Sutureless aortic valve replacement with concomitant valvular surgery

Single-center real-world data and technical considerations from 100 consecutive patients treated with the Perceval aortic bioprosthesis

Objectives

Although the Perceval sutureless aortic valve bioprosthesis presents a feasible alternative to conventional aortic valve prostheses, the extent of its applicability with respect to technical considerations for a real-world patient collective is still under debate.

Methods

One hundred patients received the Perceval prosthesis [males: 59; age: 72.5 (7.3-79) years] between December 2015 and February 2023 [EuroSCORE II: 2.8 (1.7-5.4)] for an aortic valve replacement (AVR), with additional concomitant procedures, for underlying severe aortic valve stenosis [n = 93 (93)], endocarditis [n = 5 (5)], and redo AVR [n = 7 (7)] including a prior surgical AVR [n = 4 (4)] and a failed transcatheter aortic valve implantation [n = 3 (3)]. Surgery was conducted primarily by median sternotomy [n = 71 (71)] and, alternatively, by the upper hemisternotomy approach [n = 29 (29)].

Results

Over a median follow-up time of 36.5 (16.5-53) months, eight patients (8%) underwent postoperative pacemaker implantation, with five (5%) due to high-grade atrioventricular block, while nine patients experienced a stroke (9%). The median values of maximum and mean gradients across all valve sizes were 22 (18-27.5) mmHg and 10 (13-18) mmHg, respectively. Two patients (2%) had moderate and one (1%) had severe paravalvular leakage, with the latter presenting the only case of underlying valve migration and induced redo AVR with valve explantation 2 days following initial surgery. Thirty-day mortality (and overall mortality) was 5% and 26%, respectively.

Conclusion

The implantation of the Perceval bioprosthesis is feasible for a variety of indications, with excellent hemodynamic results and low complication rates in a real-world high-risk patient collective.

The Perceval Sutureless Bioprosthetic Aortic Valve: Evolution of Surgical Valve Technology

OBJECTIVE

The surgical treatment of aortic stenosis continues to evolve, and sutureless aortic valve replacement (SUAVR) is an emerging technology. With the Perceval S (Corcym, London, UK) as the only true sutureless valve on the market, the objective of this review is to analyze the current literature on Perceval S. Focusing on valve design and deployment as well as applications of the technology for challenging pathology, clinical outcomes are assessed, including a comparison with transcatheter AVR (TAVR).

METHODS

PubMed and MEDLINE were searched by 3 authors for studies analyzing SUAVR from inception to May 19, 2023.

RESULTS

SUAVR facilitates minimally invasive surgery and offers an alternative strategy for patients with small aortic annuli. It also has a time-saving advantage for patients who require complex operations. SUAVR results in excellent long-term morbidity, mortality, durability, and hemodynamic function. In comparison with conventional surgical AVR (SAVR), SUAVR does have a greater risk of postoperative pacemaker implantation; however, increasing user experience and refinements in implantation technique have contributed to reductions in this outcome. SUAVR results in morbidity and mortality that is similar to rapid-deployment AVR. Midterm outcomes are superior to TAVR; however, further robust investigation into all of these comparisons is ultimately necessary.

CONCLUSIONS

SUAVR bridges the gap in technology between SAVR and TAVR. The application of this exciting technology will undoubtedly grow in the coming years, during which additional investigation is paramount to optimize preoperative planning, valve deployment, and reintervention strategies.

Totally endoscopic concomitant aortic and mitral valve surgery in junctional epidermolysis bullosa: a case report

