Key result
A modified continuous suture technique for aortic valve replacement significantly reduced operative times and hospital stay, and allowed for larger valve implantation compared to interrupted sutures.
Why the study?
Does a modified continuous suture technique reduce procedural times and improve outcomes compared to conventional interrupted suture in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis?
RCT (n=86)
Randomly divided
No
Does a modified continuous suture technique reduce procedural times and improve outcomes compared to conventional interrupted suture in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis?
A modified continuous suture technique for aortic valve replacement significantly reduces procedural times and allows for larger valve implantation compared to interrupted sutures.
Supports modified continuous suture in AVR; extends observational reports with RCT confirmation.
OBJECTIVE: : The continuous suture technique has numerous advantages as simple, quick, and effective for aortic valve replacement; however, it is technically difficult. We have modified the continuous suture technique and evaluated our new technique in patients with aortic stenosis. METHODS: : Between July 2007 and May 2010, 86 patients with aortic valve stenosis underwent aortic valve replacement alone or with other concomitant cardiac procedures including mitral valve surgery in our hospital. The patients were randomly divided into two groups: group A (n = 43) in which the continuous suture technique with some modifications was used and group B (n = 43) in which the conventional interrupted suture technique was used. There were no statistical differences between two groups in age, sex, body surface area, concomitant cardiac procedures, blood loss, and postoperative extubation time. RESULTS: : The aortic cross-clamp time, cardiopulmonary bypass time, operation time, and hospital stay were significantly shorter in group A than that in group B, and the valve size was significantly larger in group A. No perivalvular leak was detected in postoperative echocardiograms. All patients recovered satisfactorily without complications associated with suture technique or prosthesis. During follow-up of 4 to 38 months, there were no clinically significant complications in group A, while one patient in group B developed perivalvular leakage requiring reoperation 3 months after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: : Our modified continuous suture method is useful for aortic valve replacement in patients with aortic stenosis and beneficial for the patients because the procedure is less invasive and a larger valve can be implanted.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Watanabe et al. (2011) conducted an RCT in Aortic valve stenosis (n=86). Modified continuous suture technique vs. Conventional interrupted suture technique was evaluated on Aortic cross-clamp time, cardiopulmonary bypass time, operation time, hospital stay, and valve size. A modified continuous suture technique for aortic valve replacement significantly reduced operative times and hospital stay, and allowed for larger valve implantation compared to interrupted sutures.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: