scholarly journals Predicting the Ideal Valve Size During Aortic Valve Replacement with Rapid Deployement Bioprosthetic Valves. Is Intraoperative Transesophageal Echocardiogram Reliable?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ali Al-Alameri ◽  
Alejandro Macias ◽  
Daniel Buitrago ◽  
Alvaro Montoya ◽  
Evan Markell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Transesophageal Echocardiography ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Aortic Annulus ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Valve Size ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Rapid Deployment ◽  
Bioprosthetic Valves

Objective: To describe experience with using intraoperative Transesophageal Echocardiography to reliably predict the size of the rapid deployment prosthetic valve by measuring the native aortic annulus Methods: Retrospective review of single institution series of patients undergoing Aortic Valve Replacement with Rapid Deployement Bioprosthetic Valves. Included were patients that had their native aortic valve replaced either isolated or as part of any additional procedure. Aortic annulus was measured prior to initiation of the operation using transesophageal echocardiography (TEE). Correlation analysis was conducted between Echocardiographic annular measurements and actual implanted valve sizes. Results: Twenty five patients underwent rapid deployment valve implantation in the aortic position. Of these, 36% of patients had the same size valve as the measured aortic annulus, 48% of patients had a valve implanted that was 1 mm different, and 16% of patients had 2 mm difference. The mean annular size based was 22.4 mm (range: 21-28 mm). The mean valve size implanted was 23.3 mm (range: 21-27 mm). There was no statistically significant difference between the mean annular measurement and the valve size selected (0.9 mm , p = 0.8). Conclusion: TEE can further enhance valve sizing and guidance through a proper and safe deployment. Although evident in our experience, larger scale studies are needed to further elucidate conclusions on the importance of avoiding under-sizing valves.

scholarly journals Predicting the Ideal Valve Size During Aortic Valve Replacement with Rapid Deployement Bioprosthetic Valves. Is Intraoperative Transesophageal Echocardiogram Reliable?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ali Al-Alameri ◽  
Alejandro Macias ◽  
Daniel Buitrago ◽  
Alvaro Montoya ◽  
Evan Markell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Transesophageal Echocardiography ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Aortic Annulus ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Valve Size ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Rapid Deployment ◽  
Bioprosthetic Valves

Objective: To describe experience with using intraoperative Transesophageal Echocardiography to reliably predict the size of the rapid deployment prosthetic valve by measuring the native aortic annulus Methods: Retrospective review of single institution series of patients undergoing Aortic Valve Replacement with Rapid Deployement Bioprosthetic Valves. Included were patients that had their native aortic valve replaced either isolated or as part of any additional procedure. Aortic annulus was measured prior to initiation of the operation using transesophageal echocardiography (TEE). Correlation analysis was conducted between Echocardiographic annular measurements and actual implanted valve sizes. Results: Twenty five patients underwent rapid deployment valve implantation in the aortic position. Of these, 36% of patients had the same size valve as the measured aortic annulus, 48% of patients had a valve implanted that was 1 mm different, and 16% of patients had 2 mm difference. The mean annular size based was 22.4 mm (range: 21-28 mm). The mean valve size implanted was 23.3 mm (range: 21-27 mm). There was no statistically significant difference between the mean annular measurement and the valve size selected (0.9 mm , p = 0.8). Conclusion: TEE can further enhance valve sizing and guidance through a proper and safe deployment. Although evident in our experience, larger scale studies are needed to further elucidate conclusions on the importance of avoiding under-sizing valves.

scholarly journals Effect of conventional and rapid-deployment aortic valve replacement on the distance from the aortic annulus to coronary arteries

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iuliana Coti ◽  
Udo Maierhofer ◽  
Claus Rath ◽  
Paul Werner ◽  
Christian Loewe ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Coronary Artery ◽  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Coronary Arteries ◽  
Left Coronary Artery ◽  
Aortic Annulus ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Rapid Deployment