BACKGROUND

Junctional epidermolysis bullosa is a rare skin and mucosal disorder characterized by blister formation in response to minor trauma and extracutaneous manifestations. There have been no reports of cardiac surgery and prognostication in patients with epidermolysis bullosa due to skin and mucosal fragility.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 55-year-old man presented with congenital junctional epidermolysis bullosa, hypertension, and vasospastic angina. He complained of dyspnea on exertion, and transthoracic echocardiography revealed severe aortic valve regurgitation, moderate aortic valve stenosis (tricuspid valve), and severe mitral valve regurgitation. Considering that the skin condition in the right chest wall was relatively healthy, the right thoracotomy approach was preferred and totally endoscopic concomitant mitral valve repair and aortic valve replacement were performed using a sutureless bioprosthetic valve (Perceval™ (Corcym, Group, Milan, Italy)). Polyurethane and silicon dressing foams were used to protect the skin at the site of contact with the bag valve mask, arterial pressure catheter, intravenous catheter, and the tracheal intubation tube. Vertical mattress sutures were used for the skin sutures. The postoperative course was uneventful, and the patient was discharged nine days after the operation. There was no indication for reoperation until three years follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS

The totally endoscopic concomitant aortic and mitral valve surgery using Perceval™ prosthesis can be performed safely in patients with junctional epidermolysis bullosa by adequate protection of the skin and mucosa.

Single or Combined Valve Surgery and Concomitant Right Coronary Artery Bypass through Right Anterior Minithoracotomy Approach

BACKGROUND

Patients with combined valve and coronary artery disease are commonly performed by standard median sternotomy approach for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and valve surgery. The purpose of this study is to describe our experience and show feasibility and safety of minimally invasive approach to single or combined valve pathology with single-vessel right coronary artery (RCA) disease, even if it is suitable to percutaneous coronary intervention.

METHODS

This retrospective study comprised 28 consecutive patients who underwent single or combined valve surgery concomitant right CABG through right anterior minithoracotomy between February 2018 and December 2020. Preoperative evaluation, intraoperative, and postoperative outcomes were reviewed and analyzed.

RESULTS

There were 12 men and 16 women. The mean age was 71.46 ± 6.82 years. Ten patients were in New York Heart Association class III or IV. The mean cardiopulmonary bypass and aortic cross-clamping times were 117.6 ± 21.3 and 98.1 ± 22.6 minutes, respectively. The mean time to extubation was 9.7 ± 5.6 hours, the mean intensive care unit stay was 37.4 ± 14.6 hours, and the mean hospital stay was 6.9 ± 3.2 days. There was one patient who underwent reoperation for bleeding. There were no instances of postoperative stroke, myocardial infarction, renal failure, or wound infection. The mean follow-up was 19 ± 2.4 months.

CONCLUSION

Presence of RCA lesion is not a contraindication for minimally invasive approach in cases who underwent single or combined valve surgery. Combined valve surgery and right CABG via right anterior minithoracotomy are a safe and feasible option to standard median sternotomy surgery, even if RCA lesions seem suitable for stenting.

The Hemodynamic Performance of the Perceval Sutureless Aortic Valve in a Propensity-Matched Comparison to the Carpentier-Edwards Perimount and Perimount Magna Ease Valves for Aortic Valve Replacement

OBJECTIVES

The Perceval valve was shown to facilitate minimal-invasive operations and shorten operative times. We aimed to compare the early results of the Perceval valve to those of well-established valves, namely the Carpentier-Edwards Perimount and Perimount Magna Ease valve protheses, in terms of their clinical and hemodynamic performances.

METHODS

This is a single-center, retrospective, observational cohort study. For every patient operated with a Perceval valve, the last patient before and the next following patient receiving a Perimount valve was included in a control group leading to a 2:1 ratio (Perimount:Perceval). A propensity score matching was used and a subgroup analysis was performed to compare early and late Perceval patients as the sizing technique was changed over time.

RESULTS

From November 2013 to November 2017, 423 patients were identified. These included 141 consecutive patients receiving a Perceval valve through a full- or a hemi-sternotomy. In addition, 282 patients receiving a Perimount or a Magna Ease valve were enrolled. After propensity score matching, 127 matched patients were compared. Operating times were shorter and postoperative transvalvular pressure gradients were lower in the Perceval group (15 vs. 17 mmHg, p = 0.002). There was no difference in mortality and stroke rates. The incidence of new pacemaker implantations was higher in the Perceval group (7.1 vs. 18.9%, p = 0.005), mainly due to a very high incidence in the early phase of our Perceval experience prior to a change in the Perceval implantation technique. Subgroup analysis showed significantly better results in the late Perceval group.

