Right anterior thoracotomy approach for isolated aortic valve replacement with sutured aortic valve prosthesis

2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-33
Author(s):  
Mustafa Bahadır İnan
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Prosthesis ◽  
Aortic Valve Prosthesis

Minimally invasive redo aortic valve replacement with a sutureless valve implant

2021 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Prosthesis ◽  
Mechanical Prosthesis ◽  
Invasive Approach ◽  
Replacement Procedure ◽  
Aortic Valve Prosthesis ◽  
Sutureless Valve

Reoperations for a dysfunctional mechanical aortic valve prosthesis are usually performed with a repeat sternotomy. Reopening the chest may be associated with a heart structure tear, bleeding, excessive transfusion, and a possible unfavorable outcome. Experience performing a redo aortic valve replacement with a minimally invasive approach and avoiding lysis of the pericardial adhesions is growing. We describe a redo aortic valve replacement procedure performed because of subvalvular pannus formation in a patient with a mechanical prosthesis. A partial J-shaped hemisternotomy at the 3rd intercostal space was performed; the ascending aorta was exposed and the valve was replaced with a sutureless bioprosthesis. The video tutorial shows the surgical approach, cardiopulmonary bypass solutions, and sutureless valve deployment.

scholarly journals The first experience of implantation of the transcatheter aortal valve prosthesis “MedLab-KT”

2018 ◽  
pp. 50-57
Author(s):  
A. V. Bogachev-­Prokofiev ◽  
R. M. Sharifulin ◽  
D. D. Zubarev ◽  
A. M. Karaskov
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Prosthesis ◽  
Routine Procedure ◽  
Transcatheter Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Valve Prosthesis ◽  
Aortal Valve ◽  
Transapical Access

Aim.Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with high and extremely high risk has become a routine procedure in many cardiac surgery clinics. Until recently, there were no transcatheter prostheses produced within Russia. This article analyzes the results of applying the first domestic transcatheter aortic valve prosthesis MedLab­KT.Material and methods.In the period from June 2018 to October 2018, 7 operations of transcatheter aortic valve replacement were made using the MedLabKT prosthesis. In all cases, implantation was performed by transapical access.Results.We noted one death. In all cases, paraprosthetic regurgitation was not registrated or was not significant. There are no cases of dislocation of the prosthesis. There were no complications associated with access. In one case, implantation was complicated by myocardial infarction.Conclusion.The first experience of implantation demonstrated the efficacy and safety of using the MedLab­LT prosthesis for transcatheter aortic valve replacement. The analysis of long­term results is required.

scholarly journals Perceval S Sutureless Prosthesis in Aortic Valve Replacement

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 87-92
Author(s):  
V. V. Sokolov ◽  
A. I. Kovalyov ◽  
V. V. Vladimirov ◽  
I. V. Ivanov ◽  
N. M. Bikbova
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Prosthesis ◽  
Pericardial Cavity ◽  
Results Of Treatment ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Complex Procedure ◽  
Aortic Valve Prosthesis ◽  
Made In

 BACKGROUND In 12–47% of patients, there is a need to repeat the aortic valve replacement due to various valve-related complications in the immediate and late postoperative period. The standard operation of repeated aortic valve replacement is a complex procedure and it is associated with an increased risk due to adhesions in the pericardial cavity, previously performed coronary bybass surgery, diffculties of excision of the previously implanted prosthesis, narrow fbrous aortic valve ring and aorta. In 2007, the sutureless Perceval S aortic valve bioprosthesis (Sorin Group, Italy) was introduced into clinical practice. One of the advantages of such a prosthesis is the convenience of its anatomical positioning during repeated operations and the absence of the need to fx the prosthesis with sutures. The aim of study was to summarize the experience of sutureless implantation of the aortic valve prosthesis during repeated replacement.MATERIAL AND METHODS We report the results of treatment in 3 patients with valve-associated complications, who underwent aortic valve repeated replacement with the Perceval S sutureless prosthesis.RESULTS There were no hospital mortality and paraprosthetic regurgitation in the repeated replacement of the aortic valve with the Perceval S sutureless prosthesis. Two patients required implantation of a permanent pacemaker due to the development of a complete atrioventricular block, which was not related to the model of the prosthesis used.CONCLUSION The use of aortic valve prosthesis in cardiac surgery, which does not require fxation with sutures, allows non-standard decisions to be made in the surgical treatment of patients with various complications of previously performed aortic valve replacement and provides good immediate results if repeated replacement is necessary.

scholarly journals The first experience of implantation of the transcatheter aortal valve prosthesis “MedLab-KT”

2018 ◽  
pp. 50-56
Author(s):  
A. V. Bogachev-­Prokofiev ◽  
R. M. Sharifulin ◽  
D. D. Zubarev ◽  
A. M. Karaskov
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Prosthesis ◽  
Routine Procedure ◽  
Transcatheter Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Valve Prosthesis ◽  
Aortal Valve ◽  
Transapical Access

Aim. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with high and extremely high risk has become a routine procedure in many cardiac surgery clinics. Until recently, there were no transcatheter prostheses produced within Russia. This article analyzes the results of applying the first domestic transcatheter aortic valve prosthesis MedLab­KT. Material and methods. In the period from June 2018 to October 2018, 7 operations of transcatheter aortic valve replacement were made using the MedLabKT prosthesis. In all cases, implantation was performed by transapical access.Results. We noted one death. In all cases, paraprosthetic regurgitation was not registrated or was not significant. There are no cases of dislocation of the prosthesis. There were no complications associated with access. In one case, implantation was complicated by myocardial infarction.Conclusion. The first experience of implantation demonstrated the efficacy and safety of using the MedLab­LT prosthesis for transcatheter aortic valve replacement. The analysis of long­term results is required.

