BIOMATERIALS IN AORTIC ROOT SURGERY: MID-TERM OUTCOMES

Highlights

For the first time, a comparative study was conducted of the medium‑term results of using aortic homografts, autografts (Ross operation), and a domestic biological conduit in the surgical treatment of aortic root pathology. It has been shown that all three biomaterials provide high survival rates, acceptable freedom from reoperations, and stable hemodynamics in the medium term. The data obtained indicate the clinical viability of the domestic biological conduit as a competitive alternative to traditional biological solutions.

Background. Surgical correction of aortic root pathology remains one of the most challenging tasks in cardiac surgery. The choice of biomaterial for aortic root reconstruction may influence long-term outcomes and the frequency of reoperations.

Aim. To evaluate mid-term results of surgical treatment of aortic root pathology using different biomaterials – aortic homografts, pulmonary autografts (the Ross procedure), and “Russian conduit”.

Methods. A single-center retrospective comparative study was conducted including 68 patients operated on between 2015 and 2025. Patients were divided into three groups: I – aortic homografts (n = 19), II – autografts (Ross procedure, n = 24), III – “Russian conduit” (n = 25). Primary endpoints were overall survival and freedom from reoperation on the aortic root. Secondary endpoints included structural prosthesis degeneration, root dilatation, significant regurgitation, thromboembolic, and hemorrhagic complications. Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Statistics 23.0; differences were considered significant at p < 0.05. The follow-up period varied depending on the type of surgical intervention: group I – 58.2 ± 13.9 months (36–83), group II – 74.9 ± 11.3 months (40–110), group III – 62.3 ± 14.3 months (37–84).

Results. The mean age of patients was 51.1 ± 14.9 years, with a male predominance in all groups (85.3%). Groups were comparable in most demographic and clinical characteristics, except for a higher incidence of connective tissue dysplasia and infective endocarditis in group I, and more frequent cardiac rhythm disorders in group III. Overall mid-term survival was 92.6%: 89.5% in group I (2 in-hospital deaths, no late deaths), 91.7% in group II (2 late deaths), and 96.0% in group III (1 late death). Reoperations were performed only in groups II (2 cases) and III (3 cases). Echocardiography showed a statistically significant increase in maximum aortic valve velocity in group I (from 118 ± 10 cm/s to 126 ± 11 cm/s, p = 0.006), while peak and mean gradients and overall hemodynamics remained stable. Changes in maximum velocity and gradients in groups II and III were not statistically significant. Mild leaflet thickening, especially in group III, did not affect valve function.

Conclusions. All studied biomaterials demonstrated high stability and functional performance of the aortic valve in the mid-term. Aortic homografts, pulmonary autografts in the Ross procedure, and “Russian conduit” provide comparable survival, low risk of reoperation, and can be considered safe and effective for reconstructive aortic root surgery.

1. Elbatarny M, White A, Chung JCY, et al. State-of-the-Art Review of Aortic Root Reconstruction: Contemporary Techniques and Challenges. Innov Technol Tech Cardiothorac Vasc Surg. 2024;19(6):600-610. doi:10.1177/15569845241299804

2. Soria Jiménez CE, Papolos AI, Kenigsberg BB, et al. Management of Mechanical Prosthetic Heart Valve Thrombosis: JACC Review Topic of the Week. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2023;81(21):2115-2127. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2023.03.412

3. Yazdchi F, Harloff M, Hirji S, et al. Long-term Outcomes of Aortic Valve Replacement With Aortic Homograft: 27 Years Experience. Ann Thorac Surg. 2021;112(6):1929-1938. doi:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2020.12.030

4. Scorsese G, Yonel B, Schmalzried E, Solowinska A, Jin Z, Poppers J. Perioperative Considerations, Anesthetic Management and Transesophageal Echocardiographic Evaluation of Patients Undergoing the Ross Procedure. J Cardiovasc Dev Dis. 2025;12(4):126. doi:10.3390/jcdd12040126

5. Bazylev VV, Batrakov PA, Khadiev DM, Egorov AA, Eremin NA. Aortic root prosthesis with pericardial cusps “Russian conduit”: A hydrodynamic experiment. Patol Krovoobrashcheniya Kardiokhirurgiya. 2021;25(4):97-105. doi:10.21688/1681-3472-2021-4-97-105 (in Russian)

6. Komarov R, Chernov I, Enginoev S, Sá MPBO, Tarasov D. The Russian Conduit – Combining Bentall and Ozaki Procedures for Concomitant Ascending Aorta Replacement and Aortic Valve Neocuspidization. Braz J Cardiovasc Surg. 2019;34(5). doi:10.21470/1678-9741-2019-0329

7. Komarov RN, Tsaregorodtsev AV, Tkachev MI. Russian Conduit II: rationale for the use of a new aortic root prosthesis and first case-report. Sib J Clin Exp Med. 2024;39(2):112-121. doi:10.29001/2073-8552-2024-39-2-112-121 (in Russian)

8. Komarov RN, Bashmakov NS, Belov VA, Mikhaleva YaN. Ross Procedure: Pros and Cons. Grudnaya i Serdechno‑Sosudistaya Khirurgiya. 2023;65(5):514-521. (in Russian)

9. Komarov R, Chernov I, Enginoev S, et al. The Russian Conduit – Combining Bentall and Ozaki Procedures for Concomitant Ascending Aorta Replacement and Aortic Valve Neocuspidization. Braz J Cardiovasc Surg. 2019;34(5):618-623.8.

10. Zhu Y, Jian Z, Ma R, Wang Y, Xiao Y. Long-term outcomes after aortic root replacement for patients with Marfan syndrome. J Thorac Dis. 2021;13(12):6779-6789. doi:10.21037/jtd-21-577

11. Kim JY, Kim JB, Jung SH, Choo SJ, Chung CH, Lee JW. Long-Term Outcomes of Homografts in the Aortic Valve and Root Position: A 20-Year Experience. Korean J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2016;49(4):258-263. doi:10.5090/kjtcs.2016.49.4.258

12. Tsaroev B, Chernov I, Enginoev S, Mustaev M. Survival and freedom from reoperation after the Ross procedure in a Russian adult population: A single-center experience. JTCVS Open. 2022;10:140-147. doi:10.1016/j.xjon.2022.04.026

13. Ryan WH, Squiers JJ, Harrington KB, et al. Long-term outcomes of the Ross procedure in adults. Ann Cardiothorac Surg. 2021;10(4):499-508. doi:10.21037/acs-2021-rp-fs-28

14. Pardo González L, Ruiz-Ortiz M, Delgado M, et al. Ross procedure: valve function, clinical outcomes and predictors after 25 years’ follow-up. Curr Probl Cardiol. 2024;49(4):102410. doi:10.1016/j.cpcardiol.2024.102410

15. Hage A, Hage F, Valdis M, Guo L, Chu MWA. The Ross procedure is the optimal solution for young adults with unrepairable aortic valve disease. Ann Cardiothorac Surg. 2021;10(4):454-462. doi:10.21037/acs-2021-rp-26

16. Unai S, Ozaki S, Johnston DR, et al. Aortic Valve Reconstruction With Autologous Pericardium Versus a Bioprosthesis: The Ozaki Procedure in Perspective. J Am Heart Assoc. 2023;12(2):e027391. doi:10.1161/JAHA.122.027391