Abstract Aims Aortic valve-sparing root replacement is recommended over composite root replacement for aortic root aneurysms, especially in younger patients, but long-term outcomes in low-volume nationwide settings remain unclear. The objectives are to compare long-term survival, stroke, and reoperation rates between the two procedures in a low-volume national setting. Methods and results Patients were identified from the Western Danish Heart Registry and the Danish Heart Registry. Cases were validated by review of operative descriptions. The primary outcome was long-term survival from all-cause mortality; secondary outcomes included stroke, reoperation, recurrent aortic regurgitation, and aortic stenosis. Groups were balanced using propensity score matching. Echocardiographic data were provided for the matched cohort. We identified 760 patients treated with composite root replacement and 179 patients with aortic valve-sparing root replacement between January 2010 and April 2022. Mean follow-up was 6.5 years. Composite root replacement patients were younger [50.7 years (SD 14.1) vs. 55.2 (SD 13.5), P < 0.001], but more comorbid with a median EuroSCOREII of 5.5 [interquartile range (IQR): 3.3–11.7] vs. 3.4 (IQR: 2.6–5.0) (P < 0.001). After matching 157 patients per group, aortic valve-sparing root replacement showed improved 10-year survival [91.2%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 82.3–95.8 vs. 80.4%, 95% CI 70.0–87.5, log-rank P = 0.026], with lower 10-year stroke risk (4.9%, 95% CI 1.8–13.0 vs. 18.9%, 95% CI 11.7–29.9, log-rank P = 0.007). Risk of reoperation was nonsignificant (log-rank P = 0.12), which was consistent in the crude population when accounting for competing risk of death (log-rank P = 0.09). Conclusion In this nationwide study, aortic valve-sparing root replacement was associated with better long-term survival and lower stroke risk, supporting its role as a durable surgical option for selected patients.
Impact of valvulo-vascular haemodynamics on left ventricular remodelling and the prevalence of discordant moderate aortic stenosis
Abstract Aims This study aims to describe the prevalence of discordant mild/moderate aortic stenosis (AS) in a population-based study and to identify the mechanisms that lead to reduced stroke volume (SV) and discordant moderate AS. Methods and results Discordant high-gradient (HG)-mild AS, defined as AVA > 1.5 cm2 and mean pressure gradient (MG) of 20–40 mmHg, and discordant low-gradient (LG) moderate AS, defined as AVA 1.0–1.5 cm2 and MG < 20 mmHg, were assessed in 883 individuals from the DANCAVAS screening study with aortic valve calcification and 257 individuals form the PROGRESSA study excluding those with left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction < 50%. In the DANCAVAS cohort, 150 men had mild/moderate AS of which 34% had discordance between MG and AVA, representing 66% with moderate AS. Among 262 patients in the combined cohort, 39% had discordant LG-moderate AS and 6% discordant HG-mild AS. Compared with concordant mild and moderate AS, individuals with discordant LG-moderate AS were more likely to present with LV concentric remodelling geometry (26 vs. 33 vs. 45%, P < 0.001), increased valvulo-arterial impedance (3.3 ± 0.7 vs. 3.6 ± 0.5 vs. 4.1 ± 0.7 mmHg/mL/m2, P < 0.001), and reduced systemic arterial compliance (SAC) (0.74 ± 0.22 vs. 0.81 ± 0.22 vs. 0.64 ± 0.18 mL/m2/mmHg, P < 0.001). Factors associated with SV index were relative wall thickness, LV end-diastolic diameter index, SAC, and LV remodelling pattern. Conclusion Discordant moderate AS is common, accounting for two-thirds of patients with moderate AS in the general male population. Patients with discordant LG-moderate AS have predominantly a concentric remodelling pattern with reduced SV. Reduced SV index was associated with signs of reduced vascular compliance, suggesting that altered vascular properties drive differences in remodelling patterns and discordant moderate AS.