scholarly journals 1269 Five Year Propensity Matched Outcomes of Minimally Invasive vs Conventional Isolated Aortic Valve Surgery

2021 ◽  
Vol 108 (Supplement_6) ◽  
Author(s):  
S Oo ◽  
A Khan ◽  
J Chan ◽  
H Vohra
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Valve Prosthesis ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Operative Outcomes ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Aortic Valve Prosthesis

Abstract Aim To analyse the early and mid-term outcomes of the patients undergoing conventional isolated aortic valve replacement (CAVR) versus minimally invasive isolated aortic valve replacement (MIAVR). Method This is a single centre retrospective study involving 653 patients who underwent isolated aortic valve replacement either via CAVR (n = 516) or MIAVR (n = 137) between August 2015 and March 2020. Using pre-operative characteristics, patients were propensity matched (PM) to produce 114 matched pairs. Assessment of peri-operative outcomes, early and mid-term survival and echocardiographic parameters was performed. Results PM analysis showed the larger sized aortic valve prosthesis were inserted in the MIAVR group (22.8±2.5mm) compared to CAVR group (22.0±2.2mm)(p = 0.010). CPB time was longer with MIAVR (94.4±19.5mins) compared to CAVR (83.1 + 33.3; p = 0.003). There were no differences in the early post-operative complications and mortality between the two groups. Follow-up echocardiographic data showed significant difference in mean aortic valve gradients between CAVR and MIAVR groups (17.3±8.2mmHg and13.0±5.1mmHg, respectively; p = 0.001). There was no significant difference between CAVR and MIAVR in the mid-term survival at 3 years. (log-rank test p = 0.314). Conclusions This study found that larger aortic valve sizes with lower mean gradients are being implanted in the MIAVR group. Despite the longer CPB time in the MIAVR group, there was no significant difference in the early complications, mortality, and mid-term survival between MIAVR and CAVR. Further studies will be required to analyse the long-term survival.

Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch Causes a Significantly Increased Risk of Operative Mortality in Aortic Valve Replacement

2014 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Muhammad Shahzeb Khan ◽  
Faizan Imran Bawany ◽  
Asadullah Khan ◽  
Mehwish Hussain
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Operative Mortality ◽  
Univariate Analysis ◽  
Female Gender ◽  
Valve Prosthesis ◽  
Predictors Of Mortality ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Urgent Operation

<p><b>Background:</b> Small aortic prosthesis can lead to prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM). Implanting such small prosthesis remains a controversial issue. This study was done to investigate whether or not PPM causes an increased operative mortality in aortic valve replacement (AVR).</p><p><b>Methods:</b> Two-hundred-two consecutive patients undergoing primary AVR in a tertiary hospital were included. The sample was grouped according to the aortic valve prosthesis size: ?21 mm (small) and >21 mm (standard). The effect of variables on outcomes was determined by univariate and multivariable regression analyses.</p><p><b>Results:</b> PPM was found significantly more among patients with AVR ? 21mm (<i>P</i> < 0.0001). Moreover, the likelihood of mortality also was significantly higher in these patients (<i>P</i> < 0.0001). Univariate analysis demonstrated small prosthesis size, urgent operation, PPM, female gender, and NYHA Class IV as significant predictors of mortality. Multivariate regression identified female gender, PPM, and urgent operation as the key independent predictors of mortality.</p><p><b>Conclusion:</b> PPM and female gender are significant predictors of mortality. Care should be taken to prevent PPM by implanting larger prosthesis especially in females.</p>

scholarly journals Long-term survival after Carpentier-Edwards Perimount aortic valve replacement in Western Denmark: a multi-centre observational study

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lytfi Krasniqi ◽  
Mads P. Kronby ◽  
Lars P. S. Riber
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Significant Risk ◽  
Valve Prosthesis ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Long Term Survival ◽  
All Cause Mortality

Abstract Background This study describes the long-term survival, risk of reoperation and clinical outcomes of patients undergoing solitary surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) with a Carpentier-Edwards Perimount (CE-P) bioprosthetic in Western Denmark. The renewed interest in SAVR is based on the questioning regarding the long-term survival since new aortic replacement technique such as transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) probably have shorter durability, why assessment of long-term survival could be a key issue for patients. Methods From November 1999 to November 2013 a cohort of a total of 1604 patients with a median age of 73 years (IQR: 69–78) undergoing solitary SAVR with CE-P in Western Denmark was obtained November 2018 from the Western Danish Heart Registry (WDHR). The primary endpoint was long-term survival from all-cause mortality. Secondary endpoints were survival free from major adverse cardiovascular and cerebral events (MACCE), risk of reoperation, cause of late death, patient-prothesis mismatch, risk of AMI, stroke, pacemaker or ICD implantation and postoperative atrial fibrillation (POAF). Time-to-event analysis was performed with Kaplan-Meier curve, cumulative incidence function was performed with Nelson-Aalen cumulative hazard estimates. Cox regression was applied to detect risk factors for death and reoperation. Results In-hospital mortality was 2.7% and 30-day mortality at 3.4%. The 5-, 10- and 15-year survival from all-cause mortality was 77, 52 and 24%, respectively. Survival without MACCE was 80% after 10 years. Significant risk factors of mortality were small valves, smoking and EuroSCORE II ≥4%. The risk of reoperation was < 5% after 7.5 years and significant risk factors were valve prosthesis-patient mismatch and EuroSCORE II ≥4%. Conclusions Patients undergoing aortic valve replacement with a Carpentier-Edwards Perimount valve shows a very satisfying long-term survival. Future research should aim to investigate biological valves long-term durability for comparison of different SAVR to different TAVR in long perspective.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document