http://repub.eur.nl/res/aut/6443/ List of Publications en http://repub.eur.nl/static-eur/img/logo.png http://repub.eur.nl http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/27803/ 2010-08-01T00:00:00Z The ideal substitute for aortic valve replacement in patients with aortic valve disease is not known. Our hypothesis was that the regulatory and adaptive properties of a living valve substitute could improve the long-term outcomes in patients. We therefore compared these outcomes after autograft aortic root replacement (Ross procedure) versus homograft aortic root replacement in adults. Male and female patients (<69 years) requiring aortic valve surgery were randomly assigned in a one-to-one ratio to receive an autograft or a homograft aortic root replacement in one centre in the UK. The random allocation sequence was computer generated. Treatment was not masked. The primary endpoint was survival of patients at 10 years after surgery. This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN03530985. 228 patients were randomly assigned to receive an autograft or a homograft aortic root replacement. 12 patients were excluded because they were younger than 18 years; 108 in each group received the surgery they were assigned to and were analysed. There was one (<1) perioperative death in the autograft group versus three (3) in the homograft group (p=0·621). At 10 years, four patients died in the autograft group versus 15 in the homograft group. Actuarial survival at 10 years was 97 (SD 2) in the autograft group versus 83 (4) in the homograft group. Hazard ratio for death in the homograft group was 4·61 (95 CI 1·71-16·03; p=0·0060). Survival of patients in the autograft group was similar to that in an age-matched and sex-matched British population (96). Our findings support the hypothesis that a living valve implanted in the aortic position can significantly improve the long-term outcomes in patients. Funding Magdi Yacoub Institute. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/28017/ 2010-01-26T00:00:00Z Objectives: The aims of this study were to compare long-term results after homograft versus Freestyle (Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, Minnesota) aortic root replacement. Background: The ideal substitute for aortic root replacement remains undetermined. Methods: Between 1997 and 2005, 166 patients (age 65 ± 8 years) undergoing total aortic root replacement were randomized to receive a homograft (n = 76) or a Freestyle bioprosthesis (n = 90). Six patients randomly assigned to homograft crossed over to Freestyle because of unavailability of suitably sized homografts. Median follow-up was 7.6 years (maximum 11 years; 1,035 patient-years). "Evolving" aortic valve dysfunction was defined as aortic regurgitation ≥2/4 and/or peak gradient >20 mm Hg. Results: Patient characteristics were comparable between groups. Concomitant procedures were performed in 44% and 47% of Freestyle and homograft patients, respectively (p = 0.5). Overall hospital mortality was 4.8% (1% for isolated root replacement). Eight-year survival was 80 ± 5% in the Freestyle group versus 77 ± 6% in the homograft group (p = 0.9). Freedom from need for reoperation at 8 years was significantly higher after Freestyle root replacement (100 ± 0% vs. 90 ± 5% after homograft replacement; p = 0.02). All reoperations were secondary to structural valve deterioration (n = 6). At last echocardiographic follow-up, actuarial freedom from evolving aortic valve dysfunction was 86 ± 5% for Freestyle bioprostheses versus 37 ± 7% for homografts (p < 0.001). Clinically, freedom from New York Heart Association functional class III to IV and freedom from valve-related complications were similar between groups (p = 0.7 and p = 0.9, respectively). Conclusions: In this patient group, late survival is similar after homograft versus Freestyle root replacement. However, Freestyle aortic root replacement is associated with significantly less progressive aortic valve dysfunction and a lower need for reoperations. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/24283/ 2009-12-01T00:00:00Z Background: Surgical intervention for persistent active native aortic valve endocarditis (NVE) remains challenging. We analyzed our combined experience with allografts and mechanical prostheses (MP) in NVE operations. Methods: Between 1980 and 2002, 138 patients (81% males) underwent aortic valve replacement for NVE in 2 centers (106 allografts; 32 MPs). Perioperative characteristics and early and late morbidity and mortality were analyzed. Results: Mean age was 47 years (range, 14 to 76 years), and 34% required emergency surgery. Abscess rate was 38% for allografts vs 18% for MPs. Concomitant mitral valve replacement was required in 38% MP patients and in 5% allograft patients. Hospital mortality was 8% (n = 11; p = 0.25): 10 allograft patients (9%) and 1 MP patient (3%). During a mean 8-year follow-up (range, 0 to 25 years) 33 patients died: 22 allograft (24%) and 11 MP patients (21%; p = 0.14). Survival at 15 years was 59% ± 6% for allograft patients and 66% ± 9% for MP patients (p = 0.68). Late recurrent endocarditis developed in 6 allograft patients and 1 MP patient (p = 0.29). Overall 15-year freedom from reoperation was 76% ± 9% for allografts and 93% ± 6% for MPs (p = 0.02). Conclusions: Mechanical prostheses have comparable rates of midterm survival and freedom from recurrent infection. However, this is in combination with extensive excision of destructive tissue in a specific patient subset. Allograft reoperation rates increase with time. The importance of the mechanical prosthesis in NVE might be established in the coming years. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/19343/ 2009-01-20T00:00:00Z Background - Reports on outcome after the Ross procedure are limited by small study size and show variable durability results. A systematic review of evidence on outcome after the Ross procedure may improve insight into outcome and potential determinants. Methods and Results - A systematic review of reports published from January 2000 to January 2008 on outcome after the Ross procedure was undertaken. Thirty-nine articles meeting the inclusion criteria were allocated to 3 categories: (1) consecutive series, (2) adult patient series, and (3) pediatric patient series. With the use of an inverse variance approach, pooled morbidity and mortality rates were obtained. Pooled early mortality for consecutive, adult, and pediatric patients series was 3.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.8 to 4.9), 3.2% (95% CI, 1.5 to 6.6), and 4.2% (95% CI, 1.4 to 11.5). Autograft deterioration rates were 1.15% (95% CI, 1.06 to 2.06), 0.78% (95% CI, 0.43 to 1.40), and 1.38%/patient-year (95% CI, 0.68 to 2.80), respectively, and for right ventricular outflow tract conduit were 0.91% (95% CI, 0.56 to 1.47), 0.55% (95% CI, 0.26 to 1.17), and 1.60%/patient-year (95% CI, 0.84 to 3.05), respectively. For studies with mean patient age >18 years versus mean patient age ≤ 18 years, pooled autograft and right ventricular outflow tract deterioration rates were 1.14% (95% CI, 0.83 to 1.57) versus 1.69% (95% CI, 1.02 to 2.79) and 0.65% (95% CI, 0.41 to 1.02) versus 1.66%/patient-year (95% CI, 0.98 to 2.82), respectively. Conclusions - The Ross procedure provides satisfactory results for both children and young adults. Durability limitations become apparent by the end of the first postoperative decade, in particular in younger patients.