ATS
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Personal Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Author home page(s):
James Jaggers
Robert D. Davis
Donald D. Glower
Ross M. Ungerleider
Right arrow Permission Requests
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jaggers, J.
Right arrow Articles by Ungerleider, R. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Jaggers, J.
Right arrow Articles by Ungerleider, R. M.

Ann Thorac Surg 1998;65:1553-1557
© 1998 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons


Original articles: cardiovascular

The Ross Procedure: Shorter Hospital Stay, Decreased Morbidity, and Cost Effective

James Jaggers, MDa, John K. Harrison, MDb, Thomas M. Bashore, MDb, Robert D. Davis, MDa, Donald D. Glower, MDa, Ross M. Ungerleider, MDa

a Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA
b Department of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA

Address reprint requests to Dr Jaggers, Cardiothoracic Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Box 3474, Durham, NC 27710
e-mail: (Jagge003{at}mc.duke.edu)

Presented at the Forty-fourth Annual Meeting of the Southern Thoracic Surgical Association, Naples, FL, Nov 6–8, 1997.

Background. The Ross procedure has become an accepted and sometimes preferred alternative to mechanical aortic valve replacement. One criticism of the Ross procedure is that it may have a higher operative mortality, morbidity, and cost. Several groups have shown that this operation can be performed safely with less than 3% mortality. The issue of higher cost has not been resolved. In this retrospective study we compared a consecutive group of patients undergoing the Ross procedure with an age- and disease-matched group of patients who underwent mechanical aortic valve replacement.

Methods. From 1993 to 1996, 22 consecutive adult patients (age range, 20 to 57 years; mean, 38 ± 14 years) underwent the Ross procedure. Twenty-seven patients (age range, 17 to 57 years; mean, 41 ± 10 years) underwent mechanical aortic valve replacement between 1991 and 1996. The hospital cost (in 1996 dollars) and postoperative length of stay were calculated for each patient using Transition I, a hospital-wide cost accounting system.

Results. There was no hospital mortality in either group. The incidence of significant valve-related complication was 5% (1/22 patients) in the Ross procedure group and 22% (6/27 patients) in the mechanical valve group. There were two late deaths in the group with mechanical aortic valve replacement. The length of stay for the Ross procedure group was 5.9 ± 2.1 days, versus 8 ± 1.85 days for the mechanical valve group (p < 0.01). The mean hospital costs were not significantly different, $23,140 ± $7,825 for the mechanical valve group and $23,226 ± $6,960 for the group having the Ross procedure.

Conclusions. The data from this review demonstrate that the Ross procedure can be done safely, with short hospital stays, decreased morbidity, and costs comparable with those of standard mechanical aortic valve replacement in patients with isolated aortic valve disease.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
ANN THORAC SURG ASIAN CARDIOVASC THORAC ANN EUR J CARDIOTHORAC SURG
J THORAC CARDIOVASC SURG ICVTS ALL CTSNet JOURNALS
Copyright © 1998 by The Society of Thoracic Surgeons.