One-Year Hemodynamic Performance of Three Cardiac Aortic Bioprostheses: A Randomized Comparative Clinical Trial

Background: We aimed to compare 1 year the hemodynamic in-vivo performance of three biological aortic prostheses (Carpentier Perimount Magna Ease(TM), Crown PRT(TM), and Trifecta(TM)). Methods: The sample used in this study comes from the “BEST-VALVE” clinical trial, which is a phase IV single-blinded randomized clinical trial with the three above-mentioned prostheses. Results: 154 patients were included. Carpentier Perimount Magna Ease(TM) (n = 48, 31.2%), Crown PRT(TM) (n = 51, 32.1%) and Trifecta(TM) (n = 55, 35.7%). One year after the surgery, the mean aortic gradient and the peak aortic velocity was 17.5 (IQR 11.3–26) and 227.1 (IQR 202.0–268.8) for Carpentier Perimount Magna Ease(TM), 21.4 (IQR 14.5–26.7) and 237.8 (IQR 195.9–261.9) for Crown PRT(TM), and 13 (IQR 9.6–17.8) and 209.7 (IQR 176.5–241.4) for Trifecta(TM), respectively. Pairwise comparisons demonstrated improved mean gradients and maximum velocity of Trifecta(TM) as compared to Crown PRT(TM). Among patients with nominal prosthesis sizes ≤ 21, the mean and peak aortic gradient was higher for Crown PRT(TM) compared with Trifecta(TM), and in patients with an aortic annulus measured with metric Hegar dilators less than or equal to 22 mm. Conclusions: One year after surgery, the three prostheses presented a different hemodynamic performance, being Trifecta(TM) superior to Crown PRT(TM).