Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 19, 2025
Standardized Technique of Aortic Valve Re-implantation for Valve-sparing Aortic Root Replacement
Published on: December 11, 2017
Comparison of hemodynamics and root configurations between remodeling and reimplantation methods for valve-sparing
Masahiro Seki1, Takashi Kunihara2, Jyunpei Takada3
1Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Dokkyo Medical University, Mibu, Japan.
Purpose:
To compare the characteristics of reimplantation (RI) using grafts with sinuses and remodeling (RM) with/without external suture annuloplasty using a pulsatile flow simulator.
Methods:
Porcine aortic roots were obtained from an abattoir, and six models of RM and RI with sinuses were prepared. External suture annuloplasty (ESA) was performed in the RM models to decrease the root diameter to 22 mm (RM-AP22) and 18 mm (RM-AP18). Valve models were tested at mean pulsatile flow and aortic pressure of 5.0 L/min and 120/80 (100) mmHg, respectively, at 70 beats/min. The forward flow, regurgitation, leakage, backflow rates, valve-closing time, and mean and peak pressure gradient (p-PG) were evaluated. Root configurations were examined using micro-computed tomography (micro-CT).
Results:
The backflow rate was larger in the RM models than in the RI models (RI: 8.56% ± 0.38% vs. RM: 12.64% ± 0.79%; p < 0.01). The RM-AP and RI models were comparable in terms of the forward flow, regurgitation, backflow rates, p-PG, and valve-closing time. The analysis using a micro-CT showed a larger dilatation of the sinus of the Valsalva in the RM groups than in the RI group (Valsalva: RI, 26.55 ± 0.40 mm vs. RM-AP22, 31.22 ± 0.55 mm [p < 0.05]; RM-AP18, 31.05 ± 0.85 mm [p < 0.05]).
Conclusions:
RM with ESA and RI with neo-sinuses showed comparable hemodynamics. ESA to RM reduced regurgitation.
