Literature DB >> 16230487

Randomized comparison of stentless versus stented valves for aortic stenosis: effects on left ventricular mass.

Diego Perez de Arenaza1, Belinda Lees, Marcus Flather, Fiona Nugara, Trygve Husebye, Marek Jasinski, Marek Cisowski, Mohammed Khan, Michael Henein, Jullien Gaer, Levant Guvendik, Andrzej Bochenek, Stanislaw Wos, Mons Lie, Guido Van Nooten, Dudley Pennell, John Pepper.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Aortic valve replacement (AVR) is the established treatment for severe aortic stenosis. In response to the long-term results of aortic homografts, stentless porcine valves were introduced as an alternative low-resistance valve. We conducted a randomized trial comparing a stentless with a stented porcine valve in adults with severe aortic stenosis. METHODS AND
RESULTS: The primary outcome was change in left ventricular mass index (LVMI) measured by transthoracic echocardiography and, in a subset, by cardiovascular MR. Measurements were taken before valve replacement and at 6 and 12 months. Patients undergoing AVR with an aortic annulus < or =25 mm in diameter were randomly allocated to a stentless (n=93) or a stented supra-annular (n=97) valve. There were no significant differences in mean LVMI between the stentless versus stented groups at baseline (176+/-62 and 182+/-63 g/m2, respectively) or at 6 months (142+/-49 and 131+/-45 g/m2, respectively), although within-group changes from baseline to 6 months were highly significant. Changes in LVMI measured by cardiovascular MR (n=38) were consistent with the echo findings. There was a greater reduction in peak aortic velocity (P<0.001) and a greater increase in indexed effective orifice area (P<0.001) in the stentless group than in the stented group. There were no differences in clinical outcomes between the 2 valve groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite significant differences in indexed effective orifice area and peak flow velocity in favor of the stentless valve, there were similar reductions in left ventricular mass at 6 months with both stented and stentless valves, which persisted at 12 months.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16230487     DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.104.521161

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Circulation        ISSN: 0009-7322            Impact factor:   29.690


  10 in total

1.  LV reverse remodeling imparted by aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis; is it durable? A cardiovascular MRI study sponsored by the American Heart Association.

Authors:  Robert W W Biederman; James A Magovern; Saundra B Grant; Ronald B Williams; June A Yamrozik; Diane A Vido; Vikas K Rathi; Geetha Rayarao; Ketheswaram Caruppannan; Mark Doyle
Journal:  J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2011-04-14       Impact factor: 1.637

2.  Morphometrical and biomechanical analyses of a stentless bioprosthetic valve: an implication to avoid potential primary tissue failure.

Authors:  Hiroki Takaya; Shinya Masuda; Masaaki Naganuma; Ichiro Yoshioka; Goro Takahashi; Masatoshi Akiyama; Osamu Adachi; Kiichiro Kumagai; Shukei Sugita; Yoshikatsu Saiki
Journal:  Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2018-06-28

Review 3.  Biomechanical Behavior of Bioprosthetic Heart Valve Heterograft Tissues: Characterization, Simulation, and Performance.

Authors:  Joao S Soares; Kristen R Feaver; Will Zhang; David Kamensky; Ankush Aggarwal; Michael S Sacks
Journal:  Cardiovasc Eng Technol       Date:  2016-08-09       Impact factor: 2.495

Review 4.  Stentless aortic valve replacement: an update.

Authors:  Junjiro Kobayashi
Journal:  Vasc Health Risk Manag       Date:  2011-06-02

Review 5.  Factors affecting left ventricular remodeling after valve replacement for aortic stenosis. An overview.

Authors:  Emmanuel Villa; Giovanni Troise; Marco Cirillo; Federico Brunelli; Margherita Dalla Tomba; Zen Mhagna; Giordano Tasca; Eugenio Quaini
Journal:  Cardiovasc Ultrasound       Date:  2006-06-27       Impact factor: 2.062

6.  Full-root aortic valve replacement with stentless xenograft achieves superior regression of left ventricular hypertrophy compared to pericardial stented aortic valves.

Authors:  Reza Tavakoli; Christoph Auf der Maur; Xavier Mueller; Reinhard Schläpfer; Peiman Jamshidi; François Daubeuf; Nelly Frossard
Journal:  J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2015-02-03       Impact factor: 1.637

7.  Surgery for Young Adults With Aortic Valve Disease not Amenable to Repair.

Authors:  Mustafa Zakkar; Vito Domanico Bruno; Alexandru Ciprian Visan; Stephanie Curtis; Gianni Angelini; Emmanuel Lansac; Serban Stoica
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2018-03-02

Review 8.  Bioprosthetic Aortic Valve Degeneration: a Review from a Basic Science Perspective.

Authors:  Tiago R Velho; Rafael Maniés Pereira; Frederico Fernandes; Nuno Carvalho Guerra; Ricardo Ferreira; Ângelo Nobre
Journal:  Braz J Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2022-05-02

9.  Secreted Wnt modulators in symptomatic aortic stenosis.

Authors:  Erik Tandberg Askevold; Lars Gullestad; Svend Aakhus; Trine Ranheim; Theis Tønnessen; Ole G Solberg; Pål Aukrust; Thor Ueland
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2012-12-19       Impact factor: 5.501

10.  Anesthetic management of a patient with obstructive prosthetic aortic valve dysfunction: a case report.

Authors:  Bo Ra Lee; Jeong-Rim Lee; Min Soo Kim
Journal:  Korean J Anesthesiol       Date:  2014-02-28
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.