Khoury, Gébrine El

Abstract Severe aortic valve regurgitation, if not timely treated, can significantly impact patients’ survival both for tricuspid aortic valve and bicuspid aortic valve patients, with the latter being significantly younger. Increased understanding of the root anatomy and its physiology has opened the way to techniques of aortic valve repair surgery. The techniques mainly relate to re-establishing a correct root and annular geometry and eliminating leaflet prolapse. These techniques are applied both in the presence of a dilated and normal root and are equally valid for tricuspid or bicuspid valve. Techniques for repairing a bicuspid valve might vary depending on the different valve phenotypes. Medium and long-term results appear favourable and potentially superior to those of prosthetic replacement in terms of valve-related complications and quality of life. Optimal surgical treatment, especially in younger and selected patients, should aim to avoid aortic valve replacement and its related complications.

Abstract Aims Operating on patients with severe degenerative mitral regurgitation (DMR) is based on ACC/AHA or ESC/EACTS guidelines. Doubts persist on best surgical indications and their potential association with postoperative survival loss. We sought to investigate whether guideline-based indications lead to late postoperative survival loss in DMR patients. Methods and results We analysed outcome of 2833 patients from the Mitral Regurgitation International Database registry undergoing surgical correction of DMR. Patients were stratified by surgical indications: Class I trigger (symptoms, left ventricular end-systolic diameter ≥ 40 mm, or left ventricular ejection fraction < 60%, n = 1677), isolated Class IIa trigger [atrial fibrillation (AF), pulmonary hypertension (PH), or left atrial diameter ≥ 55 mm, n = 568], or no trigger (n = 588). Postoperative survival was compared after matching for clinical differences. Restricted mean survival time (RMST) was analysed. During a median 8.5-year follow-up, 603 deaths occurred. Long-term postoperative survival was lower with Class I trigger than in Class IIa trigger and no trigger (71.4 ± 1.9, 84.3 ± 2.3, and 88.9 ± 1.9% at 10 years, P < 0.001). Having at least one Class I criterion led to excess mortality (P < 0.001), while several Class I criteria conferred additional death risk [hazard ratio (HR): 1.53, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.42–1.66]. Isolated Class IIa triggers conferred an excess mortality risk vs. those without (HR: 1.46, 95% CI: 1.00–2.13, P = 0.05). Among these patients, isolated PH led to decreased postoperative survival vs. those without (83.7 ± 2.8% vs. 89.3 ± 1.6%, P = 0.011), with the same pattern observed for AF (81.8 ± 5.0% vs. 88.3 ± 1.5%, P = 0.023). According to RMST analysis, compare to those operated on without triggers, operating on Class I trigger patients led to 9.4-month survival loss (P < 0.001) and operating on isolated Class IIa trigger patients displayed 4.9-month survival loss (P = 0.001) after 10 years. Conclusion Waiting for the onset of Class I or isolated Class IIa triggers before operating on DMR patients is associated with postoperative survival loss. These data encourage an early surgical strategy.

Abstract This International Consensus Classification and Nomenclature for the congenital bicuspid aortic valve condition recognizes 3 types of bicuspid valves: 1. The fused type (right-left cusp fusion, right-non-coronary cusp fusion and left-non-coronary cusp fusion phenotypes); 2. The 2-sinus type (latero-lateral and antero-posterior phenotypes); and 3. The partial-fusion (forme fruste) type. The presence of raphe and the symmetry of the fused type phenotypes are critical aspects to describe. The International Consensus also recognizes 3 types of bicuspid valve-associated aortopathy: 1. The ascending phenotype; 2. The root phenotype; and 3. Extended phenotypes.

Abstract This International evidence-based nomenclature and classification consensus on the congenital bicuspid aortic valve and its aortopathy recognizes 3 types of bicuspid aortic valve: 1. Fused type, with 3 phenotypes: right-left cusp fusion, right-non cusp fusion and left-non cusp fusion; 2. 2-sinus type with 2 phenotypes: Latero-lateral and antero-posterior; and 3. Partial-fusion or forme fruste. This consensus recognizes 3 bicuspid-aortopathy types: 1. Ascending phenotype; root phenotype; and 3. extended phenotypes.

Background: Mitral valve (MV) repair is preferred over replacement in clinical guidelines and is an important determinant of the indication for surgery in degenerative mitral regurgitation. However, the level of evidence supporting current recommendations is low, and recent data cast doubts on its validity in the current era. Accordingly, the aim of the present study was to analyze very long-term outcome after MV repair and replacement for degenerative mitral regurgitation with a flail leaflet. Methods: MIDA (Mitral Regurgitation International Database) is a multicenter registry enrolling patients with degenerative mitral regurgitation with a flail leaflet in 6 tertiary European and US centers. We analyzed the outcome after MV repair (n=1709) and replacement (n=213) overall, by propensity score matching, and by inverse probability-of-treatment weighting. Results: At baseline, patients undergoing MV repair were younger, had more comorbidities, and were more likely to present with a posterior leaflet prolapse than those undergoing MV replacement. After propensity score matching and inverse probability-of-treatment weighting, the 2 treatments groups were balanced, and absolute standardized differences were usually <10%, indicating adequate match. Operative mortality (defined as a death occurring within 30 days from surgery or during the same hospitalization) was lower after MV repair than after replacement in both the entire population (1.3% versus 4.7%; P <0.001) and the propensity-matched population (0.2% versus 4.4%; P <0.001). During a mean follow-up of 9.2 years, 552 deaths were observed, of which 207 were of cardiovascular origin. Twenty-year survival was better after MV repair than after MV replacement in both the entire population (46% versus 23%; P <0.001) and the matched population (41% versus 24%; P <0.001). Similar superiority of MV repair was obtained in patient subsets on the basis of age, sex, or any stratification criteria (all P <0.001). MV repair was also associated with reduced incidence of reoperations and valve-related complications. Conclusions: Among patients with degenerative mitral regurgitation with a flail leaflet referred to mitral surgery, MV repair was associated with lower operative mortality, better long-term survival, and fewer valve-related complications compared with MV replacement.