CONCLUSION

Surgical outcome was good in both groups. The Perceval valve exhibited lower postoperative gradients, and the need for pacemaker implantation was higher and can be reduced by avoiding oversizing.

Left Coronary Ostial Obstruction by a Dislocated Sutureless Aortic Valve Prosthesis: Redo Aortic Valve Replacement with Hybrid Coronary Revascularization: A Case Report

Coronary ostium obstruction due to dislodgement of the prosthetic valve is a rare and life-threatening complication, and particular caution is required for sutureless aortic valve replacement (AVR) with concomitant valvular surgery. In general, coronary artery bypass surgery is performed when coronary ostium obstruction occurs after AVR, but other options may need to be considered in some cases. Herein, we present a case of coronary artery occlusion in an 82-year-old female patient who had undergone AVR and mitral valve replacement for aortic valve stenosis and mitral valve stenosis at the age of 77 years. A hybrid procedure involving redo AVR and percutaneous coronary intervention after left main coronary ostium endarterectomy was performed. To summarize, we present a case of hybrid AVR in a patient with coronary artery obstruction after AVR that was successfully managed using this method.

Conventional Biological versus Sutureless Aortic Valve Prostheses in Combined Aortic and Mitral Valve Replacement

BACKGROUND

Sutureless aortic valve prostheses have proven to provide a significant decrease in procedural, cardiopulmonary bypass and cross-clamp time, leading to a significant reduction in mortality risk in elderly high-risk cohorts. In this study, we sought to review our institutional experience on the sutureless aortic valve replacement (SU-AVR) and the concomitant mitral valve replacement (SMVR), comparing the combined conventional surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) with SMVR.

METHODS AND MATERIAL

Between March 2018 and July 2022, 114 consecutive patients underwent a combined aortic and mitral valve replacement at our institution. We stratified the patients according to the operative procedures into two groups and matched them 1:2: Group 1 underwent a combined conventional SAVR and SMVR (n = 46), and Group 2 included combined SU-AVR with Perceval prosthesis and SMVR (n = 23).

RESULTS

No significant differences in the preoperative characteristics were present. SU-AVR combined with SMVR demonstrated excellent haemodynamic performance, comparable to that of SAVR plus SMVR, with median postoperative gradients over the aortic valve of 4 mmHg (IQR 3.0-4.0) in Group 1 and 4 mmHg (IQR 3.0-4.0) in Group 2 (p = 0.67). There was no significant difference in the occurrence of postoperative major adverse events such as death, stroke, myocardial infarction and kidney failure between the groups. There was also no significant difference in the permanent pacemaker implantation rate, paravalvular leakage or valve dislocation. We also could not detect any significant difference in postoperative mortality between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

SU-AVR has proven to be a reliable alternative to conventional valve prostheses in patients with multivalve disease undergoing combined aortic and mitral valve replacement, offering shorter procedural time and outstanding hemodynamic performance compared to the conventional surgical method.

Severe mitral valve insufficiency caused by standard surgical aortic valve implantation and its reparation using suture-less prosthesis

BACKGROUND

Aortic valve stenosis is the most frequent cardiac valve pathology in the western world. Surgical aortic valve replacement is the gold standard for the treatment of significant degenerative aortic valve diseases.

CASE PRESENTATION

This case report highlights an unexpected abnormal iatrogenic shortening of the aorto-mitral continuity and its deformity, during traditional AVR using sutured stented aortic prosthesis as the first choice, which caused significant mitral valve regurgitation. The suture-less prosthesis was a rescue choice to restore the geometry and eliminate the deformation of the aorto-mitral continuity.

CONCLUSIONS

Aortic valve replacement using suture-less prosthesis could be a valuable optional choice for lowering the risk of deformation of the aortic annulus and aorto-mitral continuity. It might provide better outcomes in combined procedures.

Clinical and Hemodynamic Outcomes in 121 Patients Who Underwent Perceval Sutureless Aortic Valve Implantation - Early Results From a Single Korean Institution

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the early outcomes of Perceval sutureless valves in the Korean population and to introduce a modified technique of guiding suture placement during valve deployment.

