Sutureless prostheses and less invasive aortic valve replacement: just an issue of clamping time?

Continuous or interrupted pledgeted suture technique in stented bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement: a comparison of in-hospital outcomes

BACKGROUND

There is ambiguity in the literature regarding the continuous suture technique (CST) for aortic valve replacement (AVR). At our center, there has been a gradual shift towards CST over the interrupted pledgeted technique (IPT). This study aims at comparing outcomes for both techniques.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of a single-center study of patients undergoing AVR between January 2011 and July 2020. Patients were divided into two groups: Continuous suture technique and interrupted pledget-reinforced sutures. The pre-operative and In-hospital clinical characteristics and echocardiographic hemodynamics (i.e. transvalvular gradients and paravalvular leakage) were compared between CST and IPT.

RESULTS

We compared 791 patients with CST to 568 patients with IPT (median age: 73 and 74 years, respectively, p = 0.02). In CST there were 35% concomitant procedure vs. 31% in IPT (p = 0.16). Early mortality was 3.2% in CST versus 4.8% in IPT (p = 0.15), and a second cross-clamp due to a paravalvular-leak in 0.5% vs. 1.2%, respectively (p = 0.22). The CST was not associated with new-onset conduction-blocks mandating pacemaker implants(OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.54-2.14; P = 0.85). The postoperative gradients on echocardiography were lower in CST compared to IPT, especially in smaller annuli (peak gradients: 15.7mmHg vs. 20.5mmHg, in valve size < 23 mm, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The continuous suture technique was associated with lower postoperative gradients and shorter cross-clamp time compared to interrupted pledgeted technique. Differences in paravalvular leaks were non-significant, although slightly less in the continuous suture technique. There were no further differences in valve-related complications. Hence, continues suture technique is safe, with better hemodynamics compared to the interrupted pledgeted technique. This may be of clinical importance, especially in smaller size annular size.

Totally endoscopic aortic valve replacement: Techniques and early results

Objective

To demonstrate the technical details of total endoscopic aortic valve replacement using a standard prosthesis, compare the clinical effect and safety of endoscopic aortic valve replacement and traditional aortic valve replacement.

Methods

From 2020 to 2021, 60 consecutive patients underwent elective isolated aortic valve replacement (AVR). They were divided into two groups: the total endoscopic AVR group (TE-AVR group, 29 patients, nine women, aged 51.65 ± 11.79 years), and the traditional full-sternotomy group (AVR group, 31 patients, 13 women, aged 54.23 ± 12.06 years). Three working ports were adopted in the TE-AVR procedure.

Results

No patient died in either group. The cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time and aortic cross-clamp (ACC) time in the TE-AVR group were longer than those in the AVR group (CPB time: 177.6 ± 43.2 vs. 112.1 ± 18.1 min, p < 0.001; ACC time: 118.3 ± 29.7 vs. 67.0 ± 13.2 min, p < 0.001). However, the mechanical ventilation duration (14.2 ± 9.3 vs. 24.0 ± 18.9 h, p = 0.015) and postoperative hospital stay (6.0 ± 1.7 vs. 8.0 ± 4.5 days, p = 0.025) were shorter in patients of TE-AVR group than those of AVR group. Although the ICU stay (55.1 ± 26.9 vs. 61.5 ± 44.8 h, p = 0.509) and post-operative chest drainage of the first 24 h (229.8 ± 125.0 vs. 273.2 ± 103.2 ml, p = 0.146) revealed no statistical difference, there was a decreasing trend in the TE-AVR group. Among the patients of the TE-AVR group, two patients were converted to thoracotomy because of mild to moderate paravalvular leakage identified by intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography.

Conclusion

Total endoscopic aortic valve replacement is safe and feasible, with less trauma and quicker recovery.

Rapid deployment technology versus conventional sutured bioprostheses in aortic valve replacement

Objectives

Despite the benefits of rapid deployment aortic valve prostheses (RDAVR), conventional sutured valves (cAVR) are more commonly used in the treatment for aortic stenosis. Given the paucity of randomized studies, this study aimed to synthesize available data to compare both treatment options.

