Systematic review and meta-analysis of surgical outcomes in Marfan patients undergoing aortic root surgery by composite-valve graft or valve sparing root replacement.

Abstract

A major, life-limiting feature of Marfan syndrome (MFS) is the presence of aneurysmal disease. Cardiovascular intervention has dramatically improved the life expectancy of Marfan patients. Traditionally, the management of aortic root disease has been undertaken with composite-valve graft replacing the aortic valve and proximal aorta; more recently, valve sparing procedures have been developed to avoid the need for anticoagulation. This meta-analysis assesses the important surgical outcomes of the two surgical techniques. A systematic review and meta-analysis of 23 studies reporting the outcomes of aortic root surgery in Marfan patients with data extracted for outcomes of early and late mortality, thromboembolic events, late bleeding complications and surgical reintervention rates. The outcomes of 2,976 Marfan patients undergoing aortic root surgery were analysed, 1,624 patients were treated with composite valve graft (CVG) and 1,352 patients were treated with valve sparing root replacement (VSRR). When compared against CVG, VSRR was associated with reduced risk of thromboembolism (OR =0.32; 95% CI, 0.16-0.62, P=0.0008), late hemorrhagic complications (OR =0.18; 95% CI, 0.07-0.45; P=0.0003) and endocarditis (OR =0.27; 95% CI, 0.10-0.68; P=0.006). Importantly there was no significant difference in reintervention rates between VSRR and CVG (OR =0.89; 95% CI, 0.35-2.24; P=0.80). There is an increasing body of evidence that VSRR can be reliably performed in Marfan patients, resulting in a durable repair with no increased risk of re-operation compared to CVG, thus avoiding the need for systemic anticoagulation in selected patients.