ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Young adults undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR) have decreased life expectancy compared to matched controls. The Ross procedure aims to improve valve lifespan while avoiding anticoagulation. We prepared a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the Ross procedure compared to conventional AVR. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane CENTRAL for studies evaluating the Ross procedure versus any conventional AVR in adult patients. We performed screening, full-text assessment, risk of bias evaluation and data collection independently and in duplicate. We evaluated the risk of bias with the ROBINS-I and Cochrane tools and quality of evidence with the GRADE framework. We pooled data using the random- and fixed-effects models. RESULTS: Thirteen observational studies and 2 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified (n = 5346). No observational study was rated as having low risk of bias. The Ross procedure was associated with decreased late mortality in observational and RCT data [mean length of follow-up 2.6 years, relative risk (RR) 0.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.38-0.84, I2 = 58%, very low quality]. The RCT estimate of effect was similar (mean length of follow-up 8.8 years, RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.11-0.96, I2 = 66%, very low quality). No difference was observed in mortality <30 days after surgery. All-site reintervention was similar between groups in cohorts and significantly reduced by the Ross procedure in RCTs (RR 1.41, 95% CI 0.89-2.24, I2 = 55%, very low quality and RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.22-0.78, I2 = 68%, high quality, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Observational data, with residual confounding, and RCT data suggest a late survival benefit with the Ross procedure with no increased risk of reintervention when compared to conventional AVR. Considering the quality of available evidence and limited follow-up, additional high-quality randomized studies are required to strengthen these findings. Systematic review PROSPERO registration: CRD42016052512.
Subject(s)
Allografts , Aortic Valve/surgery , Bioprosthesis , Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation , Heart Valve Prosthesis , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Allografts/statistics & numerical data , Allografts/surgery , Bioprosthesis/adverse effects , Bioprosthesis/statistics & numerical data , Child , Child, Preschool , Heart Valve Diseases/surgery , Heart Valve Prosthesis/adverse effects , Heart Valve Prosthesis/statistics & numerical data , Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation/adverse effects , Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation/instrumentation , Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation/mortality , Humans , Infant , Middle Aged , Postoperative Complications , Young AdultABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Life expectancy in young adults undergoing mechanical or bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement (AVR) may be reduced by up to 20 years compared to age matched controls. The Ross procedure is a durable, anticoagulation-sparing alternative. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the valve hemodynamics of the Ross procedure versus other AVR. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We searched Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception to February 2017 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies (n≥10 Ross). Independently and in duplicate, we performed title and abstract screening, full-text eligibility assessment, and data collection. We evaluated the risk of bias with the Cochrane and CLARITY tools, and the quality of evidence with the GRADE framework. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: We identified 2 RCTs and 13 observational studies that met eligibility criteria (N.=1412). In observational studies, the Ross procedure was associated with a lower mean aortic gradient at discharge (MD -9 mmHg, 95% CI: -13 to -5, P<0.0001, I2=97%) and latest follow-up (MD -5 mmHg, 95% CI: -7 to -3, P<0.0001, I2=92%). There was no significant difference in the incidence of severe aortic regurgitation at latest follow-up (RR 1.3, 95% CI: 0.3 to 5.8, P=0.70, I2=30%). In RCTs, the Ross procedure was associated with a lower mean gradient at latest follow-up (MD -15 mmHg, 95% CI: -32 to 2, P=0.08, I2=99%). The mean pulmonic gradient for the Ross procedure was 18.0 mmHg (95% CI: 16 to 20, P<0.0001) at latest follow-up. The evidence for all outcomes from observational studies was deemed to be of very low quality, while the evidence from RCTs was downgraded for imprecision and moderately serious risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to conventional AVR, the Ross procedure was associated with better aortic valve hemodynamics. Future studies should evaluate the impact of the Ross procedure on exercise capacity and quality of life.
