Augusto D'Onofrio1, Stefano Salizzoni2, Claudia Filippini3, Chiara Tessari4, Lorenzo Bagozzi4, Antonio Messina5, Giovanni Troise5, Margerita Dalla Tomba5, Manfredo Rambaldini6, Magnus Dalén7, Francesco Alamanni8, Massimo Massetti9, Carmelo Mignosa10, Claudio Russo11, Loris Salvador12, Roberto Di Bartolomeo13, Daniele Maselli14, Ruggero De Paulis15, Ottavio Alfieri16, Carlo Maria De Filippo17, Michele Portoghese18, Uberto Bortolotti19, Mauro Rinaldi2, Gino Gerosa4. 1. Division of Cardiac Surgery, Azienda Ospedaliera/University of Padua, Padua, Italy. Electronic address: adonofrio@hotmail.it. 2. Division of Cardiac Surgery, Molinette Hospital, University of Turin, Turin, Italy. 3. Division of Cardiac Surgery, University of Turin, Turin, Italy. 4. Division of Cardiac Surgery, Azienda Ospedaliera/University of Padua, Padua, Italy. 5. Division of Cardiac Surgery, Poliambulanza Foundation, Brescia, Italy. 6. Division of Cardiac Surgery, C. Poma Hospital, ASST Mantua, Mantua, Italy. 7. Division of Cardiac Surgery, Karolinska Institute, Solna, Sweden. 8. Division of Cardiac Surgery, Monzino Hospital, Milan, Italy. 9. Division of Cardiac Surgery, Gemelli Hospital, Catholic University, Rome, Italy. 10. Division of Cardiac Surgery, Morgagni Hospital, Catania, Italy. 11. Division of Cardiac Surgery, Sacco Hospital, Milan, Italy. 12. Division of Cardiac Surgery, S. Bortolo Hospital, Vicenza, Italy. 13. Division of Cardiac Surgery, S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy. 14. Division of Cardiac Surgery, S. Anna Hospital, Catanzaro, Italy. 15. Division of Cardiac Surgery, European Hospital, Rome, Italy. 16. Division of Cardiac Surgery, S. Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy. 17. Division of Cardiac Surgery, Fondazione Giovanni Paolo II, Campobasso, Italy. 18. Division of Cardiac Surgery, ASSL Sassari, Sassari, Italy. 19. Division of Cardiac Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this retrospective multicenter study was to compare early clinical and hemodynamic outcomes of Perceval-S sutureless (Livanova, London, United Kingdom) and Intuity rapid-deployment (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, Calif) bioprostheses. METHODS: Data from patients who underwent isolated or combined aortic valve replacement with Perceval-S and with Intuity bioprostheses at 18 cardiac surgical institutions were analyzed. Propensity matching was performed to identify similar patient cohorts. RESULTS: We included 911 patients from March 2011 until May 2017. Perceval-S and Intuity valves were implanted in 349 (38.3%) and in 562 (61.7%) patients, respectively. Propensity score identified 117 matched pairs. In the matched cohort, device success was 99.1% and 100% in Perceval-S and Intuity group, respectively (P = 1.000). Thirty-day Valve Academic Research Consortium mortality occurred in 2 (1.7%) and 4 (3.4%) patients in the Perceval-S and in Intuity group, respectively (P = .6834). The rate of postoperative new permanent pacemaker implantation was 6% (7 patients) and 6.8% (8 patients) in the Perceval-S and in Intuity group, respectively (P = .7896). Perceval-S valve implantation requires significantly shorter aortic crossclamp and cardiopulmonary bypass times than Intuity valve implantation (aortic crossclamp time for isolated, 52 ± 14 minutes vs 62 ± 24 minutes; P < .0001). Peak transaortic gradients were 22.4 ± 8.1 mm Hg and 19.6 ± 6.7 mm Hg (P = .0144), whereas mean gradients were 11.8 ± 4.7 mm Hg and 10.5 ± 3.9 mm Hg (P = .0388) in the Perceval-S and Intuity groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Sutureless Perceval-S and rapid-deployment Intuity bioprostheses provide good and similar early clinical and hemodynamic outcomes. Perceval-S valve implantation requires shorter crossclamp and cardiopulmonary bypass times, whereas Intuity valve implantation provides lower transaortic peak and mean gradients.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this retrospective multicenter study was to compare early clinical and hemodynamic outcomes of Perceval-S sutureless (Livanova, London, United Kingdom) and Intuity rapid-deployment (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, Calif) bioprostheses. METHODS: Data from patients who underwent isolated or combined aortic valve replacement with Perceval-S and with Intuity bioprostheses at 18 cardiac surgical institutions were analyzed. Propensity matching was performed to identify similar patient cohorts. RESULTS: We included 911 patients from March 2011 until May 2017. Perceval-S and Intuity valves were implanted in 349 (38.3%) and in 562 (61.7%) patients, respectively. Propensity score identified 117 matched pairs. In the matched cohort, device success was 99.1% and 100% in Perceval-S and Intuity group, respectively (P = 1.000). Thirty-day Valve Academic Research Consortium mortality occurred in 2 (1.7%) and 4 (3.4%) patients in the Perceval-S and in Intuity group, respectively (P = .6834). The rate of postoperative new permanent pacemaker implantation was 6% (7 patients) and 6.8% (8 patients) in the Perceval-S and in Intuity group, respectively (P = .7896). Perceval-S valve implantation requires significantly shorter aortic crossclamp and cardiopulmonary bypass times than Intuity valve implantation (aortic crossclamp time for isolated, 52 ± 14 minutes vs 62 ± 24 minutes; P < .0001). Peak transaortic gradients were 22.4 ± 8.1 mm Hg and 19.6 ± 6.7 mm Hg (P = .0144), whereas mean gradients were 11.8 ± 4.7 mm Hg and 10.5 ± 3.9 mm Hg (P = .0388) in the Perceval-S and Intuity groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Sutureless Perceval-S and rapid-deployment Intuity bioprostheses provide good and similar early clinical and hemodynamic outcomes. Perceval-S valve implantation requires shorter crossclamp and cardiopulmonary bypass times, whereas Intuity valve implantation provides lower transaortic peak and mean gradients.
Authors: Michael L Williams; Campbell D Flynn; Andrew A Mamo; David H Tian; Utz Kappert; Manuel Wilbring; Thierry Folliguet; Antonio Fiore; Antonio Miceli; Augusto D'Onofrio; Giorgia Cibin; Gino Gerosa; Mattia Glauber; Theodor Fischlein; Francesco Pollari Journal: Ann Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2020-07
Authors: José Manuel Martínez-Comendador; Francisco Estevez-Cid; Miguel González Barbeito; Carlos Velasco García De Sierra; Alberto Bouzas Mosquera; Cayetana Barbeito; José Cuenca Castillo; José Herrera-Noreña Journal: Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg Date: 2021-04-19