Comparison of aortic root replacement in patients with Marfan syndrome.

OBJECTIVES Although the aortic-valve-sparing (AVS) reimplantation technique according to David has shown favorable durability results in mid-term and long-term studies, composite valve grafting (CVG) according to Bentall is still considered the standard procedure. METHODS Retrospectively, we evaluated the results of aortic root replacement of patients with Marfan syndrome (MFS) who underwent surgery between January 1995 and January 2010. MFS was diagnosed using the Ghent criteria. AVS was used in 58 patients and CVG in 30 patients with MFS. AVS was done for aortic-root aneurysm (n=48) or aortic dissection type A (n=10). CVG was used for aortic-root aneurysm in 14 patients or aortic dissection type A in 16 patients. The mean follow-up was 3.2 (95% CI: 2.4-4.2) years. RESULTS In both groups, 30-day mortality was 0%. Three patients (10.0%) in the CVG group required resternotomy for postoperative bleeding versus two patients (3.4%) in the AVS group (p=0.3). At follow-up, mortality was 10% in the CVG group versus 3.4% in the AVS group (p=0.3). Re-operation was required in two patients (3.4%) after AVS and in three patients after CVG (10%) (p=0.3). Three patients (10.0%) who underwent CVG had endocarditis and two patients (6.7%) had a stroke during follow-up, whereas no endocarditis and stroke occurred after AVS. After 14 years, stratified event-free survival was better in the AVS group (event-free survival was 82.3% vs 58.6%, log-rank test p=0.086), especially after aneurysm (p=0.057). After 10 years, freedom from aortic regurgitation ≥II° in the AVS group was 80% for aneurysm and 50% after dissection (p=0.524). CONCLUSION The reimplantation technique according to David was associated with excellent survival, good valve function and a low rate of re-operation, endocarditis, and stroke. There was a trend to better event-free survival for AVS patients making it the procedure of choice in MFS patients.