Methods

A systematic search of Pubmed, OVID, and MEDLINE was conducted to retrieve comparative studies for RDAVR versus cAVR in the treatment of aortic stenosis. Out of 1773 returned titles, 35 papers were used in the final analysis, including 1 randomized study, 1 registry study, 6 propensity‐matched studies, and 28 observational studies, incorporating a total of 10,381 participants (RDAVR n = 3686; cAVR n = 6310).

Results

Random‐effects meta‐analysis found no difference between the two treatment groups in terms of operative mortality, stroke, or bleeding (p > .05). The RDAVR group had reduced cardiopulmonary bypass (standardized mean difference [SMD]: −1.28, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [−1.35, −1.20], p < .001) and cross‐clamp times (SMD: −1.05, 95% CI: [−1.12, −0.98], p < .001). Length of stay in the intensive care unit was also shorter in the RDAVR group (SMD: −0.385, 95% CI: [−0.679, −0.092], p = .010). The risk of pacemaker insertion was higher for RDAVR (odds ratio [OR]: 2.41, 95% CI: [1.92, 3.01], p < .001) as was the risk of paravalvular leak (PVL) at midterm follow‐up (OR: 2.52, 95% CI: [1.32, 4.79], p = .005). Effective orifice area and transvalvular gradient were more favorable in RDAVR patients (p > .05).

Conclusions

Despite the benefits of RDAVR in terms of reduced operative time and enhanced recovery, the risk of pacemaker insertion and midterm PVL remains a significant cause for concern.

Aortic valve replacement using stented or sutureless/rapid deployment prosthesis via either full-sternotomy or a minimally invasive approach: a network meta-analysis

Background

New technologies such as sutureless or rapid deployment prosthetic valves and access via minimally invasive incisions offer alternatives to traditional full-sternotomy aortic valve replacement (SAVR). However, a comprehensive comparison of these surgical techniques along with alternative valve prosthesis has not been completed.

Methods

Electronic databases were searched for studies comparing outcomes for SAVR, minimally invasive AVR (MiAVR), sutureless/rapid-deployment AVR (SuAVR) via full-sternotomy, or minimally invasive SuAVR (MiSuAVR) from their inception until September 2018. Early postoperative outcomes and follow-up data were included in a Bayesian network meta-analysis.

Results

Twenty-three studies with 8,718 patients were identified. Compared with standard SAVR, SuAVR had significantly lower incidence of postoperative AF [odds ratio (OR) 0.33, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.14-0.79, P=0.013] and MiSuAVR greater requirement for postoperative permanent pacemaker (OR 2.27, 95% CI: 1.25-4.14, P=0.008). All sutureless/rapid-deployment procedures had reduced cardiopulmonary bypass and cross-clamp times, by a mean of 25.9 and 25.0 min, respectively. Hospital length of stay (LOS), but not intensive care LOS, was reduced for all groups (MiAVR -1.53 days, MiSuAVR -2.79 days, and SuAVR 3.37 days). A signal towards reduced early mortality, wound infections, and acute kidney injury was noted in both sutureless/rapid-deployment and minimally invasive techniques but did not achieve significance. Sutureless/rapid-deployment procedures had favourable survival and freedom from valve related reoperation, however follow-up times were short and demonstrated significant heterogeneity between intervention groups.

Conclusions

Minimally invasive and sutureless techniques demonstrate equivalent early postoperative outcomes to SAVR and may reduce ventilation time, hospital LOS and postoperative atrial fibrillation (POAF) burden.

Peri-procedural thrombocytopenia after aortic bioprosthesis implant: A systematic review and meta-analysis comparison among conventional, stentless, rapid-deployment, and transcatheter valves

BACKGROUND

Thrombocytopenia has been shown to occur soon after surgical biological aortic valve replacement (AVR), and recently reported also after transcatheter valve implantation (TAVI). The mechanism underlying this phenomenon is still unknown, and its clinical impact on the peri-operative outcome has been poorly investigated.

