Perceval S and Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting, Contradiction or Full Harmony?

Background / Study Objective: Coronary artery disease is very common in patients who are referred to aortic valve replacement. Concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) procedure does not necessarily contradict with the use of last generation sutureless bioprostheses, but, publications about this combined approach are very limited. The objective of this study is to describe the results of aortic valve replacement plus CABG using Perceval S aortic sutureless bioprostheses in our Center. Methods: From our database we retrospectively described the outcomes of 42 patients who underwent aortic valve replacement with a last generation sutureless bioprostheses (Perceval S) plus CABG at the same procedure. We used a combination of arterials (left internal mammary artery (LIMA), right internal mammary artery (RIMA) and radial artery) and saphenous vein for the coronary artery bypass grafting. Most of the patients received 1 bypass (range: 1-3). Mean age: 78,19 ± 5,1. Male 64,3%, female 35,7%. Cardiovascular risk factors: Hypertension 97,6%; Diabetes 38,1%, Dyslipidemia 69%, peripheral vascular disease 38,2%, prior stroke 9,5%, chronic renal failure 40,5%, obstructive pulmonary disease 21,4% of the patients. Mean Logistic EuroScoreI/II: 16,68/10,73% (expected mortality). Results and Conclusions: Excellent results were achieved in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement with Perceval S sutureless bioprostheses and concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting. Although high aortotomy is needed for Perceval S implantation, is possible to perform proximal anastomosis for saphenous grafts properly. Perceval S is a feasible alternative for patients with aortic valve stenosis and coronary artery disease, with shorter cross-clamp and extracorporeal circulation times and low rate of complications.

Left Ventricular Mass Regression after Two Alternative Sutureless Aortic Bioprostheses

Objective Left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy in aortic stenosis (AS) constitutes a risk factor for cardiac morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study was to investigate the degree of LV mass regression after aortic valve replacement (AVR) with two alternative sutureless self-expanding strategies: Perceval S (Sorin Group, Saluggia, Italy) (P) and 3f Enable (Medtronic, ATS Medical, Minneapolis, MN USA) (e) aortic bioprostheses. Methods Between March 2010 and December 2011, 129 patients with symptomatic AS underwent AVR with the Perceval S or 3f Enable bioprostheses in two cardiac surgery departments (Massa, Italy; Nuremberg, Germany). We analyzed 45 patients in group P and 19 in group E undergoing isolated AVR with a 6-month follow-up. The LV mass was calculated using the Devereux formula and was indexed to body surface area. Results Baseline patient characteristics showed no significant differences between the two groups. There were no in-hospital deaths. Two patients in group P died at follow-up versus zero in group E ( P = 0.49). Mean LV mass index decreased from 146.6 (78) g/m2 at baseline to 123.3 (63) g/m2 at follow-up ( P < 0.001) in group P and from 146.1 (47.6) g/m2 to 118.1 (39.8) g/m2 ( P = 0.003) in group E, with no significant difference between the two groups ( P = 0.315). This effect was accompanied by significant clinical improvement. Conclusions: In isolated AS, AVR with sutureless bioprostheses is associated with a significant regression in LV mass at 6-month follow-up. No significant differences were present between the two alternative sutureless strategies. However, regression needs an evaluation with long-term echocardiographic examinations.