Complex patients requiring operations on the left ventricular outflow tract, aortic valve, or thoracic aorta after previous repair of aortopathy constitute a challenging group, with limited information guiding decision-making. We aimed to use our institutional experience to highlight management challenges and describe surgical pearls to address them.

Forty-one complex patients with surgery on the left ventricular outflow tract, aortic valve, or aorta at Cleveland Clinic Children’s between 2016 and 2021 following previous repair of aortic pathology were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with known connective tissue disease or single ventricle circulation were excluded.

Median age at index procedure was 23 years (range 0.25–48) with median of 2 prior sternotomies. Previous aortic operations included subvalvular (n = 9), valvular (n = 6), supravalvular (n = 13), and multi-level surgeries (n = 13). Four deaths occurred in median follow-up of 2.5 years. Mean left ventricular outflow tract gradients improved significantly for patients with obstruction (34.9 ± 17.5 mmHg versus 12.6 ± 6.0 mmHg; p < 0.001). Technical pearls include the following: 1) liberal use of anterior aortoventriculoplasty with valve replacement; 2) primarily anterior aortoventriculoplasty following the subpulmonary conus in contrast to more vertical incision for post-arterial switch operation patients; 3) pre-operative imaging of mediastinum and peripheral vasculature for cannulation and sternal re-entry; and 4) proactive use of multi-site peripheral cannulation.

Operation to address the left ventricular outflow tract, aortic valve, or aorta following prior congenital aortic repair can be accomplished with excellent outcomes despite high complexity. These procedures commonly include multiple components, including concomitant valve interventions. Cannulation strategies and anterior aortoventriculoplasty in specific patients require modifications.

The use of a long backboard and cervical collar are commonly recommended by international guidelines for spinal immobilization, but both devices may cause several side effects. In a recent study, it was reported that spinal immobilization at 20° eliminated the decrease in pulmonary function secondary to spinal immobilization performed at 0°. Spinal immobilization at 20° is a new recommendation, but other potential effects need to be explored before it can be implemented in clinical use.

Hemodynamic observation is important in the management of trauma patients. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of spinal immobilization at a 20° position instead of 0° on hemodynamic parameters.

This study included 53 healthy volunteers who underwent spinal immobilization in the supine position (00) and in an elevated position (200). Systolic arterial pressure (SAP), diastolic arterial pressure (DAP), mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), left ventricular outflow tract velocity time integral (LVOT-VTI), left ventricular stroke volume (LVSV), cardiac output (CO), inferior vena cava diameter inspiration (IVC diameter insp), IVC diameter expiration (IVC diameter exp), and inferior vena cava collapsibility index (IVC-CI) were measured at the 0th and 30th minutes of spinal immobilization in both positions. The data were compared for demonstrating the efficiency of both positions in spinal immobilization.

A statistically significant difference was found in the parameters of the IVC diameter (exp), IVC diameter (insp), LVOT-VTI, LVSV, and CO through the measurements starting in the 0th minute of the transition from 0° to 20° (P <.001). Delta values (∆) of hemodynamic parameters (∆IVC diameter [exp], ∆IVC diameter [insp], ∆LVOT-VTI, ∆SV, ∆CO, ∆IVC-CI, ∆MAP, ∆SAP, ∆DAP, and ∆HR) were similar in spinal immobilization at 0° and 20°.

The findings obtained from this study illustrate that spinal immobilization at 20° does not cause clinically significant hemodynamic changes in healthy subjects compared to spinal immobilization at 0°.

We carried out a retrospective review of patients who underwent repair for ventricular septal defect and aortic arch obstruction – coarctation or interrupted aortic arch – between July, 2002 and June, 2013. Echocardiographic data were reviewed, and the need for re-intervention was evaluated.

A total of 89 patients were included in this study. A significant left ventricular outflow tract growth was noticed after surgical repair. Preoperatively, the mean left ventricular outflow tract Z-score was −1.46±1 (range −5.5 to 1.1) and increased to a mean value of −0.7±1.3 (range −2.7 to 3.2) at last follow-up (p=0.0001), demonstrating relevant growth of the left ventricular outflow tract after repair for ventricular septal defect and aortic arch obstruction. After primary repair, 11 patients (12.3%) required re-intervention with surgical repair for left ventricular outflow tract obstruction after a mean period of 36±21 months. There were no significant differences in age, weight, and indexed aortic valve and left ventricular outflow tract measurements between those who developed obstruction and those who did not.

Significant left ventricular outflow tract growth is expected after repair of ventricular septal defect and aortic arch obstruction. Small aortic valve and left ventricular outflow tract at diagnosis are not risk factors to predict the need for surgical re-intervention for left ventricular outflow tract obstruction in future.

A discrete subaortic membrane cannot only cause left ventricular outflow tract obstruction, but can grow onto the aortic valve leaflets. The late finding of this encroachment is aortic valve insufficiency or stenosis. Echocardiography is used to follow the progression of outflow tract obstruction, but its ability to show subaortic membrane encroachment onto the aortic valve is unclear. The purpose of this study is to determine the sensitivity and specificity of echocardiography for diagnosing whether a discrete subaortic membrane involves the aortic valve.

A pre-operative determination of aortic valve involvement by a discrete subaortic membrane was obtained by review of the official pre-operative echocardiogram reading and a retrospective blinded review of the pre-operative echocardiogram by an independent echocardiographer. These findings were compared to the intra-operative findings.

A total of 48 consecutive patients underwent primary resection for isolated discrete subaortic membrane between October, 1995 and May, 2006. The pre-operative and blinded readings both predicted a statistically lower rate of aortic valve involvement – 35% in 11 of 31 patients and 31% in 10 of 31 patients, respectively – than found at surgery – 65% in 31 of 48 patients. The sensitivity and specificity of pre-operative echocardiography to diagnose aortic valve involvement is 35% and 76%. Overall survival was 100%. There were no strokes, re-operations for bleeding or wound infections, or need for a pacemaker.

Echocardiography is not sensitive in assessing whether a discrete subaortic membrane involves the aortic valve. Since the morbidity and mortality for discrete subaortic membrane resection is negligible, resection may be indicated at the time of diagnosis to minimise aortic valve impairment.