Literature DB >> 25149050

Clinical experience with the freedom SOLO stentless aortic valve in 277 consecutive patients.

Markus Thalmann1, Josef Kaiblinger1, Richard Krausler2, Harald Pisarik1, Franz Veit1, Niuscha Taheri2, Karin Kornigg1, Christian Dinges2, Martin Grabenwöger2, Olaf Stanger3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Sorin Freedom SOLO (FS) bovine pericardial stentless valve prosthesis is designed for supraannular, subcoronary implantation. We report our experience and results with 277 consecutively implanted FS bioprostheses.
METHODS: 277 patients (mean age, 74.2 ± 7.3 years; 139 (50.2%) female) underwent aortic valve replacement (AVR) with the FS stentless bioprosthesis. The hemodynamic performance was investigated with transthoracic echocardiography at discharge, 6 months later, and yearly thereafter. Follow-up was 100% complete, with an average observation time of 2.6 ± 1.7 years and a total of 697.3 patient-years.
RESULTS: The overall 30-day mortality was 4.3%. The mortalities for isolated AVR and combined procedures were 1.9% and 7.3%, respectively. No causes of death were valve-related. Preoperative peak (74.2 ± 23.0 mm Hg) and mean (48.6 ± 16.3 mm Hg) gradients decreased to 15.6 ± 5.4 mm Hg and 8.8 ± 3.0 mm Hg postoperatively and remained unchanged for as long as 5 years. The postoperative mean effective orifice area (EOA) for valve sizes 19, 21, 23, 25, and 27 were 1.49 ± 0.32 cm(2), 1.67 ± 0.40 cm(2), 1.92 ± 0.38 cm(2), 2.01 ± 0.42 cm(2), and 2.13 ± 0.36 cm(2), respectively. Severe prosthesis-patient mismach (PPM) was completely absent, and moderate PPM occurred in 17 patients (6.1%). In isolated AVR, 0.8% of patients with preoperative sinus rhythm required a permanent pacemaker before hospital discharge. There was 100% freedom from structural valve deterioration, 99.6 % freedom from endocarditis and reoperation, and 97.3% freedom from thromboembolism at 5 years.
CONCLUSIONS: The FS stentless aortic valve is safe to implant, and it shows excellent hemodynamic performance and early and midterm results. Owing to the favorable EOA, the valve appears particularly attractive for patients at risk for PPM.
Copyright © 2014 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25149050     DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2014.05.089

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


  2 in total

1.  Stentless vs. stented bioprosthesis for aortic valve replacement: A case matched comparison of long-term follow-up and subgroup analysis of patients with native valve endocarditis.

Authors:  Andreas Schaefer; Jannis Dickow; Gerhard Schoen; Sumi Westhofen; Lisa Kloss; Tarik Al-Saydali; Hermann Reichenspurner; Sebastian A Philipp; Christian Detter
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-01-16       Impact factor: 3.240

2.  In Vitro Study of a Stentless Aortic Bioprosthesis Made of Bacterial Cellulose.

Authors:  Kinga Dawidowska; Piotr Siondalski; Magdalena Kołaczkowska
Journal:  Cardiovasc Eng Technol       Date:  2020-11-17       Impact factor: 2.495

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.