Early Clinical Experience with Sutureless Aortic Valve Replacement for Severe Aortic Stenosis
Background: Sutureless aortic valve replacement (SU-AVR) has been developed as an alternative surgical treatment f or p atients with s ymptomatic s evere aortic stenosis ( AS). The aim o f this s tudy w as t o evaluate the clinical outcomes of SU-AVR through an assessment of hemodynamic performanc...
Main Authors: | , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Korean Society for Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
2018-02-01
|
Series: | Korean Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://www.kjtcvs.org/journal/download_pdf.php?doi=10.5090/kjtcs.2018.51.1.1 |
Summary: | Background: Sutureless aortic valve replacement (SU-AVR) has been developed as an alternative surgical
treatment f or p atients with s ymptomatic s evere aortic stenosis ( AS). The aim o f this s tudy w as t o evaluate
the clinical outcomes of SU-AVR through an assessment of hemodynamic performance and safety. Methods:
From December 2014 to June 2016, a total of 12 consecutive patients with severe AS underwent SU-AVR.
The endpoints were overall survival and valve-related complications (paravalvular leakage, valve thrombosis,
migration, endocarditis, and permanent pacemaker implantation). The mean follow-up duration was 18.1±8.6
months. Results: The mean age of the patients was 77.1±5.8 years and their mean Society of Thoracic
Surgeons score was 9.2±17.7. The mean cardiopulmonary bypass and aortic cross-clamp times were
94.5±37.3 minutes and 54.9±12.5 minutes, respectively. Follow-up echocardiography showed good prosthesis
function with low transvalvular pressure gradients (mean, 13.9±8.6 mm Hg and peak, 27.2±15.0 mm Hg) at
a mean of 9.9±4.2 months. No cases of primary paravalvular leakage, valve thrombosis, migration, or endocarditis
were reported. A new permanent pacemaker was implanted in 1 patient (8.3%). The 1-year overall
survival rate was 83.3%±10.8%. Conclusion: Our initial experience with SU-AVR demonstrated excellent early
clinical outcomes with good hemodynamic results. However, there was a high incidence of permanent pacemaker
implantation compared to the rate for conventional AVR, which is a problem that should be solved. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2093-6516 2233-601X |