Cryopreserved homografts in valve surgery – the experience of one clinic

Introduction. Surgical treatment of infective and prosthetic endocarditis using homografts shows good results. Aortic homograft implantation is a common technique, whereas tricuspid and mitral valve replacement with mitral homograft is rare. Multiple valve malformations in infective endocarditis pose a surgical challenge because these patients are usually critically ill and surgical outcomes are often unsatisfactory. In this article, we describe our experience with successful surgical treatment of patients who underwent implantation of cryopreserved homografts

Aim: To study the long-term results of cryopreserved homograft implantation, freedom from reoperation, long-term survival, and to demonstrate new technical aspects of homograft implantation.

Material and Methods. This is a retrospective analysis of 24 patients operated in our clinic (UKB No. 1 of Sechenov University) between 2015 and 2021. Aortic homograft (AH) in orthotopic position was implanted in 6 patients with active IE. Pulmonary homograft (PH) was implanted in 13 patients: in orthotopic position (n = 10) and in heterotopic position (in the aortic root) (n = 3). Mitral homograft was implanted in 4 patients, with only 1 of them in the orthotopic position, whereas 3 were implanted in the TC position (Table 1). In 1 patient with AK and MC IE extended to the mitral-aortic contact, the use of an aorto-mitral monobloc was requested.

Results. In the midterm period, we had available data from all surviving patients. The mean gradient on AC after implantation of aortic homograft and pulmonary homograft in the position of the aortic root was 4.6 ± 1.96 mm Hg, significant regurgitation was absent in all patients, and no cases of reoperation were noted. After orthotopic implantation of pulmonary homografts, the mean gradient was 3.2 ± 1.4 mm Hg, significant regurgitation was absent in all cases. After MG implantation in TC position according to ECHO data all patients have 0–1 degree of regurgitation on the prosthesis, mean pressure gradient was 2,5 ± 0,6 mm Hg. MG was implanted in orthopic position in one case – a 52 years old woman with Bechterew’s disease, mean gradient on IC was 4 mm Hg, regurgitation 0–1 degree.

Conclusion. Valve homografts may have more advanced indications than IE. Techniques such as implantation of MG in tricuspidal or orthotopic position and the use of combined homografts show promising results, but require further clinical recruitment and evaluation of the distant period.

1. Skific M., Golemovic M., Safradin I., Duric Z., Biocina B., Golubic Cepulic B. Cryopreserved human heart valve allografts: a ten-year single centre experience. Cell Tissue Bank. 2023:24(2): 401–416. DOI: 10.1007/s10561-022-10043-3.

2. Lisy M., Kalender G., Schenke-Layland K., Brockbank K.G., Biermann A., Stock U.A. Allograft heart valves: Current aspects and future applications. Biopreserv. Biobank. 2017; 15(2):148–157. DOI: 10.1089/bio.2016.0070.

3. Arabkhani B., Bekkers J.A., Andrinopoulou E.-R., Roos-Hesselink J.W., Takkenberg J.J.M., Bogers A.J.J.C. Allografts in aortic position: insights from a 27-year, single-center prospective study. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 2016;152(6):1572–1579.e3. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2016.08.013.

4. Poinot N., Fils J.F., Demanet H., Dessy H., Biarent D., Wauthy P. Pulmonary valve replacement after right ventricular outflow tract reconstruction with homograft vs Contegra®: A case control comparison of mortality and morbidity. J. Cardiothorac. Surg. 2018;13(1):8. DOI: 10.1186/s13019-018-0698-5.

5. Nappi F., Avtaar Singh S.S., Timofeeva I. Learning from controversy: Contemporary surgical management of aortic valve endocarditis. Clin. Med. Insights Cardio. 2020;14:1179546820960729. DOI: 10.1177/1179546820960729.

6. Nuzhdin M.D., Komarov R.N., Matsuganov D.A., Nadtochiy N.B. Original technique for tricuspid valve replacement by mitral homograft: Step-bystep approach and initial results. J. Card. Surg. 2022;37(12):5195–5201. DOI: 10.1111/jocs.17228.

