Dataset Information

Degenerated BioBentall graft with failing stentless bioprosthesis and dissection of the aortic conduit treated with a bail-out valve in valve procedure: a case report.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The Bentall procedure is commonly performed to treat combined aortic valve and ascending aorta disease requiring surgical correction. Although the technique has been shown to provide favourable long-term outcomes, both the valvular prosthesis and the aortic conduit can go through structural degeneration. Increasing use of the biological prosthesis opened to percutaneous treatment of valvular deterioration according to a valve-in-valve (ViV) technique. On the contrary, damages of the tube graft are normally referred to repeated surgical operation.

Case summary

In the present case, a patient with a biological Bentall graft was diagnosed with severely deteriorated stentless aortic prosthesis and dissection of the conduit arising from a tube wall tear closely located to the valvular plane. The attempted redo surgery was technically unfeasible because of severe mediastinal adhesions; therefore, a ViV procedure with a balloon expandable transcatheter heart valve was performed in order to contemporarily treat the valve prothesis dysfunction and the aortic tube dissection. No procedure-related complications occurred and subsequent aortic computed tomography angiography showed the sealing of the graft wall false lumen.

Discussion

Surgical reintervention remains the treatment of choice for degeneration of a previous Bentall surgery, especially when damages of the aortic conduit exist. Nevertheless, when surgery has to be discarded, ViV can be a reliable option as a bail-out strategy to deal with combined aortic valve dysfunction and tube dissection.

SUBMITTER: Fineschi M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9257790 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe implantation of stentless valves is technically demanding and the outcome may depend on the performance of surgeons. We studied systematically the role of surgeons and other possible determinants for mid-term survival, postoperative gradients and Quality of Life (QoL) after aortic valve replacement (AVR) with Freestyle stentless bioprostheses.MethodsBetween 1996 and 2003, 587 patients (mean 75 years) underwent AVR with stentless Medtronic Freestyle(R) bioprostheses. Follow-up was 99% complete. Determinants of morbidity, mortality, survival time and QoL were evaluated by multiple, time-related, regression analysis. Risk models were built for all sections of the Nottingham Health Profile (NHP): energy, pain, emotional reaction, sleep, social isolation and physical mobilityResultsActuarial freedom from aortic valve re-operation, structural valve deterioration, non-structural valve dysfunction, prosthetic valve endocarditis and thromboembolic events at 6 years were 95.9 +/- 2.1%, 100%, 98.7 +/- 0.5%, 97.0 +/- 1.5%, 79.6 +/- 4.3%, respectively. The actuarial freedom from bleeding events at 6 years was 93.1 +/- 1.9%. Estimated survival at 6 years was similar to the age-matched German population (61.4 +/- 3.8 %). Predictors of survival time were: diabetes mellitus, atrial fibrillation, peripheral vascular disease, renal dysfunction, female gender > 80 years and patients < 165 cm with BMI < 24. Predictive models showed characteristic profiles and good discriminative powers (c-indexes > 0.7) for each of the 6 QoL sections. Early transvalvular gradients were identified as independent risk factors for impaired physical mobility (c-index 0.77, p < 0.002). A saturated propensity score identified besides patient related factors (e.g. preoperative gradients, ejection fraction, haematological factors) indexed geometric orifice area, subcoronary implantation technique and individual surgeons as predictors of high gradients.ConclusionIn addition to the valve size (in relation to body size), subcoronary technique (versus total root) and various patient-related factors the risk of elevated gradients after stentless valve implantation depends, considerably on the individual surgeon. Although there was no effect on survival time and most aspects of QoL, higher postoperative transvalvular gradients affect physical mobility after AVR.