Abstract OBJECTIVES This study aimed to compare the effect of surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) on coronary height in patients undergoing SAVR with rapid-deployment or SAVR with several standard sutured bioprostheses. This study may identify patients at higher risk of coronary obstruction during valve-in-valve procedures. METHODS We analysed 112 patients [mean age 71 (9 SD) years] who underwent SAVR with either a rapid-deployment aortic bioprosthesis (EDWARDS INTUITY Elite Valve) or other standard sutured biological valves. The coronary heights were assessed by computed tomography scan with the Philips 3D HeartNavigator system. RESULTS Two groups of patients were analysed: 51 (45.5%) patients implanted with an RD-AVR, which is a supra-annular valve that requires 3 anchoring sutures without the use of pledgets, and 61 (54.5%) patients implanted with a conventional supra-annular sutured bioprosthesis. The mean right and left coronary artery-to-annulus (RCAA and LCAA) heights at baseline were 16.9 (4.6 SD) and 14.2 (4.0 SD) mm in the standard sutured group and 16.3 (3.5 SD) and 12.8 (2.9 SD) mm in the RD-AVR group, respectively; a significantly shorter distance was observed for the left coronary artery in the rapid-deployment group (P = 0.420 for RCAA height and P = 0.044 for LCAA). Postoperatively, the mean RCAA and LCAA heights were significantly decreased in both groups compared to baseline. A mean of 11.5 (4.8 SD) mm for the RCAA and 7.9 (4.3 SD) mm for the LCAA in the standard sutured group as well as 14.4 (3.9 SD) mm for the RCAA and 9.0 (3.1 SD) mm for the LCAA in the RD-AVR group were observed (P < 0.001 for RCAA and LCAA in both the sutured and rapid-deployment groups). Despite the significant difference in the mean distance from the left coronary artery to annulus between the groups at baseline, the postoperative mean distance of the LCAA to the sewing ring was still higher in the RD-AVR group. CONCLUSIONS A significantly shorter coronary artery-to-aortic annulus distance for both the right and left main coronary arteries was observed after AVR with different conventional sutured supra-annular bioprostheses compared to AVR with rapid-deployment valves. These findings might be relevant for bioprosthesis selection, especially for young patients.

Early Hemodynamic Results in Patients with Small Aortic Annulus after Aortic Valve Replacement

2017 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 254-258 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pierre Olivier Dionne ◽  
Frédéric Poulin ◽  
Denis Bouchard ◽  
Philippe Généreux ◽  
Reda Ibrahim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation ◽  
Aortic Annulus ◽  
Transcatheter Aortic Valve ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Valve Size ◽  
Aortic Valve Implantation ◽  
Valve Implantation

Objective Patients with a small aortic annulus (≤21 mm) have an increased risk of patient-prosthesis mismatch after valve replacement. The aim of this study was to compare the early hemodynamic performance of the balloon-expandable transaortic valve implantation Edwards system (SAPIEN) and the sutureless Perceval prostheses. Methods Fifty patients underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation, and 113 patients underwent sutureless aortic valve replacement. Mean ± SD aortic annulus diameter was 19.7 ± 1 mm, with no significant difference between groups. SAPIEN valve size was 23 mm in 40 patients (80%) and 26 mm in 10 patients (20%). Perceval valve size was small in 45 patients (40%), medium in 62 patients (55%), and large in 6 patients (5%). Transthoracic Doppler echocardiographic images were collected at baseline and before discharge. Results There were no significant difference in predischarge effective orifice area (SAPIEN: 1.5 ± 0.5 cm2 and Perceval: 1.48 ± 0.34 cm2, P = 0.58) and indexed effective orifice areas (SAPIEN: 0.93 ± 0.32 cm2/m2 and Perceval: 0.88 ± 0.22 cm2/m2, P = 0.42). Predischarge mean ± SD transaortic gradient was lower with the SAPIEN than with Perceval valves (12 ± 6 and 17 ± 6 mm Hg, respectively, P < 0.001). Rates of moderate and severe prosthesis-patient mismatch were similar (SAPIEN: 44% and 10% and Perceval: 50% and 14%, P = 0.53 and 0.75, respectively). There were no moderate-severe paravalvular leaks. Conclusions Although indexed effective orifice areas were similar, transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the balloon-expandable SAPIEN system yielded lower predischarge transaortic mean gradients than the surgically implanted Perceval, in patients with a small annulus.

scholarly journals Supra-annular aortic valve replacement: technique and early outcomes

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nathanael Shraer ◽  
Ramzi Ramadan ◽  
Alexandre Azmoun ◽  
Julien Guihaire
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Hospital Mortality ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Marked Decrease ◽  
Aortic Annulus ◽  
Operative Outcomes ◽  
Operative Complications ◽  
Replacement Technique ◽  
The Mean

