Thrombocytopenia after implantation of the Perceval S aortic bioprosthesis

Thrombocytopenia after Aortic Valve Replacement Using Sutureless Valves

Background

Sutureless valves are widely used in aortic valve replacement surgery, with Perceval valves and Intuity valves being particularly prominent. However, concerns have been raised about postoperative thrombocytopenia with Perceval valves (Corcym, UK). We conducted a comparative analysis with the Intuity valve (Edwards Lifesciences, USA), and assessed how thrombocytopenia affected patient and transfusion outcomes.

Methods

Among 595 patients who underwent aortic valve replacement from June 2016 to March 2023, sutureless valves were used in 53 (Perceval: n=23; Intuity: n=30). Platelet counts were monitored during hospitalization and outpatient visits. Daily platelet count changes were compared between groups, and the results from patients who underwent procedures using Carpentier Edwards Perimount Magna valves were used as a reference group.

Results

Compared to the Intuity group, the Perceval group showed a significantly higher amount of platelet transfusion (5.48±1.64 packs vs. 0.60±0.44 packs, p=0.008). During the postoperative period, severe thrombocytopenia (<50,000/μL) was significantly more prevalent in the Perceval group (56.5%, n=13) than in the Intuity group (6.7%, n=2). After initial postoperative depletion, daily platelet counts increased, with significant differences observed in the extent of improvement between the Perceval and Intuity groups (p<0.001). However, there was no significant difference in early mortality or the incidence of neurological complications between the 2 groups.

Conclusion

The severity of postoperative thrombocytopenia differed significantly between the Perceval and Intuity valves. The Perceval group showed a significantly higher prevalence of severe thrombocytopenia and higher platelet transfusion volumes. However, thrombocytopenia gradually recovered during the postoperative period in both groups, and the early outcomes were similar in both groups.

Thrombocytopenia after sutureless and standard stented aortic valve replacement: a retrospective analysis of risk factors, clinical course, and early outcome

OBJECTIVES

Thrombocytopenia following Perceval aortic valve replacement has been described previously with variable outcome. Studies have lacked a robust analysis of platelet fluctuation and factors affecting it. We aimed to statistically describe the trend in thrombocyte variability as compared with conventional aortic valve replacement, and to assess predictors as well as impact on associated outcomes.

METHODS

One hundred consecutive patients with first-time Perceval were retrospectively compared to 219 patients after Perimount Magna Ease valve replacement. The primary outcome was the serial thrombocyte count on day 0-6. Generalized estimating equations were used to analyse the data using fixed-effect models: for the effect of the post-operative day on platelet count, and random-effect models estimating both time-variant (platelets) and time in-variant variables (valve type, age, LV function, pre-op platelet level).

RESULTS

Perceval patients were older (72 ± 1 vs 68 ± 1 years, p < 0.01) with higher NYHA status (3(2-3) vs 2(1-2), p < 0.001). Mean platelet count in the sutureless group was lowest on day 2 (91.9 ± 31.6 vs 121.7 ± 53.8 × 103 µl-1), and lower on day 4 (97.9 ± 44) and 6 (110.6 ± 61) compared to the conventional group (157.2 ± 60 and 181.7 ± 79) but did not result in a higher number of transfusions, bleeding or longer hospital stay (p > 0.05). Reduced platelet count was a strong predictor of red cell transfusion in the conventional (p = 0.016), but not in the sutureless group (p = 0.457). Age (Coef -1.025, 95%CI-1.649--0.401, p < 0.001) and CPB-time (Coef 0.186, 95%CI-0.371--0.001, p = 0.048) were predictors for lower platelet levels.

CONCLUSION

Considering the older patient profile treated with Perceval, postoperative thrombocytopenia does not impact on outcome in terms of transfusions, complications or hospital stay.

Thrombocytopenia Following Perceval Sutureless Aortic Valve Replacement in Asian Patients

BACKGROUND

This study analyzed the safety and performance of the Perceval valve for aortic valve replacement (AVR) in patients at 1 year after undergoing aortic stenosis (AS) treatment, and its effect on significant declines in the platelet count during the immediate postoperative period.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Data were collected retrospectively for the initial 121 patients (median age 77 years; 47.1% females) who underwent Perceval sutureless AVR between May 2019 and July 2022. Implantation was successful in all (100%), with median cross-clamp and CPB times of 59 and 100 min, respectively. Postoperative thrombocytopenia (platelet count <50×103/μL) was noted in 80 (66.1%) patients. Multivariate analysis showed advanced age (>80 years), preoperative low platelet count (<200×103/μL), and a sternotomy approach as significant risk factors for postoperative thrombocytopenia. One (0.8%) patient died within 30 days after the procedure. The 2-year site-reported event rate was 14% (n=17) for all-cause mortality, 0.8% (n=1) for cardiac mortality, 4.1% (n=5) for stroke, and 1.7% (n=2) for endocarditis and valve-related reoperation; there were no instances of paravalvular leakage or structural valve deterioration.

