Pearls, pitfalls, and surgical indications of the Intuity TM heart valve: A rapid deployment bioprosthesis. A systematic review of the literature.
Intuity
TAVR
aortic valve
echocardiography
long-term outcomes
perceval
rapid-deployment
sutured valves
Journal
Journal of cardiac surgery
ISSN: 1540-8191
Titre abrégé: J Card Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8908809
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Dec 2022
Dec 2022
Historique:
revised:
27
10
2022
received:
10
05
2022
accepted:
31
10
2022
pubmed:
21
11
2022
medline:
6
1
2023
entrez:
20
11
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To highlight short- and long-term clinical outcomes of the Intuity TM rapid deployment prosthesis for surgical aortic valve replacement. We reviewed on PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, SciELO, LILACS, CCTR/CENTRAL, and Google Scholar for clinical trials, retrospective clinical studies, meta-analysis, and gray literature. Fourty-five clinical studies with 12.714 patients were included in the analysis. Thirty-day mortality ranged from 3.8% for Intuity and 3.9% for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). The incidence of paravalvular leak (PVL) (Intuity 0% and TAVR 2.17%), permanent pacemaker implantation (Intuity 11.11% and TAVR 12.5%), stroke (Intuity 2.2% and TAVR 2.6%), myocardial infarction (MI) (Intuity 0% and TAVR 1%), were all higher in the TAVR group. Compared to other sutured bioprosthesis (SB), mortality ranged from 0% to 3.9% for Intuity and 0%-6.9% for SB. Long-term cardiac mortality ranged from 0.9% to 1.55% for Intuity and 1.4%-3.3% for the Perceval valve. The incidence of PVL (Intuity 0.24%-0.7% and Perceval 0%-1%), endocarditis (Intuity 0.2%-0.7% and Perceval 1.6%-6.6%), stroke (Intuity 0.36%-1.4% and Perceval 0%-0.8%), MI (Intuity 0.07%-0.26%), and SVD (Intuity 0.12%-0.7% and Perceval 0%) were comparable. Compared to standard full sternotomy (SFS), minimally invasive surgery (MINV) mortality ranged from 0% to 4.3% for MINV and 0%-2.1% for SFS. Hospital costs outcomes ranged from $37,187-$44,368 for the Intuity, $69,389 for TAVR, and $13,543 for SB. Intuity short-term mortality ranged between 0.9% and 12.4% while long-term mortality ranged between 2.6% and 20%. This manuscript provides a 360° overview of the current rapid deployments, sutureless, and TAVR prosthesis.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
5411-5417Informations de copyright
© 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Références
Borger MA, Moustafine V, Conradi L, et al. A randomized multicenter trial of minimally invasive rapid deployment versus conventional full sternotomy aortic valve replacement. Ann Thorac Surg. 2015;99(1):17-25. doi:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2014.09.022
Kocher AA, Laufer G, Haverich A, et al. One-year outcomes of the surgical treatment of aortic stenosis with a next generation surgical aortic valve (TRITON) trial: a prospective multicenter study of rapid-deployment aortic valve replacement with the EDWARDS INTUITY valve system. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2013;145(1):110-116. doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2012.07.108
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier. Surgical treatment of aortic stenosis with a next generation, rapid deployment surgical aortic valve deployment surgical aortic valve: NCT0 1700439.
