P. Chan1, E. Chan1, D. Chu1 1University Of Pittsburgh School Of Medicine,Cardiothoracic Surgery,Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Introduction: Aortic valve replacement (AVR) has been considered the gold standard for surgical treatment of calcific aortic stenosis (AS). However, the prostheses used for replacement are not perfect. Recently, there has been an influx of techniques to reconstruct the aortic valve. We hypothesize trileaflet aortic valve reconstruction using autologous pericardium (AVRec) is safe and feasible compared to conventional AVR with prostheses.
Methods: In a single quaternary referral institution, 8 patients underwent AVRec with autologous pericardium between January 2015 and July 2016. 6 patients underwent isolated AVRec and 2 patients underwent AVRec + coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). After initiating cardiopulmonary bypass and excising the native diseased valve cusps, the glutaraldehyde-treated pericardium is fashioned into neo-cusps following a template after measurements are done with sizers. To compare AVRec vs. AVR, we performed 1:1 matched AVRec patients with those undergoing conventional AVR+/-CABG according to age, preoperative ejection fraction (EF), aortic valve area (AVA) and baseline creatinine (Cr).
Results: The mean age, preoperative EF, AVA and baseline Cr for AVRec was 68.1±3.6 years, 60.8±1.2%, 0.79±0.07 cm² and 0.96±0.05 vs. for AVR, 65.5±4.4 years, 57.5±1.2%, 0.83±0.02 cm² and 1.0±0.07, respectively. AVRec required longer perfusion and myocardial ischemic times compared to AVR (178.1 and 153.5 minutes, p=.50 vs. 119.6 and 97.6 minutes, p=.015). Post-operative EF did not change significantly in all patients undergoing either AVRec or AVR. Length of stay (LOS) was also not statistically different, with both groups being discharged in a mean of 6.5 days (p=.959). All AVRec patients had either none or trace aortic insufficiency (AI) on immediate and 1 to 3 month postoperative echocardiography, with no valvular failures or reoperations. Aortic valve gradients were slightly improved with AVRec compared to AVR with peak gradients being 11 vs 17.4 mmHg (p=.093), respectively, and mean gradients being 6.75 vs, 9.4 mmHg (p=.171), respectively (Table 1). There were no differences in postoperative complications such as atrial fibrillation, acute kidney injury and pleural effusions.
Conclusions: Aortic valve reconstruction requires no use of foreign material. Short-term postoperative results for AVRec were comparable to conventional AVR with none or trace AI. This novel technique is a feasible and safe option for the treatment of calcified AS.