From January 1980 to December 1989, 48 consecutive patients with chronic aortic dissection and aortic valve insufficiency underwent operation. They were analyzed in 2 groups (24 patients each) to evaluate the late clinical and echocardiography outcome of those in whom the aortic valve was preserved (Group A) compared with those having valve replacement (Group B). The overall preoperative characteristics of the two groups were similar except for the age (Group A 47.9 ± 10.8 versus Group B 40.2 ± 9.5 years, p=0.03). In the preoperative echocardiographic evaluation, Group B patients had significantly higher aortic root and left ventricle systolic and diastolic diameters (p<0.03), and aortic insufficiency grade (p=0.02). The hospital mortality was 12.5% in Group A and 4.2% in Group B and the seven years actuarial survival rate was respectively 75.7% ± 9.8% and 82.7% ± 7.9%. Postoperatively there was, in both groups, a significant improvement in all clinical parameters evaluated (dyspnea, chest pain, arterial hypertension, aortic insufficiency murmurs (p<0.001). There was also a marked reduction in the aortic root and left ventricle diameters in all patients compared to preoperative values (p<0.05) without statistical difference between the groups. Echocardiographic mild aortic insufficiency remained in 20% of the patients in whom the valve was preserved, without long term hemodynamic or clinical repercussion. Hence, we conclude that aortic insufficiency in chronic dissection can be equally treated with both techniques. Aortic valve preservation should, whenever possible, be attempted and considered as the procedure of choice.
heart valves, aortic; heart valves