ALERT!

This site is not optimized for Internet Explorer 8 (or older).

Please upgrade to a newer version of Internet Explorer or use an alternate browser such as Chrome or Firefox.

Incision of the Moderator Band During Repair of Tetralogy of Fallot

Tuesday, September 16, 2025

Aydin MI, Hanabergh S, Loke Y-H, et al. Incision of the Moderator Band During Repair of Tetralogy of Fallot. September 2025. doi:10.25373/ctsnet.30138898

Objective 

Whether the moderator band should always be preserved or cut during the relief of the pulmonary subvalvar obstruction in the repair of tetralogy of Fallot (TOF) is a controversial topic. This presentation includes two cases illustrating that, at times, the moderator band can obstruct the right ventricular outflow tract in TOF and should be incised.  

The first case involved a patient with a previous history of TOF, who underwent TOF repair at three months of age, followed by reoperation for recurrent right ventricular outflow tract obstruction at three years of age. At nine years, this patient experienced recurrent right ventricular outflow tract obstruction with a peak gradient of 108 mm Hg. The second patient had a previous history of TOF and underwent elective TOF repair at four months of age. 

Case Video Summary 

The first case in the video demonstrates that the moderator band serves as the substrate creating right ventricular obstruction. Although the subvalvar apparatus of the anterior leaflet is attached to it, the moderator band needed to be resected. The second case depicted a patient with the exact same anatomy. An elective incision of the moderator band was performed to avoid residual right ventricular outflow tract obstruction. 

Conclusions 

In some instances, the moderator band is the source of subpulmonary obstruction in TOF and must be incised during repair, even when the tricuspid subvalvar apparatus is attached to the moderator band. 


Disclaimer

The information and views presented on CTSNet.org represent the views of the authors and contributors of the material and not of CTSNet. Please review our full disclaimer page here.

Comments

I wonder if this was a form of an associated double-chambered RV (DCRV), and if preop MRI would have delineated the anatomy better? I am sure epicardial RV dimple would have been noted if DCRV!
Thank you very much for pointing this out. Considering that the first patient had RVOT resection more than once, could raise the question about DCRV. The preoperative ventriculogram was not suggestive of DCRV; however, we agree that advanced imaging could have been helpful. The first case was a redo; therefore, it would have been difficult to note the epicardial RV dimple. It was not noted in the second case.

Add comment

Log in or register to post comments