True redo-aortic root replacement versus root replacement after any previous surgeryCentral MessagePerspective
Parth M. Patel, MD,
Dov Levine, MD,
Andy Dong, MD,
Tsuyoshi Yamabe, MD,
Jane Wei, MPH,
Jose Binongo, PhD,
Bradley G. Leshnower, MD,
Hiroo Takayama, MD, PhD,
Edward P. Chen, MD
Affiliations
Parth M. Patel, MD
Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Ga
Dov Levine, MD
Division of Cardiac, Thoracic and Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, New York-Presbyterian/Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY
Andy Dong, MD
Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Ga
Tsuyoshi Yamabe, MD
Division of Cardiac, Thoracic and Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, New York-Presbyterian/Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY
Jane Wei, MPH
Department of Biostatistics, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, Ga
Jose Binongo, PhD
Department of Biostatistics, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, Ga
Bradley G. Leshnower, MD
Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Ga
Hiroo Takayama, MD, PhD
Division of Cardiac, Thoracic and Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, New York-Presbyterian/Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY
Edward P. Chen, MD
Division of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Duke University, Durham, NC; Address for reprints: Edward P. Chen, MD, Duke University Medical Center, 2310 Erwin Rd, 8660 HAFS Building, Durham, NC 27710.
Objective: The impact of previous aortic root replacement (True-Redo) versus any previous operation (Any-Redo) on outcomes after reoperative aortic root replacement (redo-ROOT) is largely unknown. In this first multi-institutional study, the clinical impact True-Redo versus Any-Redo in the setting of redo-ROOT was reviewed. Methods: From 2004 to 2021, 822 patients underwent redo-ROOT at 2 major academic centers: 638 Any-Redo and 184 True-Redo. Matching based on preoperative demographics and concomitant operations resulted in 174 matched pairs. An independent risk factor analysis was performed to determine risk factors for early and late mortality. Results: Patients in the True-Redo group were younger, at 49.9 ± 15.1 versus 55.3 ± 14.7 years, P .05. Median cardiopulmonary bypass time (P < .001) and aortic crossclamp time (P = .03) were longer for True-Redo group. In-hospital mortality was 13% (109) and was without significant difference between groups, P = .41. Ten-year survival was 78% versus 76% for True-Redo versus Any-Redo groups respectively, P = .7. Landmark survival analysis at 4 years' postoperatively on the matched groups found that patients in the True-Redo group had improved survival outcomes (P = .046). Risk factors of in-hospital mortality consisted of older age (P < .0001), lower ejection fraction (P = .02), and male patient (P = .0003). Conclusions: Clinical outcomes following redo-ROOT are excellent. Performance of a True-Redo-ROOT does not result in worse in-hospital morbidity or mortality and has improved survival benefit at midterm follow-up when compared with patients in the Any-Redo group. The decision to perform a redo-ROOT must be taken seriously and must be individualized in a patient-specific manner for optimal outcomes.
