Literature DB >> 33269142

Minimally Invasive Sutureless Aortic Valve Replacement With the Perceval S Bioprosthesis Through Ministernotomy: A Single-Center Experience.

Krishan Ramsaransing1, Vikash Hindori1, Athiná Kougioumtzoglou2, Abdullah Kaya2, Eva Verbeek1.   

Abstract

Objectives Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement has the potential advantage of faster postoperative recovery compared to open procedures. Moreover, aortic valve replacement with a sutureless valve shortens procedure time. The aim of this study is to report early postoperative outcomes and one-year survival of patients undergoing sutureless aortic valve replacement with the Perceval S bioprosthesis (LivaNova, Milan, Italy) through a ministernotomy. Methods A total of 110 patients underwent sutureless aortic valve replacement in our center with the Perceval S bioprosthesis through a ministernotomy between February 2016 and March 2019. Data regarding preoperative and operative details, hospital stay, postoperative outcomes within 30 days after surgery, and one-year mortality were assessed. Results The mean cross-clamping time and extracorporeal circulation time were 54 ± 14 and 78 ± 21 minutes, respectively. No conversion to full median sternotomy was needed perioperatively. In-hospital mortality was 0.9%. Postoperative peak gradient was 13.3 mmHg; no major paravalvular leakage or valve migration occurred postoperatively. Postoperative complications consisted of one (0.9%) patient requiring full sternotomy for bleeding and two (1.8%) patients requiring re-ministernotomy due to acute tamponade. Pacemaker implantation was needed in four (3.6%) patients. Postoperative ischemic stroke rate and new-onset atrial fibrillation were 0.9% (n = 1) and 20% (n = 22), respectively, and one-year survival was 97.3%. Median intensive care unit and hospital stay were one and eight day(s), respectively. Conclusion Minimally invasive sutureless aortic valve replacement with the Perceval S bioprosthesis through a ministernotomy appears to be a safe procedure with good postoperative results and one-year survival. Further follow-up is needed to evaluate long-term outcomes.
Copyright © 2020, Ramsaransing et al.

Entities:  

Keywords:  aortic valve surgery; minimally invasive cardiac surgery; suture free

Year:  2020        PMID: 33269142      PMCID: PMC7707058          DOI: 10.7759/cureus.11212

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cureus        ISSN: 2168-8184


  20 in total

Review 1.  Ministernotomy versus conventional sternotomy for aortic valve replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Morgan L Brown; Stephen H McKellar; Thoralf M Sundt; Hartzell V Schaff
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2008-10-23       Impact factor: 5.209

2.  The sutureless aortic valve at 1 year: A large multicenter cohort study.

Authors:  Theodor Fischlein; Bart Meuris; Kavous Hakim-Meibodi; Martin Misfeld; Thierry Carrel; Marian Zembala; Sara Gaggianesi; Francesco Madonna; François Laborde; Federico Asch; Axel Haverich
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2016-01-22       Impact factor: 5.209

3.  Decision-making in elderly patients with severe aortic stenosis: why are so many denied surgery?

Authors:  Bernard Iung; Agnès Cachier; Gabriel Baron; David Messika-Zeitoun; François Delahaye; Pilar Tornos; Christa Gohlke-Bärwolf; Eric Boersma; Philippe Ravaud; Alec Vahanian
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2005-09-01       Impact factor: 29.983

4.  Better short-term outcome by using sutureless valves: a propensity-matched score analysis.

Authors:  Francesco Pollari; Giuseppe Santarpino; Angelo Maria Dell'Aquila; Laszlo Gazdag; Husam Alnahas; Ferdinand Vogt; Steffen Pfeiffer; Theodor Fischlein
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2014-06-10       Impact factor: 4.330

5.  Sutureless perceval aortic valve replacement: results of two European centers.

Authors:  Thierry A Folliguet; François Laborde; Konstantinos Zannis; Gabriel Ghorayeb; Axel Haverich; Malakh Shrestha
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 4.330

6.  Effect of sutureless implantation of the Perceval S aortic valve bioprosthesis on intraoperative and early postoperative outcomes.

Authors:  Willem Flameng; Marie-Christine Herregods; Hadewich Hermans; Gerry Van der Mieren; Monique Vercalsteren; Gert Poortmans; Jan Van Hemelrijck; Bart Meuris
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2011-04-07       Impact factor: 5.209

7.  Aortic cross-clamp time, new prostheses, and outcome in aortic valve replacement.

Authors:  Marco Ranucci; Alessandro Frigiola; Lorenzo Menicanti; Serenella Castelvecchio; Carlo de Vincentiis; Valeria Pistuddi
Journal:  J Heart Valve Dis       Date:  2012-11

8.  Isolated aortic valve replacement in North America comprising 108,687 patients in 10 years: changes in risks, valve types, and outcomes in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons National Database.

Authors:  James M Brown; Sean M O'Brien; Changfu Wu; Jo Ann H Sikora; Bartley P Griffith; James S Gammie
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 5.209

9.  The evolving epidemiology of valvular aortic stenosis. the Tromsø study.

Authors:  Gry Wisthus Eveborn; Henrik Schirmer; Geir Heggelund; Per Lunde; Knut Rasmussen
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2012-09-02       Impact factor: 5.994

10.  Sutureless Perceval Aortic Valve Versus Conventional Stented Bioprostheses: Meta-Analysis of Postoperative and Midterm Results in Isolated Aortic Valve Replacement.

Authors:  Massimo Meco; Andrea Montisci; Antonio Miceli; Paolo Panisi; Francesco Donatelli; Silvia Cirri; Matteo Ferrarini; Antonio Lio; Mattia Glauber
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2018-02-16       Impact factor: 5.501

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.