Key result
Continuous suture technique is linked to significantly shorter cross-clamp and bypass times in AVR vs interrupted sutures.
Why the study?
The study aimed to compare the continuous suture technique with the conventional interrupted suture technique in aortic valve replacement regarding operative times and complications.
Does a continuous suture technique reduce aortic cross-clamp and cardiopulmonary bypass times compared to a conventional interrupted suture technique in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement?
Cohort (n=103)
No
Does a continuous suture technique reduce aortic cross-clamp and cardiopulmonary bypass times compared to a conventional interrupted suture technique in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement?
p-value: p=<0.001 approximately 0.012
A modified continuous suture technique for aortic valve replacement significantly reduces procedural times and may lower the risk of prosthesis-associated complications compared to conventional interrupted sutures.
Continuous suture was associated with shorter cross-clamp and bypass times; hypothesis-generating for randomized trials before practice change in aortic valve replacement.
From April 2000 to April 2003 total 103 patients underwent aortic valve replacement and some concomitant cardiac procedures including mitral valve replacement in our hospital. According to the suture technique used in aortic valve replacement, the patients were divided into two groups: group A, 42 patients, the continuous suture technique with some modifications was used; group B, 61 patients, the conventional interrupted suture technique was used. There were no statistical differences between the two groups in age, sex, bodyweight, valve lesion, concomitant cardiac procedure and early mortality. But there were significant differences ([<0.001 approximately 0.012) in aortic cross-clamp time (AOCT) and cardiopulmonary bypass time (CPBT) between the two groups with less time for the group A patients. During a follow-up from 1 to 35 months, in group B, one patient developed perivalvular leak. The incidence of perivalvular leak was 1.7% (1/59). Three patients developed prosthetic bacterial endocarditis, the incidence of which was 5.0% (3/59). All the patients in group A recovered satisfactorily without suture technique or prosthesis associated complications. The modified technique was introduced and illustrated with diagrams, and the reasons for the advantages of the technique over the conventional interrupted suture technique were discussed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
He et al. (2006) conducted a cohort in Aortic valve replacement (n=103). Continuous suture technique vs. Conventional interrupted suture technique was evaluated on Aortic cross-clamp time (AOCT) and cardiopulmonary bypass time (CPBT) (p=<0.001 approximately 0.012). The continuous suture technique for aortic valve replacement significantly reduced aortic cross-clamp and cardiopulmonary bypass times compared to the interrupted technique (P<0.001 to 0.012).
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: