Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-m8qmq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T14:44:32.481Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Optimal timing of the Ross procedure in the management of chronic aortic incompetence in the young

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 May 2005

Michael M. H. Cheung ,
Ian D. Sullivan ,
Marc R. de Leval ,
Victor T. Tsang  and
Andrew N. Redington
Michael M. H. Cheung
Affiliation:
Cardiothoracic Unit, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Trust, and the Institute of Child Health, London, UK
Ian D. Sullivan
Affiliation:
Cardiothoracic Unit, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Trust, and the Institute of Child Health, London, UK
Marc R. de Leval
Affiliation:
Cardiothoracic Unit, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Trust, and the Institute of Child Health, London, UK
Victor T. Tsang
Affiliation:
Cardiothoracic Unit, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Trust, and the Institute of Child Health, London, UK
Andrew N. Redington
Affiliation:
Cardiothoracic Unit, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Trust, and the Institute of Child Health, London, UK
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The appropriate timing of intervention in patients with chronic aortic incompetence allows recovery of ventricular function. We sought to determine the optimal timing of the Ross procedure for chronic aortic incompetence in young patients. We retrospectively analysed case notes, and measured pre- and postoperative echocardiographic indexes of left ventricular function, in patients who had undergone the Ross procedure for chronic aortic incompetence. Methods and results: We found 21 patients with preoperative and postoperative data suitable for analysis. Their age at operation ranged from 5.6 to 26 years, with a median of 13.8 years, and the duration of follow-up was from 0.5 to 6.8 years, with a median of 2.4 years. The preoperative left ventricular end-diastolic dimension was converted to a z-score, and this was used as a threshold to divide the population. Using the threshold of a preoperative left ventricular z-score of more than 3 to divide the population did not show any difference in postoperative parameters of left ventricular function. Significant differences were found postoperatively, however, in both the left ventricular z-score and the ratio of left ventricular end-diastolic radius to posterior wall thickness in diastole, with a cutoff preoperative threshold z-score greater than 4. Conclusion: The increase in the ratio of left ventricular end-diastolic radius to the thickness of the posterior wall in diastole would suggest that there is disruption of left ventricular short axis architecture and myocardial contractile function when intervention is postponed. The significantly larger left ventricular dimension at end-diastole, despite the reduction in volume loading post surgery, may also demonstrate irreversible structural changes. Our data would suggest that recovery of left ventricular function is less likely when the left ventricular z-score has reached the value of 4, and that, ideally, intervention should be performed when the z-score approaches or exceeds 3.

