Abstract
ObjectiveThere is uncertainty about surgical procedures for adult patients aged 18–60 years undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR). Options include conventional AVR (mechanical, mAVR; tissue, tAVR), the pulmonary autograft (Ross) and aortic valve neocuspidisation (Ozaki). Transcatheter treatment may be an option for selected patients. We used formal consensus methodology to make recommendations about the suitability of each procedure.MethodsA working group, supported by a patient advisory group, developed a list of clinical scenarios across seven domains (anatomy, presentation, cardiac/non-cardiac comorbidities, concurrent treatments, lifestyle, preferences). A consensus group of 12 clinicians rated the appropriateness of each surgical procedure for each scenario on a 9-point Likert scale on two separate occasions (before and after a 1-day meeting).ResultsThere was a consensus that each procedure was appropriate (A) or inappropriate (I) for all clinical scenarios as follows: mAVR: total 76% (57% A, 19% I); tAVR: total 68% (68% A, 0% I); Ross: total 66% (39% A, 27% I); Ozaki: total 31% (3% A, 28% I). The remainder of percentages to 100% reflects the degree of uncertainty. There was a consensus that transcatheter aortic valve implantation is appropriate for 5 of 68 (7%) of all clinical scenarios (including frailty, prohibitive surgical risk and very limited life span).ConclusionsEvidence-based expert opinion emerging from a formal consensus process indicates that besides conventional AVR options, there is a high degree of certainty about the suitability of the Ross procedure in patients aged 18–60 years. Future clinical guidelines should include the option of the Ross procedure in aortic prosthetic valve selection.
Subject
Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
Reference25 articles.
1. Surgery for young adults with aortic valve disease not amenable to repair;Zakkar;Front Surg,2018
2. The Ross procedure: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and microsimulation;Etnel;Circ: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes,2018
3. Etnel JRG , Huygens SA , Grashuis P , et al . Bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement in nonelderly adults: a systematic review, meta-analysis, microsimulation. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2019;12:e005481. doi:10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.118.005481
4. Mechanical aortic valve replacement in non-elderly adults: meta-analysis and microsimulation;Korteland;Eur Heart J,2017
5. The Ross procedure versus prosthetic and homograft aortic valve replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis;McClure;Eur J Cardiothorac Surg,2019
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献