METHODS AND RESULTS

From December 2014 to April 2019, 121 patients (mean age: 74.7±6.2 years; 53.7% female) received a Perceval sutureless aortic valve replacement. To prevent conduction system injury, the depth of guiding suture placement (1 mm below the nadir of the annulus) was modified. All patients underwent echocardiographic evaluation at discharge and 6-12 months postoperatively, with a mean follow up of 13.7±11.2 months. Concomitant surgeries, such as coronary artery bypass grafting, and other valvular surgeries, were performed in 45.5% of cases. The mean aortic cross-clamp times for isolated and minimal procedures were 32.8±7.9, and 41.2±8.0 min, respectively. The overall transvalvular mean gradients were 13.1±3.8 mmHg at discharge and 11.5±4.7 mmHg at the last follow up. After modifying the guiding suture placement, permanent pacemaker implantation risk decreased from 9.9% to 2.5%. Cardiac-related mortality was 0.8%, with no patient developing valvular or paravalvular aortic regurgitation, valve thrombosis, or endocarditis.

CONCLUSIONS

Perceval valve implantation provided a significant cardiac-related survival benefit with excellent early hemodynamic and clinical outcomes. Further research is needed to determine whether adjusting the implantation depth, such as modification of the guiding suture technique, can reduce the risk of permanent pacemaker implantation.

Sutureless aortic valve replacement in multivalve procedures

Background

Despite the rapid expansion of transcatheter approaches for aortic valve implantation, surgical aortic valve replacement remains the treatment of choice in patients presenting with multiple valvular heart disease. We sought to review our clinical experience with sutureless aortic valve replacement (SU-AVR) in the setting of multivalve procedures, addressing the postoperative outcomes and technical challenges.

Methods

Between December 2019 and December 2020, 20 consecutive high-risk patients at our institution underwent SU-AVR and concomitant mitral valve procedure for various indications.

Results

The mean age of the patients at operation was 72.6±9.3 years. Fifty five percent of the patients (n=11) presented with moderate to severe symptomatic aortic valve stenosis, while 35% (n=7) suffered from severe aortic regurgitation. All patients had concomitant moderate to severe mitral valve disease, including regurgitation in 95% (n=19) and stenosis in 25% (n=5). Mean logistic EuroSCORE was 34.3%±24.7%. Cardiopulmonary bypass and cross-clamp times were 101 (88.0-123) minutes and 67.5 (51.7-85.2) minutes, respectively. Optimal sutureless aortic valve prosthesis device success was achieved in 20 patients (100%). One patient (5%) required permanent pacemaker implantation. Thirty-day mortality was 10% and no strokes were detected.

Conclusions

SU-AVR is a safe and feasible surgical alternative to conventional procedures in patients presenting with multiple valvular heart disease. It provides excellent hemodynamic performance with low risk of paravalvular leakage and low transvalvular gradients, whilst simplifying the surgical procedure. Precise sizing and positioning of the valve prostheses is crucial to ensure optimal postoperative outcome.

A pooled analysis of pacemaker implantation after Perceval sutureless aortic valve replacement

 

OBJECTIVES

We performed a literature meta-analysis to estimate the rate of pacemaker implantation after Perceval sutureless aortic valve replacement.

METHODS

Pertinent articles were identified from the PubMed, Google Scholar, Ovid MEDLINE and Ovid EMBASE databases. Eligible studies reported the de novo incidence of postoperative pacemaker implantation after Perceval valve surgery. Among 394 articles retrieved, 26 studies including 9492 patients met the inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

The pooled event rate for postoperative pacemaker implantation was 7% [95% confidence interval (CI) 6-9%]; however, significant heterogeneity was observed across studies. In a sub-analysis, there was no difference between the rates of pacemaker implantation calculated from multicentre and registry studies (8 studies, 6845 patients; 7%, 95% CI 5-10%) and single-centre studies (18 studies, 2647 patients; 7%, 95% CI 5-9%; P = 0.75). Implantation rates were similar in high-volume studies (16 studies, 9121 patients; 7%, 95% CI 5-8%) than in low-volume studies (10 studies, 371 patients; pooled rate: 7%, 95% CI 4-14%; P = 0.5). Postoperative pacemaker implantation rates tended to decrease over time.