Lorusso R, Jiritano F, Roselli E, et al. Perioperative platelet reduction after sutureless or stented valve implantation: results from the PERSIST-AVR controlled randomized trial. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2021;60(6):1359-1365. doi:10.1093/ejcts/ezab175
Dokollari A, Ramlawi B, Torregrossa G, et al. Benefits and pitfalls of the perceval sutureless bioprosthesis. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022;8:5. doi:10.3389/fcvm.2021.789392
Meco M, Montisci A, Miceli A, et al. Sutureless perceval aortic valve versus conventional stented bioprostheses: meta-analysis of postoperative and midterm results in isolated aortic valve replacement. J Am Heart Assoc. 2018;7:e006091. doi:10.1161/JAHA.117.006091
Vandenbroucke JP, von Elm E, Altman DG, et al. Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med. 2007;4:e297. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0040297
Hutton B, Salanti G, Caldwell DM, et al. The PRISMA extension statement for reporting of systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses of health care interventions: checklist and explanations. Ann Intern Med. 2015;162(11):777-784. doi:10.7326/M14-2385
Egbalzadeh K, Rahmanian PB, Giese D, et al. SAVR versus TAVI: What about the hemodynamic performance? An in vivo and in vitro analysis. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2020;68(7):608-615. doi:10.1055/s-0039-1695779
Ferrara J, Deharo P, Resseguier N, et al. Rapid deployment versus trans-catheter aortic valve replacement in intermediate-risk patients: a propensity score analysis. J Card Surg. 2021;36(6):2004-2012. doi:10.1111/jocs.15483
Useini D, Beluli B, Christ H, et al. Oversized versus non-oversized prosthesis: midterm outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement using SAPIEN 3 valve. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2021;69(5):445-454. doi:10.1055/s-0040-1713168
Herry M, Laghlam D, Touboul O, et al. Pacemaker implantation after aortic valve replacement: rapid-deployment Intuity® compared to conventional bioprostheses. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2020;58(2):335-342. doi:10.1093/ejcts/ezaa068
Wahlers TCW, Andreas M, Rahmanian P, et al. Outcomes of a rapid deployment aortic valve versus its conventional counterpart. Innovations: Technolo Techniques Cardiotho Vascu Surg. 2018;13(3):177-183. doi:10.1097/IMI.0000000000000509
Andreas M, Wallner S, Habertheuer A, et al. Conventional versus rapid-deployment aortic valve replacement: a single-centre comparison between the Edwards Magna valve and its rapid-deployment successor. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2016;22(6):799-805. doi:10.1093/icvts/ivw052
Nguyen A, Stevens LM, Bouchard D, Demers P, Perrault LP, Carrier M. Early outcomes with rapid-deployment vs stented biological valves: a propensity-match analysis. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Pediatr Card Surg Annu. 2018;30(1):16-23. doi:10.1053/j.semtcvs.2017.09.002
Coti I, Maierhofer U, Rath C, et al. Effect of conventional and rapid-deployment aortic valve replacement on the distance from the aortic annulus to coronary arteries. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2021;32(2):196-203. doi:10.1093/icvts/ivaa247
Ferrari E, Roduit C, Salamin P, et al. Rapid-deployment aortic valve replacement versus standard bioprosthesis implantation. J Card Surg. 2017;32(6):322-327. doi:10.1111/jocs.13139
Hartrumpf M, Kuehnel RU, Schroeter F, et al. Clinical short-term outcome and hemodynamic comparison of six contemporary bovine aortic valve prostheses. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2020;68(7):557-566. doi:10.1055/s-0038-1676853
Werner P, Coti I, Kaider A, et al. Long-term durability after surgical aortic valve replacement with the Trifecta and the Intuity valve-a comparative analysis. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2021;61:416-424. doi:10.1093/ejcts/ezab470
Taboada-Martín R, Arribas Leal JM, Esteve-Pastor MA, et al. Comparison of aortic gradient and ventricular mass after valve replacement for aortic stenosis with rapid deployment, sutureless, and conventional bioprostheses. Cardiology. 2021;146(5):656-666. doi:10.1159/000516465
Chiariello GA, Bruno P, Villa E, et al. Aortic valve replacement in elderly patients with small aortic annulus: results with three different bioprostheses. Innovations: Technol Techniques Cardiothor Vascu Surg. 2019;14(1):27-36. doi:10.1177/1556984519826430
