Clinical Short-Term Outcome and Hemodynamic Comparison of Six Contemporary Bovine Aortic Valve Prostheses.
Aged
Animals
Aortic Valve
/ diagnostic imaging
Aortic Valve Stenosis
/ diagnostic imaging
Bioprosthesis
Cattle
Female
Heart Valve Prosthesis
Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation
/ adverse effects
Hemodynamics
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Postoperative Complications
/ mortality
Prosthesis Design
Retrospective Studies
Risk Factors
Treatment Outcome
Journal
The Thoracic and cardiovascular surgeon
ISSN: 1439-1902
Titre abrégé: Thorac Cardiovasc Surg
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 7903387
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 2020
10 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
23
1
2019
medline:
16
12
2020
entrez:
23
1
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Conventional stented valves (CV) remain gold standard for aortic valve disease. Bovine prostheses have been improved and rapid deployment valves (RDV) have arrived in the recent decade. We compare clinical and hemodynamic short-term outcome of six bovine valves. We retrospectively evaluated 829 consecutive patients (all-comers) receiving bovine aortic valve replacement (AVR). Four CV from different manufacturers (Mitroflow, Crown, Perimount, Trifecta) and two RDV (Perceval, Intuity) were compared in terms of pre-, intra-, and postprocedural data. A risk model for mortality was created. All valves reduced gradients. From 23 mm, all CV showed acceptable gradients. Twenty-one millimeter Mitroflow/Perceval and 19 mm Crown showed above-average gradients. As baseline data differed, we performed propensity matching between aggregated isolated CV and RDV groups. Cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB), clamp, and surgery times were shorter with RDV (87.4 ± 34.0 min vs 111.0 ± 34.2, 54.3 ± 21.1 vs 74.9 ± 20.4, 155.2 ± 42.9 vs 178.0 ± 46.8, Isolated bovine AVR has low mortality. Valves ≥ 23 mm show comparable gradients while the valve model matters < 23 mm. RDV should be used with care. Procedure-related times are shorter than those of CV but pacemaker implantation and neurologic events are more frequent (Perceval). Early mortality is low and valve performance comparable to CV.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Conventional stented valves (CV) remain gold standard for aortic valve disease. Bovine prostheses have been improved and rapid deployment valves (RDV) have arrived in the recent decade. We compare clinical and hemodynamic short-term outcome of six bovine valves.
METHODS
We retrospectively evaluated 829 consecutive patients (all-comers) receiving bovine aortic valve replacement (AVR). Four CV from different manufacturers (Mitroflow, Crown, Perimount, Trifecta) and two RDV (Perceval, Intuity) were compared in terms of pre-, intra-, and postprocedural data. A risk model for mortality was created.
RESULTS
All valves reduced gradients. From 23 mm, all CV showed acceptable gradients. Twenty-one millimeter Mitroflow/Perceval and 19 mm Crown showed above-average gradients. As baseline data differed, we performed propensity matching between aggregated isolated CV and RDV groups. Cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB), clamp, and surgery times were shorter with RDV (87.4 ± 34.0 min vs 111.0 ± 34.2, 54.3 ± 21.1 vs 74.9 ± 20.4, 155.2 ± 42.9 vs 178.0 ± 46.8,
CONCLUSION
Isolated bovine AVR has low mortality. Valves ≥ 23 mm show comparable gradients while the valve model matters < 23 mm. RDV should be used with care. Procedure-related times are shorter than those of CV but pacemaker implantation and neurologic events are more frequent (Perceval). Early mortality is low and valve performance comparable to CV.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30669172
doi: 10.1055/s-0038-1676853
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Observational Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
557-566Informations de copyright
Thieme. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
None.