Why the study?
Does aortic valve replacement with Perceval S compared to 3f Enable sutureless bioprostheses improve left ventricular mass regression in patients with symptomatic aortic stenosis?
Does aortic valve replacement with Perceval S compared to 3f Enable sutureless bioprostheses improve left ventricular mass regression in patients with symptomatic aortic stenosis?
Aortic valve replacement with either Perceval S or 3f Enable sutureless bioprostheses results in significant and comparable left ventricular mass regression at 6 months.
Both sutureless valves were associated with comparable LV mass regression at 6 months; leaves open optimal prosthesis selection in aortic stenosis.
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/m at baseline to 123.3 (63) g/m at follow-up (P < 0.001) in group P and from 146.1 (47.6) g/m to 118.1 (39.8) g/m (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.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Concistrè et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: