Clinical Outcome of a Simplified Technique for Aortic Valve Replacement with Stentless Bioprostheses

被引:0
|
作者
Di Matteo, Gerardo [1 ]
Masala, Nicola [1 ]
Swanevelder, Justiaan [2 ]
Davies, Joan [3 ]
Galinanes, Manuel [1 ]
Sosnowski, Andrzej W. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Leicester, Dept Cardiac Surg & Cardiovasc Sci, Coronary Care Unit, Glenfield Hosp,Univ Hosp Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester LE3 9QP, Leics, England
[2] Univ Leicester, Dept Anaesthesia, Coronary Care Unit, Glenfield Hosp,Univ Hosp Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester LE3 9QP, Leics, England
[3] Univ Leicester, Dept Cardiol, Coronary Care Unit, Glenfield Hosp,Univ Hosp Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester LE3 9QP, Leics, England
来源
JOURNAL OF HEART VALVE DISEASE | 2009年 / 18卷 / 01期
关键词
FOLLOW-UP; SUTURE LINE; EXPERIENCE; IMPLANTATION; XENOGRAFTS; PROSTHESIS;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background and aim of the study: Aortic stentless bio-prostheses provide good clinical and hemodynamic results, but may be difficult to implant. Their use is also contraindicated in the presence of a severely calcified aortic root. The study aim was to assess the mid-term results of a simplified implant technique of the Sorin Pericarbon Freedom stentless bioprosthesis (SPF), that allows its use in the presence of severe aortic root calcification. Methods: Between 2001 and 2007, a total of 51 patients underwent aortic valve replacement (AVR) with the SPF, using a new technique which consisted of standard annular fixation and the fixation of each strut with a single 'U' stitch. The perioperative characteristics, early and late mortality and occurrence of valve-related events were evaluated. The overall mean cross-clamp and cardiopulmonary bypass times were 91.5 +/- 30.2 and 125.3 +/- 44.9 min, respectively, and 77.8 +/- 17.7 and 105.6 +/- 22.8 min, respectively, for AVR (these times were comparable to those required in patients receiving stented valve bioprostheses). The mean follow up period was 40.5 months (range: 3-75 months), and was 100% complete. Results: Hospital mortality was 4% and survival 76.5 +/- 14.5% at six years. Late deaths occurred in eight patients; in four cases this was valve-related (1.9%/patient-year). Freedom from valve-related death and reoperation was 91 +/- 9% and 98 +/- 2% respectively, at six years. The mean transprosthetic gradients were 12.0 +/- 3.4, 9.9 +/- 2.6, 8.7 +/- 4.2, 5.2 +/- 3.9, 4.5 +/- 3.0 and 3.2 +/- 2.7 mmHg for the 19, 21, 23, 25, 27 and 29 mm valve sizes, respectively. No valvular or paravalvular regurgitation was recorded. Conclusion: This new implantation technique for the aortic SPF stentless bioprosthesis is simple, effective and versatile, and showed good early results. It may be applicable to other stentless bioprostheses, and also be particularly useful in patients with small aortic annulus and in those with a calcified aortic root.
引用
收藏
页码:111 / 118
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Stentless bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement after valve-sparing aortic root replacement
    Ikonomidis, JS
    Miller, DC
    JOURNAL OF THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY, 2002, 124 (04): : 848 - 851
  • [42] Stentless Versus Stented Aortic Valve Replacement for Aortic Stenosis
    Yang, Bo
    Makkinejad, Alexander
    Fukuhara, Shinichi
    Clemence, Jeffrey
    Farhat, Linda
    Malik, Aroosa
    Wu, Xiaoting
    Kim, Karen
    Patel, Himanshu
    Deeb, Michael
    ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY, 2022, 114 (03): : 728 - +
  • [43] Clinical outcome of aortic valve replacement in the elderly
    Chiappini, B
    Bergonzini, M
    Gallieri, S
    Pacini, D
    Pierangeli, A
    Di Bartolomeo, R
    Marinelli, G
    CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY, 2003, 11 (05): : 359 - 365
  • [44] AORTIC-VALVE REPLACEMENT WITH STENTLESS PORCINE AORTIC BIOPROSTHESIS
    DAVID, TE
    POLLICK, C
    BOS, J
    JOURNAL OF THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY, 1990, 99 (01): : 113 - 118
  • [45] Midterm results after aortic valve replacement with a stentless bioprosthesis aortic valve
    Martinovic, I
    Everlien, M
    Farah, I
    Wittlinger, T
    Knez, I
    Greve, H
    Vogt, P
    ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY, 2005, 80 (01): : 198 - 203
  • [46] Failing stentless aortic valves: redo aortic root replacement or valve in a valve?
    Finch, Jonathan
    Roussin, Isabelle
    Pepper, John
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CARDIO-THORACIC SURGERY, 2013, 43 (03) : 495 - 504
  • [47] Survival advantage of stentless aortic bioprostheses
    Westaby, S
    Horton, M
    Jin, XY
    Katsumata, T
    Ahmed, O
    Saito, S
    Li, HH
    Grunkemeier, GL
    ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY, 2000, 70 (03): : 785 - 790
  • [48] Implantation techniques of stentless aortic bioprostheses
    Campos Rubio, Vicente
    CIRUGIA CARDIOVASCULAR, 2005, 12 (04): : 299 - 302
  • [49] Durability and Clinical Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Failed Surgical Bioprostheses
    Dauerman, Harold L.
    Deeb, G. Michael
    O'Hair, Daniel P.
    Waksman, Ron
    Yakubov, Steven J.
    Kleiman, Neal S.
    Chetcuti, Stanley J.
    Hermiller, James B.
    Bajwa, Tanvir
    Khabbaz, Kamal
    de Marchena, Eduardo
    Salerno, Tomas
    Dries-Devlin, Jessica L.
    Li, Shuzhen
    Popma, Jeffrey J.
    Reardon, Michael J.
    CIRCULATION-CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS, 2019, 12 (10)
  • [50] Do Pericardial Bioprostheses Improve Outcome of Elderly Patients Undergoing Aortic Valve Replacement?
    Said, Sameh M.
    Ashikhmina, Elena
    Greason, Kevin L.
    Suri, Rakesh M.
    Park, Soon J.
    Daly, Richard C.
    Burkhart, Harold M.
    Dearani, Joseph A.
    Sundt, Thoralf M., III
    Schaff, Hartzell V.
    ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY, 2012, 93 (06): : 1868 - 1875