Burkhart, Harold M.

Background— After repair of aortic coarctation, patients may develop restenosis, aneurysms, and pseudoaneurysms at the site of prior repair. We assessed the outcomes of late reintervention on the descending aorta after aortic coarctation repair. Methods and Results— From March 1954 to July 2008, 130 patients had operations or endovascular procedures on the descending aorta after previous coarctation repair. We excluded patients who had complex left-sided cardiac lesions or interrupted aortic arch. Mean age at reintervention was 32±24 years and 28% were female. The interval between coarctation repair and reintervention was 17±13 years. Seventy-four percent of patients had hypertension. Reasons for reintervention were restenosis (n=122 [94%]), aneurysm (n=4 [3%]), and pseudoaneurysm (n=4 [3%]). Ninety-five patients (73%) underwent operative procedures including an extra-anatomic conduit (n=41), patch repair (n=32), interposition graft (n=14), end–end anastomosis (n=6), and subclavian flap (n=2). Thirty-five patients underwent endovascular treatment (balloon dilatation, n=22 or stenting, n=13). There was no early mortality. In the surgical group, 5 patients required early reoperation for bleeding and 5 patients had early vocal cord paralysis. One patient in the endovascular group had aortic rupture at the time of intervention requiring urgent operation. Survival was 97% at 10 years. At 5 years, freedom from a second repeat procedure on the descending aorta was 96% in the surgical group and 72% in the endovascular group ( P <0.001). Five years after reintervention, fewer patients required treatment for hypertension (57% versus 74% , P <0.001) and a median of 1 antihypertensive medication was prescribed compared with a median of 2 medications preintervention. Conclusions— Operative and endovascular management of recoarctation can be performed safely with good late outcomes.

Background— Proposed advantages to the Ross procedure included presumed increased freedom from reoperation and simpler reoperation for pulmonary conduit replacement if needed. It is increasingly apparent, however, that reoperations are frequent after the Ross procedure and that when required, they may be more complex than previously thought. Methods and Results— Between September 1991 and August 2008, 56 patients underwent reoperation at our institution after a Ross procedure performed by ourselves (n=13) or elsewhere (n=43). Median age at first reoperation at our institution was 26 years (range 1 to 69 years). The 4 most common indications for reoperation were isolated autograft (neoaortic) regurgitation in 11 cases (20), isolated pulmonary conduit regurgitation/stenosis in 9 (16), combined autograft regurgitation/dilatation in 8 (14), and combined autograft regurgitation and pulmonary conduit regurgitation/stenosis in 6 (11). A total of 144 procedures were performed in these 56 patients during first reoperation at our institution. The autograft valve required replacement in 21 cases (38) and aortic root replacement in 21 (38), with ascending aortic/arch reconstruction in 13 (23) and mitral valve surgery in 5 (9). The pulmonary valve was replaced in 33 cases (59) and the tricuspid valve was repaired/replaced in 10 (18). Early mortality was 1.8 (1 of 56 patients), and morbidity included 6 patients with respiratory failure and 3 who required postcardiotomy extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. There were 4 late deaths during the median follow-up of 8 months (range 1 to 179 months). Conclusions— A broad spectrum of complex reoperations may be required after the Ross procedure. Patients and family members considering the procedure should be informed of the potential for associated morbidity should reoperation be necessary.

Irreparable mitral pathology may lead to early mitral valve replacement (MVR) in children. Often, a small mechanical prosthesis (<23 mm) is required, raising concerns about annular growth in patients who may eventually require subsequent mitral valve re-replacement (MVRR). The aim of this study was to evaluate interval mitral annular growth in this cohort. Between January 1972 and December 2006, 164 children underwent MVR with a mechanical prosthesis; 110 of these children (median age, 4 years; range, 7 days to 14 years) received a small mechanical prosthesis (<23 mm). The most common diagnoses were congenital mitral stenosis (10%), regurgitation (46%), and left atrioventricular valve dysfunction after previous atrioventricular septal defect repair (44%). The cohort was analyzed for age, body surface area (BSA), prosthesis size, and Z score at the time of MVR and MVRR. At the time of MVR, 78 patients had a BSA of 0.77 ± 0.06 m2, had an annular size of 24 ± 0.62 mm ( Z score, 2.91 ± 0.23), and ultimately did not require MVRR. Another cohort, who eventually did require MVRR (n = 24), had an initial BSA at the time of MVR of 0.62 ± 0.05 m2 ( P = NS vs MVR only) and an annular size of 20 ± 0.49 mm ( Z score, 1.85 ± 0.22) ( P = .008 vs MVR only). In the interval between MVR and MVRR (7.8 ± 1.1 years), BSA increased to 1.12 ± 0.07 m2, and annulus size increased to 24 ± 0.47 mm ( Z score, 1.80 ± 0.28). These data suggest growth of the mitral annulus following MVR with a small mechanical prosthesis, as evidenced by an unchanged Z score in the setting of normal interval increase in BSA. Additionally, there was a statistically significant difference in initial Z scores between the cohorts requiring MVRR and those who have not needed re-replacement, suggesting that the feasibility of placement of a slightly larger prosthesis may be associated with a decreased need for MVRR.

The most common cause of reoperation following repair of atrioventricular septal defect (AVSD) is left atrioventricular valve regurgitation. However, reoperation for subaortic obstruction is required in some, especially after initial repair of partial AVSD. Etiology of reoperation and late outcome were evaluated. Between 1962 and 2007, 146 patients (59 male) underwent reoperation at the authors' institution after prior repair of partial (n = 96) and complete (n = 50) AVSD. Median age at reoperation after repair of partial AVSD was 26 years (range, 10 months to 71 years) and 4.5 years (range, 53 days to 38 years) after repair of complete AVSD. The 3 most common indications for reoperation included left atrioventricular (AV) valve regurgitation in 105 patients, subaortic stenosis in 29, and right AV valve regurgitation in 21. The most common procedures performed included left AV valve repair in 59 (40%) patients, left AV valve replacement in 56 (38%), subaortic fibrous resection/myectomy in 24 (16%), and right AV valve surgery in 19 (13%). Freedom from subsequent reoperation at 10 years was 48% after initial repair of complete AVSD and 84% after initial repair of partial AVSD. During late follow-up, 10-year actuarial survival was 91% and 77% after initial repair of complete and partial AVSD, respectively. The most common indication for reoperation after initial repair of partial or complete AVSD is left AV valve pathology; left ventricular outflow tract obstruction was more common in partial AVSD. Although freedom from subsequent reoperations is higher after initial repair of partial AVSD, these patients have reduced long-term survival when compared with complete AVSD.

Advances in extracorporeal life support have expanded indications for use extending beyond patients undergoing cardiac surgery. The approach to cannulation in patients requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation should be individualized and based on the specific clinical scenario in which the need arises. Adherence to proper techniques of vessel visualization, exposure, and cannulation along with accurate placement of cannulae will optimize flows and minimize complications in this setting. Patients in need of mechanical circulatory support require input from a multidisciplinary team approach with systematic clinical evaluation to optimize outcome. If hemodynamics do not initially permit the successful separation from mechanical support, then a systematic search for potentially reversible patient and/ or pump related factors should be undertaken. The success of this therapy is predicated on patient selection, a multidisciplinary team approach in the intensive care unit, adherence to precise technical principles, and repeated patient evaluation.