What type of study is this?

Comparison of Surgical Treatment Outcomes in Patients with Symptomatic Severe Aortic Valve Stenosis Using the Perceval Sutureless Bioprosthesis Versus a Conventional Biological Valve

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Authors

Retrospective cohort study shows improved survival with Perceval in patients with aortic valve stenosis, indicating its efficacy in high-risk groups.

Survival rate at 36 months was higher for the Perceval group at 88.3% compared to 76.8% for the conventional group, indicating better long-term outcomes.
Mean aortic cross-clamp time during combined procedures was significantly shorter in the Perceval group, reflecting efficiency in surgical technique.
A total of 233 patients were analyzed, with 74 receiving a Perceval sutureless valve and 159 a conventional stented valve over a nearly four-year period.
Echocardiographic follow-up for the Perceval group extended up to 58 months, supporting its safety and effectiveness for elderly high-risk patients.

Lazović et al. (2025) studied this question.

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Retrospective cohort study shows improved survival with Perceval in patients with aortic valve stenosis, indicating its efficacy in high-risk groups.