METHODS

A systematic review and a meta-analysis of all available studies reporting data about peri-procedural thrombocytopenia on isolated bio-AVR, comparing rapid-deployment (RDV), stentless (stentless-AVR), and TAVI vs. stented (stented-AVR) valves, have been performed.

RESULTS

Fifteen trials (2.163 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. Perioperative platelet reduction ranged from 35% to 55% in stented-AVR, from 60% to 77% in stentless-AVR, from 53% to 60% in RDV, and from to 21% to 72% in TAVI (apparently, balloon-expandable valves more frequently associated to thrombocytopenia). Stented-AVR required more red blood cells transfusion than stentless-AVR (P < 0.0001), whereas no difference has been found between RDV and stented-AVR. Platelet transfusion rate was very low in all surgical groups. No difference has been found in RDV and stentless-AVR vs. stented-AVR, in terms of reoperation for bleeding, and length-of-intensive care unit or hospital stay.

CONCLUSIONS

Thrombocytopenia-related major adverse events were mainly reported in TAVI patients, whereas clinically meaningless in surgical patients. Transient peri-procedural thrombocytopenia is common after bio-AVR, regardless of prosthesis's type or implant modality. It should receive appropriate monitoring and focused investigations.

The flutter-by effect: a comprehensive study of the fluttering cusps of the Perceval heart valve prosthesis

OBJECTIVES

Sutureless aortic valve prostheses are gaining popularity due to the substantial reduction in cross-clamp time. In this study, we report our observations on the cusp-fluttering phenomenon of the Perceval bioprosthesis (LivaNova, London, UK) using a combination of technical and medical perspectives.

METHODS

Between August 2014 and December 2016, a total of 108 patients (69% women) with a mean age of 78 years had aortic valve replacement using the Perceval bioprosthesis (34 combined procedures). All patients underwent transoesophageal echocardiography (TOE) intraoperatively. TOE was performed postoperatively to detect paravalvular leakage and to measure gradients, acceleration time, Doppler velocity indices (Vmax and LVOT/Vmax AV) and effective orifice area indices. In addition, a TOE examination was performed in 21 patients postoperatively. Data were collected retrospectively from our hospital database.

RESULTS

The retrospective evaluation of the intraoperative TOE examinations revealed consistent fluttering in all patients with the Perceval bioprosthesis. The echocardiographic postoperative measurements showed a mean effective orifice area index of 0.91 ± 0.12 cm2/m2. The overall mean pressure and peak pressure gradients were in a higher range (13.5 ± 5.1 mmHg and 25.5 ± 8.6 mmHg, respectively), whereas acceleration time (62.8 ± 16.4 ms) and Doppler velocity indices (0.43 ± 0.11) were within the normal range according to the American Society of Echocardiography or european association of echocardiography (EAE) guidelines. The 2-dimensional TOE in Motion Mode (M-Mode) that was performed in patients with elevated lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels revealed remarkable fluttering of the cusps of the Perceval bioprosthesis.

CONCLUSIONS

In our study cohort, we observed the fluttering phenomenon in all patients who received the Perceval bioprosthesis, which was correlated with elevated LDH levels and higher pressure gradients.

Rapid deployment or sutureless versus conventional bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

This meta-analysis was conducted to compare the early and follow-up outcomes of aortic valve replacement using rapid deployment or sutureless (RD) valves (RDAVR group) with aortic valve replacement using conventional bioprostheses (CAVR group).

METHODS

A literature search of 5 online databases was conducted. The primary outcomes were postoperative complications and the secondary outcomes included the aortic cross-clamp (ACC) and cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) times and early mortality and all-cause mortality during follow-up.

