Midterm Clinical Outcomes of Reimplantation Versus Remodeling Valve-Sparing Aortic Root Replacement in Patients With...

This meta-analysis aimed to compare the midterm clinical outcomes of reimplantation versus remodeling techniques for valve-sparing aortic root replacement (VSARR) in patients with connective tissue disorders (CTDs). Studies were screened and identified after the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines from the PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase databases. Forest plots were produced using Review Manager 5.3 (Cochrane, UK). Studies comparing early and midterm clinical outcomes of reimplantation versus remodeling VSARR in patients with CTD with a mean age ≥18 years were included. The sensitivity analysis excluded studies and subgroups of patients that received ring or suture annuloplasty in addition to remodeling surgery. The study selection identified 9 eligible studies. After analysis of the study period and location for patient crossover, 7 retrospective studies consisting of 597 patients (301 reimplantation and 296 remodeling) were pooled. The pooling revealed no significant difference in postoperative mortality (estimated mean follow-up of 10.5 years) (odds ratio [OR] 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.30 to 1.48, I² = 30%, p = 0.32), reoperation (OR 0.35, CI 0.04 to 3.30, I² = 81%, p = 0.36), or occurrence of postoperative aortic regurgitation of ≥2 (OR 0.56, CI 0.31 to 1.02, I² = 47%, p = 0.06). The sensitivity analysis excluding annuloplasty demonstrated improved mortality (OR 0.19, CI 0.06 to 0.64, I² = 0%, p = 0.007) and decreased aortic regurgitation of ≥2 (OR 0.23, CI 0.10 to 0.53, I² = 47%, p = 0.0005) in reimplantation VSARR. The rates of reoperation remained insignificant in the sensitivity analysis (OR 0.43, CI 0.05 to 3.53, I² = 71%, p = 0.43). In conclusion, this meta-analysis has demonstrated no significant difference in the midterm clinical outcomes of reimplantation versus remodeling techniques of VSARR. The sensitivity analysis excluding studies and patient subgroups that received remodeling and annuloplasty suggests remodeling alone to be inferior to reimplantation in patients with CTDs. Further research is required to assess remodeling and annuloplasty against reimplantation in patients of this demographic because the current body of knowledge does not allow sufficient analysis.