Rahmanian PB, Kaya S, Eghbalzadeh K, Menghesha H, Madershahian N, Wahlers T. Rapid deployment aortic valve replacement: excellent results and increased effective orifice areas. Ann Thorac Surg. 2018;105(1):24-30. doi:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2017.07.047
Laufer G, Haverich A, Andreas M, et al. Long-term outcomes of a rapid deployment aortic valve: data up to 5 years. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2017;52(2):281-287. doi:10.1093/ejcts/ezx103
Andreas M, Coti I, Rosenhek R, et al. Intermediate-term outcome of 500 consecutive rapid-deployment surgical aortic valve procedures. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2019;55(3):527-533. doi:10.1093/ejcts/ezy273
Pelce E, Porto A, Gariboldi V, et al. Five-year outcomes of rapid-deployment aortic valve replacement with the Edwards Intuity valve. J Card Surg. 2021;36(8):2826-2833. doi:10.1111/jocs.15665
Shrestha M, Fischlein T, Meuris B, et al. European multicentre experience with the sutureless perceval valve: clinical and haemodynamic outcomes up to 5 years in over 700 patients. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2016;49:234-241. doi:10.1093/ejcts/ezv040
Meuris B, Flameng WJ, Laborde F, Folliguet TA, Haverich A, Shrestha M. Five year results of the pilot trial of a sutureless valve. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2015;150:84-88. doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2015.03.040
Ensminger S, Fujita B, Bauer T, et al. Rapid deployment versus conventional bioprosthetic valve replacement for aortic stenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018;71(13):1417-1428. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2018.01.065
Liakopoulos OJ, Gerfer S, Rahmanian P, et al. Rapid deployment aortic valve replacement with the perceval S and intuity elite. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2021;69(5):412-419. doi:10.1055/s-0040-1716892
Liakopoulos OJ, Gerfer S, Weider S, et al. Direct comparison of the Edwards Intuity elite and sorin perceval S rapid deployment aortic valves. Ann Thorac Surg. 2018;105(1):108-114. doi:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2017.06.034
Berretta P, Andreas M, Carrel TP, et al. Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement with sutureless and rapid deployment valves: a report from an international registry (Sutureless and Rapid Deployment International Registry). Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2019;56(4):793-799. doi:10.1093/ejcts/ezz055
Gotzmann M, Wilbring M, Charitos E, Treede H, Silachi M. Hemodynamic comparison of sutureless and rapid-deployment valves with conventional bioprostheses. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2020;68(7):584-594. doi:10.1055/s-0039-1683426
D'Onofrio A, Salizzoni S, Filippini C, et al. Surgical aortic valve replacement with new-generation bioprostheses: sutureless versus rapid-deployment. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2020;159(2):432-442. doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2019.02.135
Bening C, Hamouda K, Oezkur M, et al. Rapid deployment valve system shortens operative times for aortic valve replacement through right anterior minithoracotomy. J Cardiothorac Surg. 2017;12(1):27. doi:10.1186/s13019-017-0598-0
Wahlers TCW, Haverich A, Borger MA, et al. Early outcomes after isolated aortic valve replacement with rapid deployment aortic valve. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2016;151(6):1639-1647. doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2015.12.058
Moore M, Barnhart GR, Chitwood Jr., WR, et al. The economic value of rapid deployment aortic valve replacement via full sternotomy. J Comp Eff Res. 2017;6(4):293-302. doi:10.2217/cer-2016-0064
Moore M, Barnhart GR, Chitwood Jr., WR, et al. The economic value of INTUITY in aortic valve replacement. J Med Eco. 2016;19(10):1011-1017. doi:10.1080/13696998.2016.1220949
Povero M, Miceli A, Pradelli L, Ferrarini M, Pinciroli M, Glauber M. Cost-utility of surgical sutureless bioprostheses vs TAVI in aortic valve replacement for patients at intermediate and high surgical risk. ClinicoEconomics Outcomes Res. 2018;10:733-745. doi:10.2147/CEOR.S185743
Villa E, Dalla Tomba M, Messina A, et al. Sutureless aortic valve replacement in high-risk patients neutralizes expected worse hospital outcome: a clinical and economic analysis. Cardiol J. 2019;26(1):56-65. doi:10.5603/CJ.a2018.0098
D'Onofrio A, Bagozzi L, Tessari C, et al. Evaluation of conduction disorders after aortic valve replacement with rapid deployment bioprostheses. Innovations: Technol Techniques Cardiothora Vascu Surg. 2018;13(5):356-360. doi:10.1097/IMI.0000000000000558