OBJECTIVES: The supra-annular aortic valve replacement (SA-AVR) allows for implantation of larger prostheses. We describe the technique, early post-operative outcomes and hospital mortality. METHODS: Patients who underwent SA-AVR with the Carpentier-Edwards Magna Ease bioprosthesis between December 2010 and December 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. The prosthesis was sutured to the aortic annulus along the coronary sinuses, and in a supra-annular position along the non-coronary sinus. RESULTS: 115 patients were included (mean age: 71,6 years ± 9,4). Mean bioprosthesis diameter was 23,3 ± 1,7 mm. Four early deaths were observed in the ICU. Early post-operative complications included: re-operation for bleeding (n=6), tamponade (n=7), permanent atrioventricular block (n=4) and hemodialysis (n=2). In-hospital mortality was 3,48%. Postoperative echocardiography showed a marked decrease in the mean left ventricle – aorta gradient (50,4 ± 16,1 mmHg vs 11,3 ± 4,05 mmHg). CONCLUSION: SA-AVR is safe and associated with favourable immediate outcomes in patients with small aortic annulus.

scholarly journals Sutureless and rapid deployment bioprosthetic valves: new perspectives.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Piperata ◽  
Tomaso Bottio ◽  
Martina Avesani ◽  
Gino Gerosa
Keyword(s):  
Infective Endocarditis ◽  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Bioprosthetic Valve ◽  
Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Prostheses ◽  
Rapid Deployment ◽  
Bioprosthetic Valves

We carefully read the recent paper by Hammond et al. (1) on the use of sutureless bioprosthetic valve for homograft failure in the setting of infective endocarditis (IE). This article is the latest demonstration that new sutureless and rapid deployment (RD) valve prostheses are safe and easy-to-use devices for surgical aortic valve replacement, and indicates their suitability for different scenarios and peculiar surgical situations as infective endocarditis (IE).

scholarly journals Pacemaker implantation after aortic valve replacement: rapid-deployment Intuity® compared to conventional bioprostheses

2020 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 335-342 ◽  
Author(s):  
Morgane Herry ◽  
Driss Laghlam ◽  
Olivier Touboul ◽  
Lee S Nguyen ◽  
Philippe Estagnasié ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Multivariate Analysis ◽  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Propensity Score ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Standard Group ◽  
Bundle Branch Block ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Rapid Deployment

Abstract OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to compare the incidence of permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation after aortic valve replacement by rapid-deployment bioprosthesis (RDB) and standard valve (Standard). METHODS All patients undergoing aortic valve replacement between 2015 and 2018, in 1 centre, were included. A multivariate analysis on the whole cohort and then a propensity score matching were used to compare the 2 groups. The primary end point was PPM implantation. RESULTS We studied 924 patients (256 RDBs and 668 Standards). Overall, 67 PPM were implanted, 37 (14.5%) in the RDB group and 26 (3.9%) in the Standard group (P &lt; 0.0001, univariate analysis). The multivariate analysis in the unmatched population found 4 independent factors associated with PPM implantation: right bundle branch block with odds ratios (ORs 3.7, 95% CI 2.9–6.7; P &lt; 0.0001), RDB (OR 3.6, 95% CI 2.0–6.2; P &lt; 0.0001), age (OR 1.1, 95% CI 1.0–1.1; P &lt; 0.006) and endocarditis (OR 3.4, 95% CI 1.0–11.0; P &lt; 0.04). In the propensity score-matched RDB group (203 patients per group), 25 patients required PPM implantation versus 3 in the Standard group (12.3% vs 1.5%, P &lt; 0.0001). RDBs also had more postoperative left bundle branch block and new onset of atrial fibrillation (30.2% vs 5.1%, P &lt; 0.0001 and 34.0% vs 24.1%, P = 0.029). RDBs had lower operating times (in min): aortic cross-clamping = 62 (44–76.5) vs 72 (57.5–91.5) and cardiopulmonary bypass = 81 (63–98.5) vs 91 (75–112), P &lt; 0.0001. There was no significant difference in other outcomes. CONCLUSIONS RDBs were associated with reduced operating times, increased risk of atrial fibrillation and PPM implantation as compared with standard aortic valves.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document