Cargando…

Initial experience with the Perceval S sutureless aortic valve

INTRODUCTION: Surgical treatment of the aortic valve represents the gold standard, and thus aortic valve replacement (AVR) is one of the most commonly performed cardiac operations. AIM: To evaluate the early outcome of aortic valve replacement with the Perceval S sutureless aortic bioprosthesis. MAT...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Raickovic, Tatjana, Zivkovic, Igor, Ragus, Tatjana, Tomic, Slobodan, Vukovic, Petar, Nezic, Dusko, Peric, Miodrag, Micovic, Slobodan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Termedia Publishing House 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7379214/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32728358
http://dx.doi.org/10.5114/kitp.2020.94186
Descripción
Sumario:INTRODUCTION: Surgical treatment of the aortic valve represents the gold standard, and thus aortic valve replacement (AVR) is one of the most commonly performed cardiac operations. AIM: To evaluate the early outcome of aortic valve replacement with the Perceval S sutureless aortic bioprosthesis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of 24 patients (mean age: 71 ±5 years), who underwent aortic valve replacement with a Perceval S valve. Concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) was performed in 9 patients. Patients were evaluated preoperatively, at hospital discharge, and once during follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 15 of 24 patients underwent isolated sutureless aortic valve replacement (mean aortic cross-clamp time: 60 ±14 minutes; mean bypass time: 90 ±23 minutes). Coronary bypass grafting was performed in 9 patients (mean aortic cross-clamp time: 78 ±23 minutes; mean bypass time: 111 ±31 minutes). Hospital mortality was nil. Mean and peak transvalvular pressure gradients were 10 ±2 mm Hg and 21 ±3 mm Hg at follow-up, respectively. Moderate or severe aortic regurgitation did not develop in any patients during the follow-up period. No valve thrombosis, thromboembolic events, or structural valve deterioration were observed. CONCLUSIONS: In our experience with sutureless aortic valve replacement, the surgical procedure is shown to be safe. The early haemodynamic performance seems favourable. By shortening the aortic cross-clamp and bypass times we can notice advantages, especially in high-risk patients. Minimally invasive access seems to be facilitated. Larger studies are needed to confirm our data and determine the long-term durability of the Perceval S sutureless bioprosthesis.