Cargando…

A comparative study of minimally invasive aortic valve replacement with sutureless biological versus mechanical prostheses

INTRODUCTION: The ministernotomy approach with sutureless aortic bioprosthesis may provide an attractive and safe option for aortic valve disease patients. AIM: To assess the early and mid-term outcomes of minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (miniAVR) with sutureless vs. standard prostheses....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bociański, Michał, Puślecki, Mateusz, Olasińska-Wiśniewska, Anna, Perek, Bartłomiej, Stefaniak, Sebastian, Buczkowski, Piotr, Jemielity, Marek
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Termedia Publishing House 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10410630/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37564970
http://dx.doi.org/10.5114/kitp.2023.129542
_version_ 1785086500703043584
author Bociański, Michał
Puślecki, Mateusz
Olasińska-Wiśniewska, Anna
Perek, Bartłomiej
Stefaniak, Sebastian
Buczkowski, Piotr
Jemielity, Marek
author_facet Bociański, Michał
Puślecki, Mateusz
Olasińska-Wiśniewska, Anna
Perek, Bartłomiej
Stefaniak, Sebastian
Buczkowski, Piotr
Jemielity, Marek
author_sort Bociański, Michał
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: The ministernotomy approach with sutureless aortic bioprosthesis may provide an attractive and safe option for aortic valve disease patients. AIM: To assess the early and mid-term outcomes of minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (miniAVR) with sutureless vs. standard prostheses. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study involved 76 consecutive patients (51 males and 25 females) with mean age of 63.2 years who were treated with miniAVR between 2015 and 2022. They were divided into 2 subgroups: group I (n = 40) subjects with sutureless bioprostheses and group II (n = 36) with standard prostheses implanted. Early and mid-term outcomes were evaluated. A probability of survival was estimated by means of the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: No conversion to complete sternotomy was necessary. The median (minimum; maximum) aorta cross clamping and cardio-pulmonary bypass times were 49 (27; 84) and 70 (40; 188) minutes in group I whereas 69 (50; 103) and 95 (69; 170) minutes in group II, respectively (p < 0.001). In-hospital mortality was 5.0% (n = 2) and 2.8% (n = 1) in group I vs. II, respectively (ns). Permanent ICD implantation was performed in 8 (20.0%) in group I and in 3 (8.3%) subjects in group II. In the discharge echocardiography, the function of all prostheses was correct. Five-year probability of survival was much lower in group I (0.75 ±0.10) than in group II (0.94 ±0.04). No wound infection or sternum instability was noted. CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative advantages of miniAVR procedures for aortic valve patients with sutureless bioprostheses do not translate directly into improved early and middle-term outcomes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10410630
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Termedia Publishing House
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-104106302023-08-10 A comparative study of minimally invasive aortic valve replacement with sutureless biological versus mechanical prostheses Bociański, Michał Puślecki, Mateusz Olasińska-Wiśniewska, Anna Perek, Bartłomiej Stefaniak, Sebastian Buczkowski, Piotr Jemielity, Marek Kardiochir Torakochirurgia Pol Original Paper INTRODUCTION: The ministernotomy approach with sutureless aortic bioprosthesis may provide an attractive and safe option for aortic valve disease patients. AIM: To assess the early and mid-term outcomes of minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (miniAVR) with sutureless vs. standard prostheses. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study involved 76 consecutive patients (51 males and 25 females) with mean age of 63.2 years who were treated with miniAVR between 2015 and 2022. They were divided into 2 subgroups: group I (n = 40) subjects with sutureless bioprostheses and group II (n = 36) with standard prostheses implanted. Early and mid-term outcomes were evaluated. A probability of survival was estimated by means of the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: No conversion to complete sternotomy was necessary. The median (minimum; maximum) aorta cross clamping and cardio-pulmonary bypass times were 49 (27; 84) and 70 (40; 188) minutes in group I whereas 69 (50; 103) and 95 (69; 170) minutes in group II, respectively (p < 0.001). In-hospital mortality was 5.0% (n = 2) and 2.8% (n = 1) in group I vs. II, respectively (ns). Permanent ICD implantation was performed in 8 (20.0%) in group I and in 3 (8.3%) subjects in group II. In the discharge echocardiography, the function of all prostheses was correct. Five-year probability of survival was much lower in group I (0.75 ±0.10) than in group II (0.94 ±0.04). No wound infection or sternum instability was noted. CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative advantages of miniAVR procedures for aortic valve patients with sutureless bioprostheses do not translate directly into improved early and middle-term outcomes. Termedia Publishing House 2023-07-26 2023-06 /pmc/articles/PMC10410630/ /pubmed/37564970 http://dx.doi.org/10.5114/kitp.2023.129542 Text en Copyright: © 2023 Polish Society of Cardiothoracic Surgeons (Polskie Towarzystwo KardioTorakochirurgów) and the editors of the Polish Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (Kardiochirurgia i Torakochirurgia Polska) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) License, allowing third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and to remix, transform, and build upon the material, provided the original work is properly cited and states its license.
