Literature DB >> 23798213

Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement with self-anchoring Perceval valve.

Malakh Shrestha1, Rebecca Timm, Klaus Höffler, Nurbol Koigeldiyev, Nawid Khaladj, Christian Hagl, Axel Haverich, Samir Sarikouch.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: Although minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (AVR) has been proposed to cause less morbidity in patients, it still has not seen broad application. The study aim was to evaluate the implantation of the self-anchoring aortic valve (Perceval S; Sorin) via a mini-sternotomy.
METHODS: As a part of a multicenter, European, prospective, non-randomized, clinical trial, 35 patients (30 females, five males; mean age 80 +/- 4 years) with isolated aortic valve stenosis (mean gradient 48 +/- 21 mm Hg) were operated on at the authors' center. Perceval S self-anchoring valves were implanted following a mini-sternotomy, extracorporeal circulation (ECC), aortic cross-clamping, cardioplegic arrest and removal of the calcified native valve. The mean EuroSCORE and STS score were 12 +/- 9% and 4 +/- 2%, respectively.
RESULTS: There were no failures of deployment, and nor was there any intra-procedure or 30-day mortality. The mean ECC-time was 70 +/- 24 min, and cross-clamp time 34 +/- 10 min. The valve implantation time was 9 +/- 5 min. Perioperative echocardiography revealed no significant aortic insufficiency or paravalvular leakage. The postoperative mean gradient was 16 +/- 6 mmHg. At follow up, there was no paravalvular leakage or significant valvular insufficiency. No migration or dislodgement of the prosthesis occurred.
CONCLUSION: This trial highlights the advantages of the Perceval S self-anchoring valve which, technically is a more reproducible alternative for minimally invasive AVR. As the valve does not need to be sutured, the limited exposure is not a disadvantage even in patients with calcified or small aortic roots. This also potentially reduces the cross-clamp and ECC-times. This valve may enable a broader application of minimally invasive AVR.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23798213

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Heart Valve Dis        ISSN: 0966-8519


  3 in total

1.  Sutureless aortic bioprosthesis valve implantation and bicuspid valve anatomy: an unsolved dilemma?

Authors:  Marco Vola; Jean-Baptiste Guichard; Salvatore Campisi; Jean-François Fuzellier; Antoine Gerbay; Fabien Doguet; Karl Isaaz; Kasra Azarnoush; Amedeo Anselmi; Vito Giovani Ruggieri
Journal:  Heart Vessels       Date:  2016-01-12       Impact factor: 2.037

2.  Aortic valve replacement with sutureless prosthesis: better than root enlargement to avoid patient-prosthesis mismatch?

Authors:  Erik Beckmann; Andreas Martens; Firas Alhadi; Klaus Hoeffler; Julia Umminger; Tim Kaufeld; Samir Sarikouch; Nurbol Koigeldiev; Serghei Cebotari; Jan Dieter Schmitto; Axel Haverich; Malakh Shrestha
Journal:  Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg       Date:  2016-02-25

3.  Experimental Study and Early Clinical Application Of a Sutureless Aortic Bioprosthesis.

Authors:  Walter J Gomes; João Carlos Leal; Fabio Biscegli Jatene; Nelson A Hossne; Renata Gabaldi; Glaucia Basso Frazzato; Guilherme Agreli; Domingo M Braile
Journal:  Braz J Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2015 Sep-Oct
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.