Search

Objective: Anterior mitral anular calcification, particularly in radiation heart disease, and previous valve replacement with destroyed intervalvular fibrosa are challenging for prosthesis sizing and placement. The Commando procedure with intervalvular fibrosa reconstruction permits double-valve replacement in these challenging conditions. We referenced outcomes after Commando procedures to standard double-valve replacements., Methods: From January 2011 to January 2022, 129 Commando procedures and 1191 aortic and mitral double-valve replacements were performed at the Cleveland Clinic, excluding endocarditis. Reasons for the Commando were severe calcification after radiation (n = 67), without radiation (n = 43), and others (n = 19). Commando procedures were referenced to a subset of double-valve replacements using balancing-score methods (109 pairs)., Results: Between balanced groups, Commando versus double-valve replacement had higher total calcium scores (median 6140 vs 2680 HU, P  = .03). Hospital outcomes were similar, including operative mortality (12/11% vs 8/7.3%, P  = .35) and reoperation for bleeding (9/8.3% vs 5/4.6%, P  = .28). Survival and freedom from reoperation at 5 years were 54% versus 67% ( P  = .33) and 87% versus 100% ( P  = .04), respectively. Higher calcium score was associated with lower survival after double-valve replacement but not after the Commando. The Commando procedure had lower aortic valve mean gradients at 4 years (9.4 vs 11 mm Hg, P  = .04). After Commando procedures for calcification, 5-year survival was 60% and 59% with and without radiation, respectively ( P  = .47)., Conclusions: The Commando procedure with reconstruction of the intervalvular fibrosa destroyed by mitral anular calcification, radiation, or previous surgery demonstrates acceptable outcomes similar to standard double-valve replacement. More experience and long-term outcomes are required to refine patient selection for and application of the Commando approach., Competing Interests: The authors reported no conflicts of interest. The Journal policy requires editors and reviewers to disclose conflicts of interest and to decline handling or reviewing manuscripts for which they may have a conflict of interest. The editors and reviewers of this article have no conflicts of interest., (© 2023 The Author(s).)

Objective: During aortic valve reimplantation, cusp repair may be needed to produce a competent valve. We investigated whether the need for aortic valve cusp repair affects aortic valve reimplantation durability., Methods: Patients with tricuspid aortic valves who underwent aortic valve reimplantation from January 2002 to January 2020 at a single center were retrospectively analyzed. Propensity matching was used to compare outcomes between patients who did and did not require aortic valve cusp repair., Results: Cusp repair was performed in 181 of 756 patients (24%). Patients who required cusp repair were more often male, were older, had more aortic valve regurgitation, and less often had connective tissue disease. Patients who underwent cusp repair had longer aortic clamp time (124 ± 43 minutes vs 107 ± 36 minutes, P  = .001). In-hospital outcomes were similar between groups and with no operative deaths. A total of 98.3% of patients with cusp repair and 99.3% of patients without cusp repair had mild or less aortic regurgitation at discharge. The median follow-up was 3.9 and 3.2 years for the cusp repair and no cusp repair groups, respectively. At 10 years, estimated prevalence of moderate or more aortic regurgitation was 12% for patients with cusp repair and 7.0% for patients without cusp repair ( P  = .30). Mean aortic valve gradients were 6.2 mm Hg and 8.0 mm Hg, respectively ( P  = .01). Ten-year freedom from reoperation was 99% versus 99% ( P  = .64) in the matched cohort and 97% versus 97%, respectively ( P  = .30), in the unmatched cohort. Survival at 10 years was 98% after cusp repair and 93% without cusp repair ( P  = .05)., Conclusions: Aortic valve reimplantation for patients with tricuspid aortic valves has excellent long-term results. Need for aortic valve cusp repair does not affect long-term outcomes and should not deter surgeons from performing valve-sparing surgery., (© 2023 The Author(s).)