• IMA sites
  • IMAJ services
  • IMA journals
  • Follow us
  • Alternate Text Alternate Text
עמוד בית
Mon, 15.07.24

Search results


March 2008
B. Sheick-Yousif, A. Sheinfield, S. Tager, P. Ghosh, S. Priesman, A.K. Smolinsky and E. Raanani

Background: As the shortcomings of the Bentall operation and its variants in the Marfan syndrome have become apparent, the recent cusp-sparing techniques (remodeling or reimplantation) bear promise of better mid-term and long-term outcomes.

Objective: To examine the results of aortic root surgery in patients with Marfan syndrome.

Methods: During the period March 1994 to September 2007, 220 patients underwent aortic valve-sparing surgery; 20 were Marfan patients (group 1) who were compared with another 20 Marfan patients undergoing composite aortic root replacement (group 2). Fourteen patients had aortic dissection and 26 had thoracic aortic aneurysm. There were 31 males and 9 females with a mean age of 37.9 ± 13.8 years. In group 1, reimplantation was used in 13 patients, remodeling in 4, and aortic valve repair with sinotubular junction replacement in 3. In group 2, a mechanical valve conduit was used. Mean logistic Euroscore was 12.27 ± 14.6% for the whole group, five of whom were emergent cases

Results: Group 2 had more previous cardiac procedures compared to group 1 (9 vs. 2, P = 0.03) and shorter cross-clamp time (122 ± 27.1 vs. 153.9 ± 23.7 minutes, P = 0.0004). Overall mortality was 10%. Early mortality was 10% in group 2 and 5% in group 1(NS). Mean follow-up time was 25 months for group 2 and 53 months for group 1. Three patients were reoperated; all had undergone the remodeling. Five year freedom from reoperation and death was 86% and 90% in group 2 and 70% and 95% in group 1 (P = 0.6, P = 0.6), respectively.

Conclusions: Late survival of patients with Marfan syndrome was similar in both groups. Root reconstruction tends towards a higher incidence of late reoperations if the remodeling technique is used. We now prefer to use the reimplantation technique.
 

April 2007
D. Spiegelstein, P.l Ghosh, L. Sternik, S. Tager, A. Shinfeld and E. Raanani

Background: During the last decade new surgical techniques for mitral valve repair were developed. We have been using those techniques in order to widen the spectrum of patients eligible for MV[1] repair.

Objectives: To assess the operative and mid-term results a wide variety of surgical techniques.

Methods: From January 2004 through December 2006, 213 patients underwent MV repair in our institution. Valve pathology was degenerative in 123 patients (58%), ischemic in 37 (17%), showed annular dilatation in 25 (12%), endocarditis in 16 (8%), was rheumatic in 13 (6%), and due to other causes in 14 (7%). Preoperative New York Heart Association score was 2.35 ± 0.85 and ejection fraction 53 ± 12%. Isolated MV repair was performed in 90 patients (42%) and 158 concomitant procedures were done in 123 patients (58%). A wide variety of surgical techniques was used in order to increase the number of repairs compared to valve replacement.

Results: There were 7 in-hospital deaths (3.3%). NYHA[2] class improved from 2.19 ± 0.85 to 1.4 ± 0.6, and freedom from reoperation was 100%. Echocardiography follow-up of patients with degenerative MV revealed that 93% of the patients (115/123) were free of mitral regurgitation greater than 2+ grade. In patients operated by a minimal invasive approach there were no conversions to sternotomy, no late deaths, none required reoperation, and 96% were free of MR[3] greater than 2+ grade. The use of multiple surgical techniques enabled the repair of more than 80% of pure MR cases.

Conclusions: MV repair provides good perioperative and mid-term results, and supports the preference for MV repair over replacement, when feasible. Multiple valve repair techniques tailored to different pathologies increases the feasibility of mitral repair.







[1] MV = mitral valve

[2] NYHA = New York Heart Association

[3] MR = mitral regurgitation


Legal Disclaimer: The information contained in this website is provided for informational purposes only, and should not be construed as legal or medical advice on any matter.
The IMA is not responsible for and expressly disclaims liability for damages of any kind arising from the use of or reliance on information contained within the site.
© All rights to information on this site are reserved and are the property of the Israeli Medical Association. Privacy policy

2 Twin Towers, 35 Jabotinsky, POB 4292, Ramat Gan 5251108 Israel