Comparable Outcomes of Bicuspid Aortic Valves for Rapid- Deployment Aortic Valve Replacement
Background: Edwards Intuity is recognized as a relatively contraindicated bioprosthesis for bicuspid aortic valve disease. This study compared the early echocardiographic and clinical outcomes of rapid-deployment aortic valve replacement for bicuspid versus tricuspid aortic valves. Methods: Of 2...
| 出版年: | Journal of Chest Surgery |
|---|---|
| 主要な著者: | , , , , , |
| フォーマット: | 論文 |
| 言語: | 英語 |
| 出版事項: |
Korean Society for Thoracic & Cardiovascular Surgery
2023-11-01
|
| 主題: |
| 要約: | Background: Edwards Intuity is recognized as a relatively contraindicated bioprosthesis
for bicuspid aortic valve disease. This study compared the early echocardiographic and
clinical outcomes of rapid-deployment aortic valve replacement for bicuspid versus tricuspid
aortic valves.
Methods: Of 278 patients who underwent rapid-deployment aortic valve replacement
using Intuity at Seoul National University Hospital, 252 patients were enrolled after excluding
those with pure aortic regurgitation, prosthetic valve failure, endocarditis, and
quadricuspid valves. The bicuspid and tricuspid groups included 147 and 105 patients,
respectively. Early outcomes and the incidence of paravalvular leak were compared between
the groups. A subgroup analysis compared the outcomes for type 0 versus type 1
or 2 bicuspid valves.
Results: The bicuspid group had more male and younger patients. Comorbidities, including
diabetes mellitus, hypertension, chronic kidney disease, and coronary artery disease,
were less prevalent in the bicuspid group. Early echocardiographic evaluations demonstrated
that the incidence of ≥mild paravalvular leak did not differ significantly between
the groups (5.5% vs. 1.0% in the bicuspid vs. tricuspid groups, p=0.09), and the early clinical
outcomes were also comparable between the groups. In the subgroup analysis between
type 0 and type 1 or 2 bicuspid valves, the incidence of mild or greater paravalvular leak
(2.4% vs. 6.7% in type 0 vs. type 1 or 2, p=0.34) and clinical outcomes were comparable.
Conclusion: Rapid-deployment aortic valve replacement for bicuspid aortic valves
demonstrated comparable early echocardiographic and clinical outcomes to those for
tricuspid aortic valves, and the outcomes were also satisfactory for type 0 bicuspid aortic
valves. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2765-1606 2765-1614 |
