Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Aortic root geometry following valve-sparing root replacement with reimplantation or remodeling: experimental investigation under static continuous pressure

  • Original Article
  • Others
  • Published:
Journal of Artificial Organs Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The differences in aortic root geometry associated with various valve-sparing root replacement (VSRR) techniques have not fully been understood. We evaluated the root configuration of current VSRR techniques by developing in vitro test apparatus. Six fresh porcine hearts were used for each model. The aortic root remodeling control group involved replacement of the ascending aorta with diameter reduction of sino-tubular junction (STJ) (C1). The aortic valve reimplantation control group involved replacement of the ascending aorta alone (C2). VSRR included remodeling without (RM) or with annuloplasty (RM + A) and reimplantation with a tube (RI) or a handmade neo-Valsalva graft (RI + V). The root geometry of each model in response to closing hydraulic pressures of 80 and 120 mmHg was investigated using echocardiography. Among the VSRR models, RM yielded the largest aorto-ventricular junction (AVJ), which was similar to those in non-VSRR models [mean AVJ diameter (mm) at 80 mmHg; RM = 25.1 ± 1.5, RM + A = 20.9 ± 0.7, RI = 20.7 ± 0.9, RI + V = 20.8 ± 0.4]. RI + V yielded the largest Valsalva size and largest ratio of Valsalva/AVJ, which was similar to the control group [mean Valsalva diameter (mm) at 80 mmHg; RM = 28.4 ± 1.4, RM + A = 25.8 ± 1.3, RI = 23.6 ± 1.0, RI + V = 30.5 ± 0.8, ratio of Valsalva/AVJ at 80 mmHg; RM = 1.14 ± 0.06, RM + A = 1.24 ± 0.06, RI = 1.15 ± 0.06, RI + V = 1.47 ± 0.05]. The STJ diameter at 80 mmHg was numerically smaller with RM + A (22.4 ± 1.2 mm) than with RM (24.8 ± 2.3 mm, p = 0.11). There were no significant differences in AVJ, Valsalva, or STJ distensibility or ellipticity between procedures. Current modifications, including annuloplasty for remodeling or reimplantation in the setting of neo-Valsalva graft, yield near-physiological root geometries.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Yacoub MH, Fagan A, Stassano P, Radley-Smith R. Results of valve conserving operations for aortic regurgitation. Circulation. 1983;68:311–2.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Sarsam MA, Yacoub M. Remodeling of the aortic valve anulus. J ThoracCardiovascSurg. 1993;105:435–8.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. David TE, Feindel CM. An aortic valve-sparing operation for patients with aortic incompetence and aneurysm of the ascending aorta. J ThoracCardiovascSurg. 1992;103:617–21.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Rahnavardi M, Yan TD, Bannon PG, Wilson MK. Aortic valve-sparing operations in aortic root aneurysms: remodeling or reimplantation? Interact CardiovascThoracSurg. 2011;13:189–97.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Kunihara T. Valve-sparing aortic root surgery. CON: remodeling. Gen ThoracCardiovascSurg. 2019;67(1):82–92.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Arabkhani B, Mookhoek A, Di Centa I, Lansac E, Bekkers JA, De Lind VanWijngaarden R, et al. Reported outcome after valve-sparing aortic root replacement for aortic root aneurysm: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Thorac Surg. 2015;100:1126–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Leyh RG, Schmidtke C, Sievers HH, Yacoub MH. Opening and closing characteristics of the aortic valve after different types of valve-preserving surgery. Circulation. 1999;100:2153–60.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Graeter TP, Fries R, Aicher D, Reul H, Schmitz C, Schäfers HJ. In-vitro comparison of aortic valve hemodynamics among aortic root remodeling and aortic valve reimplantation. J Heart Valve Dis. 2006;15:329–35.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. De Paulis R, Chirichilli I, Scaffa R, Weltert L, Maselli D, Salica A, Chiariello L, et al. Long-term results of the valve reimplantation technique using a graft with sinuses. J ThoracCardiovasc Surg. 2016;151(1):112–9.

