Cargando…

Mid-term clinical and echocardiographic results of the INSPIRIS RESILIA aortic valve: a retrospective comparison to the Magna Ease

OBJECTIVES: The INSPIRIS aortic valve combines the RESILIA proprietary tissue preservation process and an expandable stent frame to benefit future transcatheter valve-in-valve procedures. As the INSPIRIS valve became commercially available in 2017, mid-term outcome reports are scarce. We aimed to ev...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bernard, Jérémy, Georges, Gabriel, Hecht, Sébastien, Pibarot, Philippe, Clavel, Marie-Annick, Babaki, Shervin, Kalavrouziotis, Dimitri, Mohammadi, Siamak
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10386877/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37462610
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/icvts/ivad117
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVES: The INSPIRIS aortic valve combines the RESILIA proprietary tissue preservation process and an expandable stent frame to benefit future transcatheter valve-in-valve procedures. As the INSPIRIS valve became commercially available in 2017, mid-term outcome reports are scarce. We aimed to evaluate mid-term safety and echocardiographic performance of the INSPIRIS valve in comparison to its predecessor, the Carpentier Edwards Perimount Magna Ease (ME). METHODS: This study was a retrospective single-centre study. Clinical results included early postoperative outcomes, mid-term mortality and readmission for cardiovascular cause or stroke. Echocardiographic follow-up (FU) was performed at discharge and 1–3, 6, 12 and 24 months. Clinical end point analyses were accomplished with a propensity score matching analysis and FU echocardiographic data comparisons using pairwise analyses and linear mixed-effect models. RESULTS: We included 953 patients who received an INSPIRIS (n = 488) or ME (n = 463) bioprosthesis between January 2018 and July 2021. In the matched population (n = 217 per group), no significant difference in short-term outcomes was observed, survival was similar at 30 months (INSPIRIS: 94% vs ME: 91%, P = 0.89), but freedom from readmission was higher in the INSPIRIS group (94% vs 86%, P = 0.014). INSPIRIS valves had a lower gradient at discharge (∼10 vs 14 mmHg, P < 0.001), 1–3 months (∼10 vs 12 mmHg, P < 0.001) and 24 months (∼11 vs 17 mmHg, P < 0.001) in paired analyses and significantly lower evolution of mean transvalvular gradients compared to ME. CONCLUSIONS: This study represents the largest comparative evaluation of the INSPIRIS to the ME valves, which demonstrated safe clinical outcomes and favourable haemodynamic performance at 2 years. Long-term FU is underway.