D'Onofrio A, Tessari C, Bagozzi L, et al. Conduction disorders after aortic valve replacement with rapid-deployment bioprostheses: early occurrence and one-year evolution. Ann Cardiothorac Surg. 2020;9(5):396-407. doi:10.21037/acs-2020-surd-14
Arribas JM, Soriano L, Rivera-Caravaca JM, et al. Incidence and causes of pacemaker implantation during postoperative period of aortic valve replacement with rapid deployment prosthesis. Pacing Clean Electrophysiol. 2019;42(12):1534-1540. doi:10.1111/pace.13824
Barnhart GR, Accola KD, Grossi EA, et al. TRANSFORM (multicenter experience with rapid deployment Edwards INTUITY valve system for aortic valve replacement) US clinical trial: performance of a rapid deployment aortic valve. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2017;153(2):241-251. doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2016.09.062
Theron A, Ravis E, Grisoli D, et al. Rapid-deployment aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis: 1-year outcomes in 150 patients. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2017;25(1):68-74. doi:10.1093/icvts/ivx050
Coti I, Haberl T, Scherzer S, et al. Rapid-deployment aortic valves for patients with a small aortic root: a single-center experience. Ann Thorac Surg. 2020;110(5):1549-1556. doi:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2020.02.030
Lim K, Ho YK, Chow SCY, Fujikawa T, Lee APW, Wong RHL. Peri-procedural trans-esophageal echocardiographic sizing of the native left ventricular outflow tract during Edwards INTUITY valve implantation. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2021;8:1-7. doi:10.3389/fcvm.2021.690752
Young C, Laufer G, Kocher A, et al. One-year outcomes after rapid-deployment aortic valve replacement. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2018;155(2):575-585. doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2017.09.133
Schlömicher M, Bechtel M, Taghiyev Z, et al. Intermediate outcomes after rapid deployment aortic valve replacement in multiple valve surgery. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2020;68(7):595-601. doi:10.1055/s-0039-1685178
Gonzalez-Barbeito M, Arribas JM, Vazquez A, et al. Risk factors for postoperative pacemaker implantation after rapid deployment aortic valve replacement: results from the RADAR registry. Adv Ther. 2021;38(4):1832-1842. doi:10.1007/s12325-021-01622-z
Romano MA, Koeckert M, Mumtaz MA, et al. Permanent pacemaker implantation following rapid deployment aortic valve replacement. Ann Thorac Surg. 106(3):685-690. doi:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2018.03.055
Mogilansky C, Balan R, Deutsch C, Czesla M, Massoudy P. New postoperative conduction abnormalities after the implantation of a rapid-deployment aortic valve prosthesis. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2019; 28(4):581-586. doi:10.1093/icvts/ivy307
D'Onofrio A, Tessari C, Filippini C, et al. Early and mid-term results of rapid deployment valves: the intuity Italian Registry (INTU-ITA). Ann Thorac Surg. 2018;106(6):1742-1749. doi:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2018.07.002
Kim HJ, Kang DY, Park H, et al. Comparison of sutureless bioprosthetic valve with surgical or TAVR for severe aortic stenosis. JACC Asia. 2021;1(3):317-329.
Dokollari A, Cameli M, Mandoli GE, et al. Early and midterm clinical outcomes of transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation versus redo surgical aortic valve replacement for aortic bioprosthetic valve degeneration: two faces of the same medal. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2021;35(11):3223-3231. doi:10.1053/j.jvca.2021.05.029
Leon MB, Smith CR, Mack MJ, et al. Transcatheter or surgical aortic-valve replacement in intermediate-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2016;374:1609-1620. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1514616
Leon MB, Smith CR, Mack M, et al. Transcatheter aortic-valve implantation for aortic stenosis in patients who cannot undergo surgery. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:1597-1607. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1008232
Di Eusanio M, Phan K. Sutureless aortic valve replacement. Ann Cardiothorac Surg. 2015;4(2):123-130. doi:10.3978/j.issn.2225-319X.2015.02.06
Murzi M, Cerillo AG, Gilmanov D, et al. Exploring the learning curve for minimally invasive sutureless aortic valve replacement. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2016;152(6):1537-1546. doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2016.04.094