European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery · 2026
Should We Replace the Non-Aneurysmal Aortic Arch During Elective Valve-Sparing Aortic Root Replacement in Marfan Patients?
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Shrestha Malakh, Kaufeld Tim, Rudolph Linda, Krueger Heike, Shrestha Mizala, Martens Andreas, Beckmann Erik
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Valve-sparing aortic root replacement has increasingly been performed in Marfan patients. However, there is ongoing debate on whether the non-aneurysmal sized aortic arch should be prophylactically replaced during the index operation. The aim of our retrospective single-centre study was to investigate the long-term status of the aortic arch in these patients.
METHODS: Between 1993 and 2021, a total of 723 patients underwent valve-sparing aortic root replacement with a straight tube graft (David I reimplantation) at our institution; 119 patients had confirmed Marfan disease. Of these 119 Marfan patients, 67 patients had isolated aortic root aneurysm with no aortic arch pathology. These 67 patients underwent isolated David I procedure in an elective setting (only aortic root and ascending aortic replacement) without any concomitant procedures and were included in the present study.
RESULTS: This study includes 67 patients with Marfan syndrome who underwent isolated elective valve-sparing aortic root replacement. The median age of patients was 30 years (20-41), and 47 were male (70%). The cardiopulmonary time was 157.5 (145.8-178.3) min, and aortic clamp time was 117.0 ± 19.8 min. The in-hospital mortality and stroke rates were both 0%. Follow-up was 100% complete. Survival at 1, 5, 10, 15, and 20 years were 100%, 100%, 93%, 89%, and 85%, respectively. Freedom from aortic arch reoperation due to aneurysm at 1, 5, 10, 15, and 20 years was 100%, 100%, 100%, 100%, and 95%, respectively. In follow-up, no patient required aortic arch replacement due to aortic arch aneurysm. A total of 3 patients underwent aortic arch replacement for type B aortic dissection. Of these 3 patients, 1 had chronic type B dissection with aortic aneurysm, and 2 had acute type B dissection.
CONCLUSIONS: The long-term results after valve-sparing aortic root replacement with a straight tube graft (David I procedure) in Marfan patients are excellent. Our study shows that the risk for future aortic arch intervention after elective valve sparing aortic root replacement in Marfan patients is extremely low. Hence, our study supports the idea that concomitant prophylactic aortic arch replacement during elective valve sparing aortic root replacement in Marfan patients with non-aneurysmal aortic arch is not necessary.
METHODS: Between 1993 and 2021, a total of 723 patients underwent valve-sparing aortic root replacement with a straight tube graft (David I reimplantation) at our institution; 119 patients had confirmed Marfan disease. Of these 119 Marfan patients, 67 patients had isolated aortic root aneurysm with no aortic arch pathology. These 67 patients underwent isolated David I procedure in an elective setting (only aortic root and ascending aortic replacement) without any concomitant procedures and were included in the present study.
RESULTS: This study includes 67 patients with Marfan syndrome who underwent isolated elective valve-sparing aortic root replacement. The median age of patients was 30 years (20-41), and 47 were male (70%). The cardiopulmonary time was 157.5 (145.8-178.3) min, and aortic clamp time was 117.0 ± 19.8 min. The in-hospital mortality and stroke rates were both 0%. Follow-up was 100% complete. Survival at 1, 5, 10, 15, and 20 years were 100%, 100%, 93%, 89%, and 85%, respectively. Freedom from aortic arch reoperation due to aneurysm at 1, 5, 10, 15, and 20 years was 100%, 100%, 100%, 100%, and 95%, respectively. In follow-up, no patient required aortic arch replacement due to aortic arch aneurysm. A total of 3 patients underwent aortic arch replacement for type B aortic dissection. Of these 3 patients, 1 had chronic type B dissection with aortic aneurysm, and 2 had acute type B dissection.
CONCLUSIONS: The long-term results after valve-sparing aortic root replacement with a straight tube graft (David I procedure) in Marfan patients are excellent. Our study shows that the risk for future aortic arch intervention after elective valve sparing aortic root replacement in Marfan patients is extremely low. Hence, our study supports the idea that concomitant prophylactic aortic arch replacement during elective valve sparing aortic root replacement in Marfan patients with non-aneurysmal aortic arch is not necessary.