CONCLUSIONS

With a pooled event rate of 7%, postoperative pacemaker implantation remains an important limitation of Perceval sutureless valve surgery, although we observed a degree of variability across included studies. The resultant findings provide a useful estimate for physicians and patients and can serve as a benchmark for future comparative studies.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020188397.

Rapid-deployment aortic valve replacement in high-risk patients: A case-control study

Introduction: Aortic valve stenosis is the most frequent cardiac valve pathology in the western world. In high-risk patients, conventional aortic valve replacement (C-AVR) carries high rates of morbidity and mortality. In the last few years, rapid-deployment valves (RDV) have been developed to reduce the surgical risks. In this work, we aimed to compare the mid-term outcomes of rapid-deployment AVR (RD-AVR) with those of the C-AVR in high-risk patients.

Methods: This retrospective case-control study identified 23 high-risk patients who underwent RD-AVR between 12/2015 to 01/2018. The study group was compared with a control group of 46 patients who were retrospectively selected from a database of 687 C-AVR patients from 2016 to 2017 which matched with the study group for age and Euro SCORE II.

Results: RD-AVR group presented more cardiovascular risk factors. Euro SCORE II was higher in the RD-AVR group (P =0.06). In the RD-AVR group, we observed significantly higher mean prosthetic size (P <0.001). In-hospital mortality was zero in RD-AVR group versus 2 deaths in C-AVR group. Hospital stay was longer in the RD-AVR group with statistical significance (P =0.03). In the group AVR with associated cardiac procedures, while comparing subgroups RD-AVR versus C-AVR, early mean gradient was lower in the first cited (P =0.02). The overall mean follow-up was 10.9 ± 4.3 months.

Conclusion: The RD-AVR technique is reliable and lead to positive outcomes. This procedure provides a much larger size with certainly better flow through the aortic root. It is an alternative to C-AVR in patients recognized to be surgically fragile.

Sutureless aortic valve replacement with concomitant aortic arch reconstruction

Sutureless aortic valve replacement (AVR) offers an alternative approach to the standard AVR in aortic valve disease. We herein report a case of an 82-year-old woman with severe aortic insufficiency and a persistent type 1 endoleak following a thoracic endovascular aortic repair, who underwent successful combined aortic arch reconstruction and sutureless AVR. The bioprosthesis, Perceval (LivaNova PLC, London, UK), a self-anchoring, self-expanding, sutureless valve, which can be implanted in selected patients with aortic insufficiency was used. Although the patient was frail and at a high risk of open-heart surgery, she had an uneventful postoperative course. Hence, Perceval may be a useful option for combined aortic arch reconstruction and aortic valve surgery in high-risk elderly patients.

Multiple Valve Implantation Through a Minimally Invasive Approach: Comparison of Standard Median Sternotomy and Right Anterior Thoracotomy

BACKGROUND

Following developments in the area of minimally invasive surgery and good, recently published surgical results, the areas in which minimally invasive surgery can be used are beginning to expand. This study aimed to describe experience and show the feasibility and safety of minimally invasive multiple valve implantation with right anterior minithoracotomy (RAT) and compare the outcomes with cases that underwent multiple valve surgery via a standard median sternotomy.

METHODS

The study cohort comprised 52 patients with combined valvular disease who underwent aortic valve replacement and mitral valve replacement or repair, and/or tricuspid valve ring annuloplasty through median sternotomy (control group n=32) or minimally invasive surgery through a RAT (study group n=20) between January 2012 and December 2018 at the current centre. Preoperative evaluation included coronary catheterisation and multisliced computerised tomography in all patients. Postoperative clinical outcomes and haemodynamic performance of heart valves were reviewed.

RESULTS

The mean age of patients was 72.6±7.1 years, and 50% were male. Seventeen (17) patients (32.6%) were in New York Heart Association functional class III or IV. Three (3) patients (7.6%) had third-degree atrioventricular block requiring permanent pacemaker implantation. Mean follow-up was 21±3.9 months (maximum 26 months). No major paravalvular leakage occurred, and there was no postoperative valve migration in either group. Non-valve-related deaths occurred in five patients during follow-up.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that minimally invasive multiple valve implantation is a technically feasible and safe procedure with acceptable surgical outcomes and similar postoperative quality when compared with median sternotomy.

Recent advances in aortic valve replacement

Aortic valve replacement has stood the test of time but is no longer an operation that is exclusively approached through a median sternotomy using only sutured prostheses. Currently, surgical aortic valve replacement can be performed through a number of minimally invasive approaches employing conventional mechanical or bioprostheses as well as sutureless valves. In either case, the direct surgical access allows inspection of the valve, complete excision of the diseased leaflets, and debridement of the annulus in a controlled and thorough manner under visual control. It can be employed to treat aortic valve pathologies of all natures and aetiologies. When compared with transcatheter valves in patients with a high or intermediate preoperative predictive risk, conventional surgery has not been shown to be inferior to transcatheter valve implants. As our understanding of sutureless valves and their applicability to minimally invasive surgery advances, the invasiveness and trauma of surgery can be reduced and outcomes can improve. This warrants further comparative trials comparing sutureless and transcatheter valves.

Intermediate Outcomes after Rapid Deployment Aortic Valve Replacement in Multiple Valve Surgery

BACKGROUND

Multiple valve surgery is associated with significant higher operative risks. Reduced cross-clamp and cardiopulmonary bypass times in multiple valve surgery may potentially be beneficial as they can be considered independent risk factors for increased morbidity and mortality following cardiac surgery. We report first intermediate outcomes of the Edwards Intuity valve system (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, California, United States) in combined procedures METHODS:  Fifty-eight patients underwent rapid deployment aortic valve replacement with concomitant mitral valve surgery between January 2014 and November 2017 in our institution. The valve was assessed echocardiographically after 12 months. The median follow-up was 1.7 years with a cumulative follow-up time of 115.3 patient years.

RESULTS

The mean age was 73.5 ± 6.2 years and the mean logistic Euroscore was 11.6 ± 3.1%. Concomitant mitral valve repair was performed in 43 cases (74.1%), and mitral valve replacement in 15 cases (19.0%). The mean cross-clamp time was 93 ± 21 minutes along with a mean bypass time of 118 ± 24 minutes. All-cause mortality after 30 days was 8.6%. Overall actuarial survival at 1 year was 87.2 ± 4.5% and after 2 years 82.8 ± 5.3%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Rapid deployment aortic valve replacement in multiple valve surgery can be performed safely with good intermediate outcomes in elderly, high-risk patients.

Outcome of a Modified Perceval Implantation Technique

Background In our institution, we developed a modification of the standard implantation technique of the Perceval sutureless aortic prosthesis (LivaNova, London, United Kingdom) that involves the usage of snuggers for the guiding sutures during valve deployment. The technique has been described elsewhere. In this article, we present the results of our initial case series comprising 128 consecutive patients.

Methods From September 2016 to June 2018, 128 patients received a sutureless Perceval prosthesis (mean age 72.2 ± 8.5 years, 66 males). The data of the patients were prospectively collected in our general database and retrospectively analyzed using the SPSS software version 25 (IBM SPSS Inc., Chicago, Illinois, United States). Primary end points were primary implantation success and 30-day mortality. All patients underwent transthoracic echocardiography on discharge.

Results Our cohort consisted of real-world scenario patients with infective endocarditis, bicuspid aortic valves and one patient with left ventricular assist device. However, we had 100% primary implantation success with no need for valve explantation or paravalvular leaks. All-cause 30-day mortality was 2.3% (3 patients) with no cardiac deaths. Two patients (1.6%) had a permanent neurological deficit, three patients (2.3%) had new-onset renal dialysis, and four patients (3.1%) needed a permanent pacemaker postoperatively.

Conclusion To our knowledge, this is the first case series to report on a modified implantation technique of the Perceval prosthesis. The Perceval valve prosthesis produces excellent outcome in most pathologies, so that current contraindications should be revised.