Keywords

Aortic regurgitationpulmonary autograftventricular function
Type
Original Article
Information
Cardiology in the Young , Volume 13 , Issue 3 , June 2003 , pp. 253 - 257
Copyright
© 2003 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Fioretti P, Roelandt D, Bos R. Echocardiography in chronic aortic insufficiency: is valve replacement too late when left ventricular end-systolic dimension reaches 55 mm? Circulation 1983; 67: 216–221.Google Scholar
Daniel WG, Hood WP Jr, Siart A, et al. Chronic aortic regurgitation: reassessment of the prognostic value of preoperative left ventricular end-systolic dimension and fractional shortening. Circulation 1985; 71: 669–680.Google Scholar
Kumpuris AG, Quinones MA, Waggoner AD, Kanon DJ, Nelson JG, Miller RR. Importance of preoperative hypertrophy, wall stress and end-systolic dimension as echocardiographic predictors of normalization of left ventricular dilatation after valve replacement in chronic aortic insufficiency. Am J Cardiol 1982; 49: 1091–1100.Google Scholar
Stone PH, Clark RD, Goldschlager N, Selzer A, Cohn K. Determinants of prognosis of patients with aortic regurgitation who undergo aortic valve replacement. J Am Coll Cardiol 1984; 3: 1118–1126.Google Scholar
Henry WL, Bonow RO, Rosing DR, Epstein SE. Observations on the optimum time for operative intervention for aortic regurgitation. II. Serial echocardiographic evaluation of asymptomatic patients. Circulation 1980; 61: 484–492.Google Scholar
Gaasch WH, Andrias CW, Levine HJ. Chronic aortic regurgitation: the effect of aortic valve replacement on left ventricular volume, mass and function. Circulation 1978; 58: 825–836.Google Scholar
Ross DN. Replacement of the aortic valve and mitral valves with a pulmonary autograft. Lancet 1967; 2: 956–958.Google Scholar
Savoye C, Auffray JL, Hubert E, et al. Echocardiographic follow-up after Ross procedure in 100 patients. Am J Cardiol 2000; 185: 854–857.Google Scholar
Santangelo K, Elkins RC, Stelzer P, et al. Normal left ventricular function following pulmonary autograft replacement of the aortic valve in children. J Card Surg 1991; 6 (Suppl 4): 633–637.Google Scholar
Rubay JE, Shango P, Clement S, et al. Ross procedure in congenital patients: results and left ventricular function. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 1997; 11: 92–99.Google Scholar
Hokken RB, Cromme-Dijkhuis AH, Bogers AJ, et al. Clinical outcome and left ventricular function after pulmonary autograft implantation in children. Ann Thorac Surg 1997; 63: 1713–1717.Google Scholar
Sahn DJ, DeMaria A, Kisslo J, Weyman A. Recommendations regarding quantitation in M-mode echocardiography: results of a survey of echocardiographic measurements Circulation 1978; 58: 1072–1083.Google Scholar
Nidorf SM, Picard MH, Triulzi MO, et al. New perspectives in the assessment of cardiac chamber dimensions during development and adulthood. J Am Coll Cardiol 1992; 19: 983–988.Google Scholar
St John Sutton MG, Marier DL, Oldershaw PJ, Sacchetti R, Gibson DG. Effect of age related changes in chamber size, wall thickness, and heart rate on left ventricular function in normal children. Br Heart J 1982; 48: 342–351.Google Scholar
Tarasoutchi F, Grinberg M, Filho JP, et al. Symptoms, left ventricular function, and timing of valve replacement surgery in patients with aortic regurgitation. Am Heart J 1999; 138 (3 Pt 1): 477–485.Google Scholar
Elkins R, Lane M, McCue C. Pulmonary autograft reoperation: incidence and management. Ann Thorac Surg 1996; 62: 450–455.Google Scholar
Bonow RO, Carabello B, de Leon AC Jr, et al. Guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: executive summary. A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee on Management of Patients with Valvular Heart Disease). Circulation 1998; 98: 1949–1984.Google Scholar
Kasegawa H, Kawazoe K, Fujita T, Nakajima N, Masuda Y, Park YD. Assessment of relationship between the pattern of hypertrophy and the function of left ventricle in patients with chronic aortic regurgitation. Jpn Circ J 1990; 54: 161–174.Google Scholar
Gaasch WH. Left ventricular radius to wall thickness ratio. Am J Cardiol 1979; 43: 1189–1194.Google Scholar
Ford L. Heart size. Circ Res 1976; 39: 291–303.Google Scholar
St John Sutton M, Oldershaw P, Kotler M. Textbook of echocardiography and Doppler in adults and children, 2nd edn. Blackwell Science Ltd, Oxford, 1996.
Collinson J, Henein M, Flather M, Pepper JR, Gibson DG. Valve replacement for aortic stenosis in patients with poor left ventricular function: comparison of early changes with stented and stentless valves. Circulation 1999; 100 (Suppl 19): II1–II5.Google Scholar
Sutton M, Plappert T, Spiegel A, et al. Early postoperative changes in left ventricular chamber size, architecture, and function in aortic stenosis and aortic regurgitation and their relation to intraoperative changes in afterload: a prospective two-dimensional echocardiographic study. Circulation 1987; 76: 77–89.Google Scholar