spellingShingle Original Paper
Bociański, Michał
Puślecki, Mateusz
Olasińska-Wiśniewska, Anna
Perek, Bartłomiej
Stefaniak, Sebastian
Buczkowski, Piotr
Jemielity, Marek
A comparative study of minimally invasive aortic valve replacement with sutureless biological versus mechanical prostheses
title A comparative study of minimally invasive aortic valve replacement with sutureless biological versus mechanical prostheses
title_full A comparative study of minimally invasive aortic valve replacement with sutureless biological versus mechanical prostheses
title_fullStr A comparative study of minimally invasive aortic valve replacement with sutureless biological versus mechanical prostheses
title_full_unstemmed A comparative study of minimally invasive aortic valve replacement with sutureless biological versus mechanical prostheses
title_short A comparative study of minimally invasive aortic valve replacement with sutureless biological versus mechanical prostheses
title_sort comparative study of minimally invasive aortic valve replacement with sutureless biological versus mechanical prostheses
topic Original Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10410630/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37564970
http://dx.doi.org/10.5114/kitp.2023.129542
work_keys_str_mv AT bocianskimichał acomparativestudyofminimallyinvasiveaorticvalvereplacementwithsuturelessbiologicalversusmechanicalprostheses
AT pusleckimateusz acomparativestudyofminimallyinvasiveaorticvalvereplacementwithsuturelessbiologicalversusmechanicalprostheses
AT olasinskawisniewskaanna acomparativestudyofminimallyinvasiveaorticvalvereplacementwithsuturelessbiologicalversusmechanicalprostheses
AT perekbartłomiej acomparativestudyofminimallyinvasiveaorticvalvereplacementwithsuturelessbiologicalversusmechanicalprostheses
AT stefaniaksebastian acomparativestudyofminimallyinvasiveaorticvalvereplacementwithsuturelessbiologicalversusmechanicalprostheses
AT buczkowskipiotr acomparativestudyofminimallyinvasiveaorticvalvereplacementwithsuturelessbiologicalversusmechanicalprostheses
AT jemielitymarek acomparativestudyofminimallyinvasiveaorticvalvereplacementwithsuturelessbiologicalversusmechanicalprostheses
AT bocianskimichał comparativestudyofminimallyinvasiveaorticvalvereplacementwithsuturelessbiologicalversusmechanicalprostheses
AT pusleckimateusz comparativestudyofminimallyinvasiveaorticvalvereplacementwithsuturelessbiologicalversusmechanicalprostheses
AT olasinskawisniewskaanna comparativestudyofminimallyinvasiveaorticvalvereplacementwithsuturelessbiologicalversusmechanicalprostheses
AT perekbartłomiej comparativestudyofminimallyinvasiveaorticvalvereplacementwithsuturelessbiologicalversusmechanicalprostheses
AT stefaniaksebastian comparativestudyofminimallyinvasiveaorticvalvereplacementwithsuturelessbiologicalversusmechanicalprostheses
AT buczkowskipiotr comparativestudyofminimallyinvasiveaorticvalvereplacementwithsuturelessbiologicalversusmechanicalprostheses
AT jemielitymarek comparativestudyofminimallyinvasiveaorticvalvereplacementwithsuturelessbiologicalversusmechanicalprostheses