international registry of 316 patients with Marfan syndrome (MFS). METHODS: Patients underwent AVS (n = 239, 76%) or AVR (n = 77, 24%) aortic root replacement at 19 participating centers from 2005 to 2010. One-year follow-up data were complete for 312 patients (99%), with imaging findings available for 293 (94%). The time-to-events were compared between groups using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Two patients (0.6%)--1 in each group--died within 30 days. No significant differences were found in early major adverse valve-related events (MAVRE; P = .6). Two AVS patients required early reoperation for coronary artery complications. The 1-year survival rates were similar in the AVR (97%) and AVS (98%) groups; the procedure type was not significantly associated with any valve-related events. At 1 year and beyond, aortic regurgitation of at least moderate severity (≥2+) was present in 16 patients in the AVS group (7%) but in no patients in the AVR group (P = .02). One AVS patient required late AVR. CONCLUSIONS: AVS aortic root replacement was not associated with greater 30-day mortality or morbidity rates than AVR root replacement. At 1 year, no differences were found in survival, valve-related morbidity, or MAVRE between the AVS and AVR groups. Of concern, 7% of AVS patients developed grade ≥2+ aortic regurgitation, emphasizing the importance of 5 to 10 years of follow-up to learn the long-term durability of AVS versus AVR root replacement in patients with MFS.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]