7. Habib G., Lancellotti P., Antunes M.J., Bongiorni M.G., Casalta J.P., Del Zotti F. et al.; ESC Scientific Document Group. 2015 ESC Guidelines for the management of infective endocarditis: The Task Force for the Management of Infective Endocarditis of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Endorsed by: European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS), the European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM). Eur. Heart J. 2015;36(44):3075–3128. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehv319.

8. Musci M., Hübler M., Amiri A., Stein J., Kosky S., Meyer R. et al. Surgical treatment for active infective prosthetic valve endocarditis: 22-year single-centre experience. Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg. 2010;38(5):528–538. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejcts.2010.03.019.

9. Yankah A.C., Klose H., Petzina R., Musci M., Siniawski H., Hetzer R. Surgical management of acute aortic root endocarditis with viable homograft: 13-year experience. Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg. 2002;21(2):260– 267. DOI: 10.1016/s1010-7940(01)01084-3.

10. Yanagawa B., Mazine A., Tam D.Y., Jüni P., Bhatt D.L., Spindel S. et al. Homograft versus conventional prosthesis for surgical management of aortic valve infective endocarditis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Innovations (Phila). 2018;13(3):163–170. DOI: 10.1097/IMI.0000000000000510.

11. Williams M.L., Brookes J.D.L., Jaya J.S., Tan E. Homograft versus valves and valved conduits for extensive aortic valve endocarditis with aortic root involvement/destruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Aorta (Stamford). 2022;10(2):43–51. DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1743110.

12. Yankah A.C., Klose H., Petzina R., Musci M., Siniawski H., Hetzer R. Surgical management of acute aortic root endocarditis with viable homograft: 13-year experience. Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg. 2002; 21(2):260– 267. DOI: 10.1016/s1010-7940(01)01084-3.

13. Morris A.J., Drinković D., Pottumarthy S., MacCulloch D., Kerr A., West T. Bacteriological outcome after valve surgery for active infective endocarditis: Implications for duration of treatment after surgery. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2005;41(2): 187–194. DOI: 10.1086/430908.

14. Ghez O., Saeed I., Serrato M., Quintero D., Kreitmann B., Fraisse A. et al. Surgical repair of pulmonary artery branches. Multimed. Man Cardiothorac. Surg. 2013;2013:mmt014. DOI: 10.1093/mmcts/mmt014.

15. Wyler von Ballmoos M., Chan E., Reardon M. Imaging and surgical treatment of primary pulmonary artery sarcoma. Int. J. Cardiovasc. Imaging. 2019;35(8):1429–1433. DOI: 10.1007/s10554-018-1489-8.

16. Pomar J.L., Mestres C.A. Tricuspid valve replacement using a mitral homograft: surgical technique and initial results. J. Heart Valve Dis. 1993;2:125–128. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8261148/ (14.05.2024).

17. Luciani G.B., de Manna N.D., Segreto A., Lanzoni L., Faggian G. Scalloped freehand pulmonary homograft for prosthetic tricuspid valve replacement. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 2021;112(1):e61–e64. DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2020.12.089.

18. Acar C., Tolan M., Berrebi A., Gaer J., Gouezo R., Marchix T. et al. Carpentier Homograft replacement of the mitral valve. Graft selection, technique of implantation, and results in forty-three patients J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surgery. 1996;111(2):367–378. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-5223(96)70446-4.

19. Shrestha B.M., Fukushima S., Vrtik M., Chong I.H., Sparks L., Jalali H. et al. Partial replacement of tricuspid valve using cryopreserved homograft. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 2010;89(4):1187–1194. DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2009.12.047.

20. Couetil J.P., Argyriadis P.G., Shafy A., Cohen A., Berrebi A.J., Loulmet D.F. et al. Partial replacement of the tricuspid valve by mitral homografts in acute endocarditis. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 2002;73:1808–1812. DOI: 10.1016/s0003-4975(02)03574-9.