    Google Scholar 

  10. de Kerchove L, Mastrobuoni S, Boodhwani M, Astarci P, Rubay J, Poncelet A, et al. The role of annular dimension and annuloplasty in tricuspid aortic valve repair. Eur J CardiothoracSurg. 2016;49:428–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Hanke T, Charitos EI, Stierle U, Robinson D, Gorski A, Sievers HH, et al. Factors associated with the development of aortic valve regurgitation over time after two different techniques of valve-sparing aortic root surgery. J ThoracCardiovascSurg. 2009;137:314–9.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Schäfers HJ, Raddatz A, Schmied W, Takahashi H, Miura Y, Kunihara T, et al. Reexaminingremodeling. J ThoracCardiovascSurg. 2015;149:S30–6.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Schneider U, Aicher D, Miura Y, Schäfers HJ. Suture annuloplasty in aortic valve repair. Ann ThoracSurg. 2016;101:783–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Monti L, Mauri G, Balzarini L, Tarelli G, Brambilla G, Vitali E, et al. Compliance of the valsalva graft’s pseudosinuses at midterm follow-up with cardiovascular magnetic resonance. Ann ThoracSurg. 2011;91:92–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Laurent S, Cockcroft J, Van Bortel L, Boutouyrie P, Giannattasio C, Hayoz D, et al. European network for non-invasive investigation of large arteries. Expert consensus document on arterial stiffness: methodological issues and clinical applications. Eur Heart J. 2006;27:2588–605.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Matsumori M, Tanaka H, Kawanishi Y, Onishi T, Nakagiri K, Yamashita T, et al. Comparison of distensibility of the aortic root and cusp motion after aortic root replacement with two reimplantation techniques: valsalva graft versus tube graft. Interact CardiovascThoracSurg. 2007;6:177–81.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Zhu D, Zhao Q. Dynamic normal aortic root diameters: implications for aortic root reconstruction. Ann ThoracSurg. 2011;91:485–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Kazui T, Izumoto H, Yoshioka K, Kawazoe K. Dynamic morphologic changes in the normal aortic annulus during systole and diastole. J H eart Valve Dis. 2006;15:617–21.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Weltert L, De Paulis R, Scaffa R, Maselli D, Bellisario A, D’Alessandro S. Recreation of a sinuslike graft expansion in Bentall procedure reduces stress at the coronary button anastomoses: a finite element study. J ThoracCardiovascSurg. 2009;137:1082–7.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Lansac E, Di Centa I, Sleilaty G, Lejeune S, Berrebi A, Zacek P, et al. Remodeling root repair with an external aortic ring annuloplasty. J ThoracCardiovascSurg. 2017;153:1033–42.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C) (No.15K10227) from Japan Society for the promotion of science (JSPS) and Subsidy Program for Development of International Standards for Evaluation of Innovative Medical Devices and Regenerative Medicine Products, from Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare, Japan.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Saitama Sekishinkai Hospital, Sayama, Japan

    Kenichi Sasaki

  2. Cooperative Major in Advanced Biomedical Sciences, Joint Graduate School of Tokyo Women’s Medical University and Waseda University, Waseda University, 2-2 Wakamatsucho, Shinjuku, Tokyo, 162-8480, Japan

    Kenichi Sasaki, Mitsuo Umezu & Kiyotaka Iwasaki

  3. Department of Cardiac Surgery, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan

    Takashi Kunihara

  4. Department of Cardiac Surgery, International University of Health and Welfare, Mita Hospital, Tokyo, Japan

    Hitoshi Kasegawa

  5. Department of Cardiac and Vascular Surgery, Dokkyo Medical University Hospital Heart Center, Tochigi, Japan

    Masahiro Seki

  6. Division of Cardiovascular Surgery, Yamato Seiwa Hospital, Yamato, Japan

    Hiroshi Seki

  7. Department of Integrative Bioscience and Biomedical Engineering, Graduate School of Advanced Science and Engineering, Waseda University, Tokyo, Japan

    Jumpei Takada, Saeko Sasuga, Ryo Kumazawa, Mitsuo Umezu & Kiyotaka Iwasaki

  8. Department of Modern Mechanical Engineering, Graduate School of Creative Science and Engineering, Waseda University, Tokyo, Japan

    Mitsuo Umezu & Kiyotaka Iwasaki

Authors
  1. Kenichi Sasaki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Takashi Kunihara
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hitoshi Kasegawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Masahiro Seki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Hiroshi Seki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Jumpei Takada
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Saeko Sasuga
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Ryo Kumazawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Mitsuo Umezu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Kiyotaka Iwasaki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

KS: writing -original draft; investigation; data curation. TK: conceptualization; writing-review and editing; supervision; funding acquisition. HK: conceptualization. MS: data curation; investigation. HS: data curation; investigation. SS: investigation. RK: data curation; investigation. JT: data curation; investigation. MU: conceptualization. KI: conceptualization; methodology; writing-review and editing; funding acquisition; supervision.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kiyotaka Iwasaki.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The author(s) declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (MPG 4430 KB)

Supplementary file2 (MPG 4250 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sasaki, K., Kunihara, T., Kasegawa, H. et al. Aortic root geometry following valve-sparing root replacement with reimplantation or remodeling: experimental investigation under static continuous pressure. J Artif Organs 24, 245–253 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10047-020-01242-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10047-020-01242-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation