Key result
Dobutamine stress echocardiography linked to a ~39% higher EOAi in Perceval bioprostheses versus rest.
Why the study?
Does the Perceval sutureless bioprosthesis demonstrate improved hemodynamic performance under high workload induced by dobutamine stress echocardiography?
Observational (n=32)
Does the Perceval sutureless bioprosthesis demonstrate improved hemodynamic performance under high workload induced by dobutamine stress echocardiography?
The Perceval sutureless bioprosthesis demonstrates significant increases in effective orifice area during dobutamine stress echocardiography, suggesting potential advantages for patients with small aortic annuli or those at risk for patient-prosthesis mismatch.
May support Perceval selection in small annuli; leaves open randomized outcome confirmation before practice change.
Objectives The aim of this study was to evaluate the hemodynamic performance of a sutureless bioprosthesis under high workload at mid‐term follow‐up. Methods Thirty‐two patients who underwent isolated aortic valve replacement with a Perceval sutureless bioprosthesis with a minimum follow‐up of 1 year were enrolled in this study. S size prosthesis was deployed in 10 patients (31.3%), M size in 9 (28.1%), L size in 8 (25%) and XL size in 5 (15.6%). Effective orifice area (EOA), EOA index (EOAi), and transvalvular gradients were assessed at rest and during dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE) a median of 19.5 months after surgery. Results Dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE) significantly increased heart rate, stroke volume, ejection fraction, and transvalvular gradients (peak gradient, 24.0 ± 7.6 vs 38.7 ± 13.6 mm Hg, P < .001; mean gradient, 12.6 ± 4.2 vs 19.8 ± 8.3, P < .001). When compared to baseline, estimated valve areas significantly increased at follow‐up (EOA, 1.48 ± 0.46 vs 2.06 ± 0.67, P < .001; EOAi, 0.84 ± 0.26 vs 1.17 ± 0.37, P < .001). Mean percentage increase in EOAi was 40.3% ± 28.0%. S size prostheses had the highest increase in EOA1, but the difference was not significant (S 46.0% ± 27.5% vs M 45.4% ± 34.5% vs L 32.7% ± 26.4% vs XL 32.1% ± 20.5%, P = .66). Severe patient‐prosthesis mismatch (EOAi ≤ 0.65 cm2/m2) was present at rest in 8 patients (25%), but only in one patient (3.1%) during DSE. Conclusions The Perceval sutureless bioprosthesis demonstrated good hemodynamics at rest and under high workload. The significant increase in EOAi during DSE suggests the potential advantages of Perceval sutureless bioprostheses in case of small aortic annulus or when patient‐prosthesis mismatch is anticipated.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rubino et al. (2017) conducted an observational in Aortic valve replacement (n=32). Dobutamine stress echocardiography vs. Rest was evaluated on Effective orifice area index (EOAi) (p=<.001). Dobutamine stress echocardiography significantly increased the effective orifice area index of the Perceval sutureless bioprosthesis compared to rest (1.17 vs 0.84, P<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: