Literature DB >> 16305867

Stentless aortic valves are hemodynamically superior to stented valves during mid-term follow-up: a large retrospective study.

Michael A Borger1, Susan M Carson, Joan Ivanov, Vivek Rao, Hugh E Scully, Christopher M Feindel, Tirone E David.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Several studies have compared left venticular mass (LVM) regression and hemodynamic data for stentless versus stented aortic bioprostheses with conflicting results. The major limitations of these studies are their small sample size and short-term follow-up. We therefore compared midterm LVM regression, hemodynamic data, and survival in a large population of tissue aortic valve replacement (AVR) patients.
METHODS: All patients undergoing tissue AVR at our institution between 1998 and 2001 were included (n = 737). Patients were divided into two groups according to type of bioprosthetic implanted: stentless patients (total n = 310) (Toronto SPV [St Jude Medical, St Paul, MN], n = 146 and Freestyle [Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN], n = 164) and stented patients (total n = 427) (Perimount [Edwards Life Sciences Inc, Irvine, CA], n = 291 and Mosaic [Medtronic], n = 136).
RESULTS: The two groups of patients had similar preoperative transvalvular gradients and LVM index (130 +/- 47 vs 130 +/- 42 g/m2 for stentless versus stented valves, respectively). Predischarge echos revealed that stentless patients had significantly lower mean transvalvular gradients (11 +/- 5 vs 15 +/- 6 mm Hg, p < 0.001) and larger effective orifice areas (1.32 +/- 0.52 vs 1.22 +/- 0.48 cm2, p = 0.01). Follow-up echocardiograms were obtained in 99% of surviving patients 28 +/- 22 (range, 0-79) months postoperatively. Stentless patients had significantly lower LVM index during follow-up (100 +/- 32 vs 107 +/- 32 g/m2, p = 0.005) and stentless valves were an independent predictor of LVM regression. Furthermore, a higher proportion of stented patients had residual LV hypertrophy during follow-up (28% vs 18%, p = 0.001). Stentless valves were associated with improved midterm survival by univariate analysis, but not by multivariable analysis.
CONCLUSIONS: Midterm follow-up in a large number of patients reveals that stentless bioprostheses are hemodynamically superior to stented valves.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16305867     DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2005.05.055

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg        ISSN: 0003-4975            Impact factor:   4.330


  15 in total

1.  Hemodynamic performance of the Edwards Prima Plus stentless valve at 1 year.

Authors:  Keizo Tanaka; Toshihiko Kinoshita; Kazuya Fujinaga; Shinji Kanemitsu; Jin Tanaka; Hitoshi Suzuki; Toshiya Tokui
Journal:  Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2008-09-13

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

3.  Early failure secondary to noncoronary leaflet prolapse in a stentless aortic bioprosthesis.

Authors:  Sanjay Cherian; Hajo Müller; Afksendiyos Kalangos; Mustafa Cikirikcioglu
Journal:  Tex Heart Inst J       Date:  2012

4.  Sutureless versus Conventional Aortic Valve Replacement: Outcomes in 70 High-Risk Patients Undergoing Concomitant Cardiac Procedures.

Authors:  Muhammet Onur Hanedan; Mehmet Ali Yuruk; Ali Ihsan Parlar; Ugur Ziyrek; Ali Kemal Arslan; Ufuk Sayar; Ilker Mataraci
Journal:  Tex Heart Inst J       Date:  2018-02-01

5.  In-vivo assessment of the morphology and hemodynamic functions of the BioValsalva™ composite valve-conduit graft using cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and computational modelling technology.

Authors:  Emaddin Kidher; Zhuo Cheng; Omar A Jarral; Declan P O'Regan; Xiao Yun Xu; Thanos Athanasiou
Journal:  J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2014-12-09       Impact factor: 1.637

6.  Clinical and echocardiographic outcomes after implantation of the Trifecta aortic bioprosthesis: an initial single-centre experience.

Authors:  Angelo M Dell'Aquila; Dominik Schlarb; Stefan R B Schneider; Jürgen R Sindermann; Andreas Hoffmeier; Gerrit Kaleschke; Sven Martens; Andreas Rukosujew
Journal:  Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg       Date:  2012-11-15

7.  Hemodynamics of Pericardial Aortic Valves: Contemporary Stented versus Stentless Valves in a Matched Comparison.

Authors:  Torsten Christ; Sebastian Holinski; Konstantin Zhigalov; Christina Barbara Zielinski; Herko Grubitzsch
Journal:  Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2017-09-08       Impact factor: 1.520

Review 8.  Stentless aortic valve replacement: an update.

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

9.  Long-Term Results (up to 20 Years) of 19 mm or Smaller Prostheses in the Aortic Position. Does Size Matter? A Propensity-Matched Survival Analysis.

Authors:  Horea Feier; Andrei Grigorescu; Lucian Falnita; Oana Rachita; Marian Gaspar; Constantin T Luca
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2021-05-11       Impact factor: 4.241

10.  Stentless aortic valve replacement in the young patient: long-term results.

Authors:  Torsten Christ; Herko Grubitzsch; Benjamin Claus; Wolfgang Konertz
Journal:  J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2013-04-08       Impact factor: 1.637

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.