Is a high-risk biventricular repair always preferable to conversion to a single ventricle repair?

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this report is to examine the short-and intermediate-term outcome of a complex biventricular repair compared with a single ventricle repair in patients with two functional ventricles.

PATIENT POPULATION: Since 1986, 34 patients with atrioventricular concordance or discordance, ventriculoarterial discordance, ventricular septal defect, and pulmonary stenosis or atresia have undergone biventricular repair (group I). Another group of 16 patients (group II) with the same diagnoses have undergone a single ventricle repair consisting of a total cavopulmonary connection because of either a straddling atrioventricular valve (11 patients) or an uncommitted ventricular septal defect (5 patients).

RESULTS

The mean length of follow-up was 3.9 years in group I and 3.0 years in group II. Freedom from reoperation at 7 years was 45.5% in group I and 100% in group II (p = 0.014). The actuarial estimate of survival at 7 years was 68.0% in group I and 93.8% in group II (p = 0.048).

CONCLUSION

Short- and intermediate-term morbidity and mortality were greater in patients undergoing a biventricular repair than in a similar group of patients undergoing total cavopulmonary connection. It is unknown whether the long-term results of a total cavopulmonary connection in patients with two ventricles are as good as those obtained with a biventricular approach. However, there may be situations in which the short- and intermediate-term risks of a complex biventricular repair may outweigh the long-term disadvantages of a single ventricle approach.