RESULTS

Twenty-one articles (RDAVR group = 1297 patients; CAVR group = 1488 patients) were selected. The pooled analyses showed that the ACC and CPB times were significantly shorter in the RDAVR group than in the CAVR group (mean difference, -26.34; 95% confidence interval [CI], -31.86 to -20.82 and mean difference, -25.33; 95% CI, -30.79 to -19.87, respectively). The pooled risk ratios (RRs) of any paravalvular leak and permanent pacemaker (PPM) insertion were significantly higher in the RDAVR group than in the CAVR group (RR, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.53-3.51 and RR, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.49-2.90, respectively). The pooled analysis showed that the risk of a paravalvular leak grade ≥2 in the RDAVR group did not significantly differ between the RDAVR and CAVR groups (RR, 2.05; 95% CI, 0.71-5.93). The risk of PPM insertion remained significant when only studies reporting adjusted outcomes were pooled. The risks of other postoperative complications, early mortality, and all-cause mortality during follow-up were not significantly different between the RDAVR and CAVR groups.

CONCLUSIONS

RDAVR is associated with significantly shorter ACC and CPB times than CAVR, although this difference did not translate into improved postoperative outcomes, early mortality, and all-cause mortality during follow-up. Care might be needed when implanting RD valves because they are associated with a higher incidence of PPM insertion, regardless of the RD valve type.

Continuous Suture Technique for Aortic Valve Replacement Shortens Cross-Clamp and Bypass Times

The interrupted noneverting mattress suture technique is typically used in conventional surgical aortic valve replacement. The continuous suture technique, although faster, has been associated with a higher incidence of paravalvular leak. Using a slightly modified technique to minimize this risk, we investigated whether continuous suturing would shorten aortic cross-clamp time in aortic valve replacement in comparison with interrupted suturing. We reviewed the cases and compared the perioperative data of 60 consecutive patients in Japan and Australia (35 men and 25 women; median age, 70 yr) who had undergone aortic valve replacement with or without septal myectomy. The continuous suture technique had been used in 41 patients (Group CS) and the standard interrupted suture technique in 19 (Group IS). The groups were similar in age, sex, pathologic valvular conditions, and operative urgency. In Group CS, aortic cross-clamp time (47 vs 63 min; P=0.0001) and cardiopulmonary bypass time (76 vs 89 min; P=0.04) were significantly shorter. Neither group had early paravalvular leak. Using our continuous suture technique safely shortened aortic cross-clamp time during surgical aortic valve replacement.

Sutureless 3F Enable Valve Replacement for Pure Aortic Regurgitation

BACKGROUND AND AIM

We present our experience in the use of the sutureless valve in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement for pure aortic regurgitation.

METHODS

Out of 167 patients who underwent sutureless aortic valve implantation with a Medtronic 3f Enable prosthesis in our unit between March 2011 and February 2014, 12 (7.1%) received a sutureless valve for pure aortic regurgitation.

RESULTS

Mean age, logistic EuroSCORE, and left ventricular ejection fraction were 72 ± 5 years, 6.3 ± 2.9%, and 52.5 ± 15.3%, respectively. The sutureless valve could be successfully implanted in all cases; nine patients had a full sternotomy (associated coronary artery bypass graft in four cases and associated mitral surgery in five), one patient had a ministernotomy, and two had a thoracoscopic approach. Average cross-clamping and cardiopulmonary bypass times were 90 ± 30 and 127 ± 51 minutes, respectively. At the outpatient echocardiography, average mean gradient was 10.54 ± 4.99 mmHg and a grade I-II paravalvular leakage (PVL) was detected in the first patient of the cohort (ministernotomy approach). At a mean follow-up of 11.1 ± 5.5 months, average mean gradient was 9.75 ± 2.87 mmHg, no new PVL was detected, and the known PVL was stable. No pacemaker implantation was required.

CONCLUSIONS

Implantation of the 3f Enable sutureless valve is technically possible with pure aortic regurgitation in selected patients. Multicenter investigations are necessary to assess the mid-term benefits of such a device in this subset of patients.