COMPARISON OF IMPLANTATION TECHNIQUES USING FREESTYLE STENTLESS PORCINE AORTIC-VALVE

被引:72
作者
KON, ND [1 ]
WESTABY, S [1 ]
AMARASENA, N [1 ]
PILLAI, R [1 ]
CORDELL, AR [1 ]
机构
[1] OXFORD HEART CTR,OXFORD,ENGLAND
关键词
D O I
10.1016/0003-4975(95)00066-T
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Stentless porcine aortic valves demonstrate superior hemodynamic performance when compared with their stented counterparts. The technical considerations for implanting these valves can be demanding. The Medtronic Freestyle aortic root bioprosthesis resembles an allograft, has zero-pressure-fixed leaflets treated with an antimineralization agent, and can be implanted using a variety of techniques. In this study of that valve, total root replacement (TRR) was compared with a partial scallop aortic inclusion technique (PSI). Implantations were performed in 75 patients (49 PSI and 26 TRR). There were no significant differences with respect to age, sex, or incidence of concomitant procedures. Mean aortic crossclamp times were significantly less in the PSI group than in the TRR group (51.8 +/- 11.7 minutes versus 125.5 +/- 19.7 minutes; p = 0.0001). At discharge, mean systolic gradients seen on color-now Doppler echocardiography were less in the TRR group than in the PSI group (6.17 +/- 3.66 versus 10.01 +/- 4.83 mm Hg; p = 0.014). Discharge echocardiography revealed trivial valve regurgitation in 8.3% of the TRR group and in 41.7% of the PSI group (p = 0.004). No patient experienced any significant valvular regurgitation on discharge echocardiography. We conclude that early experience with the Medtronic Freestyle aortic root bioprosthesis shows excellent short-term function regardless of implantation technique. Shorter crossclamp times, comparable with those of stented valve procedures, occurred with PSI implantation. We anticipate that effects on long-term durability will be beneficial.
引用
收藏
页码:857 / 862
页数:6
相关论文
共 23 条
[1]  
David TE, Ropchan GC, Butany JW, Aortic valve replacement with stentless porcine bioprostheses, J Cardiac Surg, 3, pp. 501-505, (1988)
[2]  
David TE, Pollick C, Bos J, Aortic valve replacement with stentless porcine aortic bioprosthesis, J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg, 99, pp. 113-118, (1990)
[3]  
Konertz W, Weyand M, Sidiropoulos A, Schwammenthal E, Breithardt G, Scheld HH, Technique of aortic valve replacement with the Edwards stentless aortic bioprosthesis 2500, Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, 6, pp. 274-277, (1992)
[4]  
Pillai R, Spriggings D, Amarasena N, O'Regan DJ, Parry AJ, Westaby S, Stentless aortic bioprosthesis?, The way forward: early experience with the Edwards valve, 56, pp. 88-91, (1993)
[5]  
David TE, Bos J, Rakowski H, Aortic valve replacement with the Toronto SPV bioprosthesis, J Heart Valve Dis, 1, pp. 244-248, (1992)
[6]  
Konertz W, Hamann P, Schwammenthal E, Breithardt G, Scheld HH, Aortic valve replacement with stentless xenografts, J Heart Valve Dis, 1, pp. 249-252, (1992)
[7]  
Konertz W, Herrmann M, Knauth M, Stabenow I, David T, Preliminary experience with the Toronto SPV stentless porcine bioprosthesis for aortic valve replacement, Thorac Cardiovasc Surg, 42, pp. 36-39, (1994)
[8]  
Hvass U, Chatel D, Ouroudji M, Et al., The O'Brien-Angell stentless valve, Early results of 100 implants, 8, pp. 384-387, (1994)
[9]  
Del Rizzo DF, Goldman BS, Joyner CP, Sever J, Fremes SE, Christakis GT, Initial clinical experience with the Toronto Stentless Porcine Valve™, J Cardiac Surg, 9, pp. 379-385, (1994)
[10]  
Angell WW, Oury JH, Lamberti JJ, Koziol J, Durability of the viable aortic allograft, J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg, 98, pp. 48-56, (1989)