Key result
Redo surgical AVR is linked to more POAF than redo-sutureless AVR, with similar long-term outcomes.
Why the study?
Clinical outcomes needed evaluation after redo AVR comparing sutured valves, ViV-TAVR, and sutureless valves.
Do redo-sutureless AVR or ViV-TAVR improve clinical outcomes compared to redo-sutured AVR in patients undergoing redo aortic valve replacement?
Cohort (n=113)
Do redo-sutureless AVR or ViV-TAVR improve clinical outcomes compared to redo-sutured AVR in patients undergoing redo aortic valve replacement?
p-value: p=0.04
In patients undergoing redo aortic valve replacement, long-term follow-up outcomes were similar among sutured, sutureless, and ViV-TAVR approaches.
No abstract yet. The journal hasn't published one we can show.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dokollari et al. (2023) conducted a cohort in Redo aortic valve replacement (n=113). Redo-sutureless AVR or ViV-TAVR vs. Redo-sutured AVR was evaluated on New postoperative atrial fibrillation (POAF) (p=0.04). Redo surgical aortic valve replacement was associated with a higher incidence of new postoperative atrial fibrillation compared with redo-sutureless AVR (p=0.04), with no differences in long-term outcomes.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: