P212. Mid-term Outcomes of Y Incision Annular Root Enlargement Compared to Traditional Root Enlargement Techniques.
Presented During: POD Abstracts (Available for viewing in the exhibit hall for the duration of the meeting)
Houston Methodist Hospital
Houston, TX
United States - Contact Me
I am a Postdoctoral Research Fellow in Cardiothoracic Surgery. Interested in surgical outcomes involving aortic valve, aortic root, and cardiac tumors. Huge Potterhead!
Thursday, April 25, 2024: 5:38 PM - 7:00 PM
Sheraton Times Square
Room: Central Park
Description
Objective:
Patient prosthesis mismatch remains a significant problem following surgical aortic valve replacement in up to half the patients, affecting long-term valve durability and outcomes. The Y-incision root enlargement technique was recently proposed to enlarge the annulus by 3-4 valve sizes. We compare our early results using this technique with traditional root enlargement (Nicks or Manougian).
Methods:
From 2017-2023, we retrospectively reviewed our institutional cardiac surgery database, patient medical records, and internal surgical valve database to compare all patients undergoing root enlargement operations with or without other combined cardiac operations. Patients were categorized based on the operative techniques. Patient demographics, procedural characteristics, and operative outcomes were reported at 30 days and one year between the two groups. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression was used to investigate the association between one-year mortality and root enlargement techniques.
Results:
Among the 111 patients in our cohort, 60 underwent the traditional, and 51 underwent Y-incision root enlargement. The mean age was 64.7±11.8 years; 68% (76/111) were females, and (29/111) 26% had a prior surgical aortic valve replacement. Most operations (95%) employed a sternotomy, with 78% receiving a bioprosthetic valve and 22% a mechanical valve. Isolated AVR was performed in 69% (77/111) of the cohort. Patients undergoing Y-incision annuloplasty had a higher prevalence of endocarditis (18%(9/51) vs 2%(1/60), p<0.003), former sternotomy (33% (17/51) vs 23%(14/60)), and prior MI (16%(8/51) vs 5%(3/60)) compared to the traditional group. Compared to the traditional group, the increase in implanted valve size was significantly higher in the Y-incision group, 4.1mm compared to 2.6mm (p<0.001), an aortic cross-clamp time of 135 min versus 105 min (p:<0.001), and a cardiopulmonary bypass time of 182 min versus 130 minutes(p<0.001). Overall, 30-day post-operative complications were not statistically different between the two groups. The postoperative mean gradient across the aortic valve was 8.1mmHg in the traditional group and 10.1mmHg in the Y enlargement group (p=0.23). Similarly, the effective orifice area was 1.8cm2 in the Y-incision group compared to 1.6cm2 in the traditional group (p=0.05). Multivariable analysis, adjusting for age, gender, endocarditis, and prior MI, showed no significant difference in mortality hazards at 30 days (p:0.14) and one year (p:0.26) between the two procedures.
Conclusions:
Our experience with 51 patients undergoing Y root enlargement shows similar perioperative outcomes after adjusting for comorbidities compared to traditional root enlargement techniques. The Y enlargement cohort was associated with a longer operative time and a more significant increase in aortic valve size. Further investigations are warranted to validate these early results and assess long-term effects.
Authors
Fatima Qamar (1), Sahar Samimi (2), Marcel Gugala (2), Muskan Khan (2), Ahmed Ahmed (2), Taha Hatab (2), Rody Bou Chaaya (2), Neal Kleiman (2), Sachin Goel (3), Syed Zaid (4), Ross Reul (2), Mahesh Ramchandani (2), Michael Reardon (2), Marvin Atkins (2)
Institutions
(1) N/A, N/A, (2) Houston Methodist Hospital, Houston, TX, (3) Houston Methodist, N/A, (4) Houston Methodist Debakey Heart and Vascular Center, Houston, TX
Patient prosthesis mismatch remains a significant problem following surgical aortic valve replacement in up to half the patients, affecting long-term valve durability and outcomes. The Y-incision root enlargement technique was recently proposed to enlarge the annulus by 3-4 valve sizes. We compare our early results using this technique with traditional root enlargement (Nicks or Manougian).
Methods:
From 2017-2023, we retrospectively reviewed our institutional cardiac surgery database, patient medical records, and internal surgical valve database to compare all patients undergoing root enlargement operations with or without other combined cardiac operations. Patients were categorized based on the operative techniques. Patient demographics, procedural characteristics, and operative outcomes were reported at 30 days and one year between the two groups. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression was used to investigate the association between one-year mortality and root enlargement techniques.
Results:
Among the 111 patients in our cohort, 60 underwent the traditional, and 51 underwent Y-incision root enlargement. The mean age was 64.7±11.8 years; 68% (76/111) were females, and (29/111) 26% had a prior surgical aortic valve replacement. Most operations (95%) employed a sternotomy, with 78% receiving a bioprosthetic valve and 22% a mechanical valve. Isolated AVR was performed in 69% (77/111) of the cohort. Patients undergoing Y-incision annuloplasty had a higher prevalence of endocarditis (18%(9/51) vs 2%(1/60), p<0.003), former sternotomy (33% (17/51) vs 23%(14/60)), and prior MI (16%(8/51) vs 5%(3/60)) compared to the traditional group. Compared to the traditional group, the increase in implanted valve size was significantly higher in the Y-incision group, 4.1mm compared to 2.6mm (p<0.001), an aortic cross-clamp time of 135 min versus 105 min (p:<0.001), and a cardiopulmonary bypass time of 182 min versus 130 minutes(p<0.001). Overall, 30-day post-operative complications were not statistically different between the two groups. The postoperative mean gradient across the aortic valve was 8.1mmHg in the traditional group and 10.1mmHg in the Y enlargement group (p=0.23). Similarly, the effective orifice area was 1.8cm2 in the Y-incision group compared to 1.6cm2 in the traditional group (p=0.05). Multivariable analysis, adjusting for age, gender, endocarditis, and prior MI, showed no significant difference in mortality hazards at 30 days (p:0.14) and one year (p:0.26) between the two procedures.
Conclusions:
Our experience with 51 patients undergoing Y root enlargement shows similar perioperative outcomes after adjusting for comorbidities compared to traditional root enlargement techniques. The Y enlargement cohort was associated with a longer operative time and a more significant increase in aortic valve size. Further investigations are warranted to validate these early results and assess long-term effects.
Authors
Fatima Qamar (1), Sahar Samimi (2), Marcel Gugala (2), Muskan Khan (2), Ahmed Ahmed (2), Taha Hatab (2), Rody Bou Chaaya (2), Neal Kleiman (2), Sachin Goel (3), Syed Zaid (4), Ross Reul (2), Mahesh Ramchandani (2), Michael Reardon (2), Marvin Atkins (2)
Institutions
(1) N/A, N/A, (2) Houston Methodist Hospital, Houston, TX, (3) Houston Methodist, N/A, (4) Houston Methodist Debakey Heart and Vascular Center, Houston, TX
Presentation Duration
PODS will be on display in the exhibit hall for the duration of the meeting during exhibit hall hours. PODS will also be available for viewing on the meeting website. There is no formal presentation associated with your POD, but we encourage you to visit the PODS area during breaks to connect with those viewing.