Literature DB >> 16820633

Are stentless valves superior to modern stented valves? A prospective randomized trial.

Ayyaz Ali1, James C Halstead, Fay Cafferty, Linda Sharples, Fiona Rose, Richard Coulden, Evelyn Lee, John Dunning, Vincenzo Argano, Steven Tsui.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: It is presumed that stentless aortic bioprostheses are hemodynamically superior to stented bioprostheses. A prospective randomized controlled trial was undertaken to compare stentless versus modern stented valves. METHODS AND
RESULTS: Patients with severe aortic valve stenosis (n=161) undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR) were randomized intraoperatively to receive either the C-E Perimount stented bioprosthesis (n=81) or the Prima Plus stentless bioprosthesis (n =80). We assessed left ventricular mass (LVM) regression with transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Transvalvular gradients were measured postoperatively by Doppler echocardiography to compare hemodynamic performance. There was no difference between groups with regard to age, symptom status, need for concomitant coronary artery bypass surgery, or baseline LVM. LVM regressed in both groups but with no significant difference between groups at 1 year. In a subset of 50 patients, MRI was also used to assess LVM regression, and again there was no significant difference between groups at 1 year. Hemodynamic performance of the 2 valves was similar with no difference in mean and peak systolic transvalvular gradients 1 year after surgery. In patients with reduced ventricular function (left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] <60%), there was a significantly greater improvement in LVEF from baseline to 1 year in stentless valve recipients.
CONCLUSIONS: Both stented and stentless bioprostheses are associated with excellent clinical and hemodynamic outcomes 1 year after AVR. Comparable hemodynamics and LVM regression can be achieved using a second-generation stented pericardial bioprosthesis. In patients with ventricular impairment, stentless bioprostheses may allow for greater improvement in left ventricular function postoperatively.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16820633     DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.105.000950

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


  12 in total

Review 1.  Surgical Treatment of Valvular Heart Disease: Overview of Mechanical and Tissue Prostheses, Advantages, Disadvantages, and Implications for Clinical Use.

Authors:  Amy G Fiedler; George Tolis
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2018-02-05

2.  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

3.  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 4.  A look at recent improvements in the durability of tissue valves.

Authors:  Takahiro Nishida; Ryuji Tominaga
Journal:  Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2013-01-24

Review 5.  Biological aortic valve replacement: advantages and optimal indications of stentless compared to stented valve substitutes. A review.

Authors:  Reza Tavakoli; Pichoy Danial; Ahmed Hamid Oudjana; Peiman Jamshidi; Max Gassmann; Pascal Leprince; Guillaume Lebreton
Journal:  Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2018-01-10

Review 6.  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

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.  Early and mid-term haemodynamic performance and clinical outcomes of St. Jude Medical Trifecta™ valve.

Authors:  Renata Raimundo; Soraia Moreira; Francisca Saraiva; Rui J Cerqueira; Pedro Teixeira; Elson Salgueiro; André Lourenço; Mário J Amorim; Jorge Almeida; Paulo Pinho; Adelino F Leite-Moreira
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 2.895

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.