title: Composite valve graft versus separate aortic valve and ascending aortic replacement.
abstract: To ascertain if the operative technique has any influence on outcome, the surgical results after aortic root replacement using either a composite valve graft (CVG) or a separate graft and valve (SVG) were analyzed. Eighty-four patients received a CVG, and 36 had SVG replacement. The operative mortality rate was 6% for patients receiving a CVG and 3% for SVG replacement (nonsignificant). Follow-up extended to 21 years (mean 124 +/- 45 months). The type of the procedure (SVG versus CVG) was not a significant predictor of in-hospital mortality, length of hospital stay, subsequent root dilatation (SVG), anastomotic dehiscence and subsequent surgery. The early and long-term results after CVG or SVG were similar, which reflects proper patient selection.
authors.affiliation: Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany. mbrandt@kielheart.uni-kiel.de
authors.forename: Michael
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Brandt
authors.forename: Someia
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Abdelkerim
authors.forename: Susanne
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Clemm
authors.forename: Andreas
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Böning
authors.forename: Jochen
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Cremer
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D001011:Aorta; D017545:Aortic Aneurysm, Thoracic / Q000601:surgery; D001021:Aortic Valve; D001807:Blood Vessel Prosthesis; D019917:Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation / Q000379:methods*; D005260:Female; D006349:Heart Valve Diseases / Q000601:surgery; D006350:Heart Valve Prosthesis; D019918:Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation / Q000379:methods*; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D016896:Treatment Outcome