Volume 25, Issue 1 pp. 74-78

Results of Left Atrioventricular Valve Reoperations Following Previous Repair of Atrioventricular Septal Defects

Bahaaldin Alsoufi M.D.

Bahaaldin Alsoufi M.D.

King Faisal Heart Institute, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Search for more papers by this author
Zohair Al-Halees M.D.

Zohair Al-Halees M.D.

King Faisal Heart Institute, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Search for more papers by this author
Fareed Khouqeer M.D.

Fareed Khouqeer M.D.

King Faisal Heart Institute, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Search for more papers by this author
Charles C. Canver M.D.

Charles C. Canver M.D.

King Faisal Heart Institute, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Search for more papers by this author
Ghassan Siblini M.D.

Ghassan Siblini M.D.

King Faisal Heart Institute, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Search for more papers by this author
Elias Saad M.D.

Elias Saad M.D.

King Faisal Heart Institute, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Search for more papers by this author
Ahmed Sallehuddin M.D.

Ahmed Sallehuddin M.D.

King Faisal Heart Institute, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 27 December 2009
Citations: 13
Address for correspondence: Bahaaldin Alsoufi, M.D., King Faisal Heart Institute (MBC 16), King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, P.O. Box 3354, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia 11211. Fax: 966-1-442-7791; e-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

Abstract Objectives: We report results of left atrioventricular valve reoperations (LAVVR) following atrioventricular septal defect (AVSD) repair and examine variables predictive of outcome. Methods: Multiple demographics and operative variables were analyzed to determine factors affecting survival and reoperation. Results: Forty patients following partial (n = 9) or complete (n = 31) AVSD repair underwent 47 LAVVR (1992-2005). Median age was 0.87 years (24 days-7.7 years) at initial AVSD repair and 3.15 years (84 days-13.6 years) at subsequent LAVVR with median interval between AVSD repair and LAVVR of 1.76 years (1 day-12.9 years). First LAVVR included repair (n = 20) or replacement (n = 20). Operative mortality was 10% and five-year survival was 76 ± 6%. Significant risk factors were complete AVSD (p < 0.001), valve replacement (p < 0.001) for early death, and young age at time of LAVVR (p = 0.03) for late death. Five-year freedom from LAVV re-intervention was 100% for replacement versus 55 ± 13% for repair (p = 0.006). Overall, ejection fraction increased to 61 ± 3% versus 42 ± 2% preoperatively (p < 0.01), and left-ventricle end-diastolic dimension Z-score decreased to 0.05 ± 0.36 versus 3.1 ± 0.3 preoperatively (p < 0.01). Eighty-seven percent of children were in New York Heart Association class I/II at latest follow-up. Conclusions: LAVVR results in significant clinical improvement and lasting recovery in ventricular chamber function and size. Valve repair offers survival advantage and should be aggressively attempted; however, it is only achievable in 50% of cases. Valve replacement is necessary in cases associated with complex LAVV morphology or following repair failure. At intermediate follow-up, patients continue to be at risk of major valve-related morbidity, requirement for re-intervention, and cardiac death. (J Card Surg 2010;25:74-78)

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.