CONCLUSIONS

Thrombocytopenia was common after Perceval sutureless AVR, although its impact was not significant. Although Perceval sutureless AVR was found to be a safe and effective option, preoperative assessment of potential bleeding should be performed and the Perceval valve should not be used for patients with a high bleeding risk.

Mid-term outcomes of surgical aortic valve replacement using a mosaic porcine bioprosthesis with concomitant mitral valve repair

This study retrospectively evaluated the mid-term outcomes of surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) using a stented porcine aortic valve bioprosthesis (Mosaic; Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, MN, USA) with concomitant mitral valve (MV) repair. From 1999 to 2014, 157 patients (median [interquartile range] age, 75 [70-79] years; 47% women) underwent SAVR with concomitant MV repair (SAVR + MV repair), and 1045 patients (median [interquartile range] age, 76 [70-80] years; 54% women) underwent SAVR only at 10 centers in Japan as part of the long-term multicenter Japan Mosaic valve (J-MOVE) study. The 5-year overall survival rate was 81.5% ± 4.1% in the SAVR + MV repair group and 85.1% ± 1.4% in the SAVR only group, and the 8-year overall survival rates were 75.2% ± 5.7% and 78.1% ± 2.1%, respectively. Cox proportional hazards analysis showed no significant difference in the survival rates between the two groups (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval, 0.54-1.40; P = 0.576). Among women with mild or moderate mitral regurgitation who were not receiving dialysis, those who underwent SAVR + MV repair, were aged > 75 years, and had a preoperative left ventricular ejection fraction of 30-75% tended to have a lower mortality risk. In conclusion, this subgroup analysis of the J-MOVE cohort showed relevant mid-term outcomes after SAVR + MV repair.

Thrombocytopenia among Patients Undergoing Aortic Valve Replacement Using the Sutureless Perceval S Bioprosthesis: A Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

The sutureless Perceval S bioprosthesis is associated with postoperative thrombocytopenia. Our objectives were to compare the incidence, severity, and clinical implications of thrombocytopenia after aortic valve replacement (AVR) using the Perceval S or the Trifecta bioprosthesis.

METHODS

Patients who underwent AVR between March 2016 and August 2019 using the Perceval or Trifecta were retrospectively included. The primary endpoint was the nadir in platelet counts within 15 days after surgery. Secondary endpoints included postoperative hemolysis and inflammatory parameters, as well as clinical and echocardiographic outcomes.

RESULTS

Overall, 156 patients were included (Perceval, n = 103; Trifecta, n = 53). Preoperatively, there was no difference in platelet counts between the two groups. Postoperatively, the Perceval S bioprosthesis was associated with a greater decrease in platelet counts. The nadir was reached at Day 3 for both groups, but thrombocytopenia was more severe for the Perceval S (Perceval S vs. Trifecta, 89.2 ± 37.7 × 109/L vs. 106.5 ± 34.1 × 109/L, p = 0.01). No difference regarding lactate dehydrogenase, C-reactive protein, and white blood cells count was found. All-cause 30-day mortality rates (both valves, 2%, p = 0.98), hospital lengths of stay, and re-operation rates were similar.

CONCLUSION

The Perceval S bioprosthesis was associated with more severe postoperative thrombocytopenia. This did not translate into higher short-term morbidity or mortality.

Thrombocytopenia after Implantation of the Perceval, Intuity, and Sapien Aortic Valve Prostheses

BACKGROUND

An increased incidence of thrombocytopenia was reported after implantation of the LivaNova Perceval and the Edwards Sapien aortic valve bioprostheses. Aim of this study is to assess the perioperative platelet count and bleeding complications in three different types of aortic valve bioprostheses intended for high-risk patients, the sutureless LivaNova Perceval, the rapid deployment Edwards Intuity, and the transcatheter Edwards Sapien.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of the perioperative data of patients receiving the Perceval, Intuity, and Sapien aortic valve bioprosthesis. The platelet count was collected preoperatively, at nadir postoperatively, and at discharge. The bioprostheses were compared for between-group differences in platelet count and postoperative bleeding complications.

RESULTS

Overall, 37 patients received the Perceval, 42 the Intuity, and 58 the Sapien bioprosthesis. There was no significant between-group difference in the preoperative platelet count [Perceval 203(178-246)G/l, Intuity 214(190-232)G/l, Sapien 201(178-275)G/l, p = 0.800]. There was a significant between-group difference in the postoperative platelet count, both at nadir value [Perceval 57(37-80)G/l, Intuity 91(73-109)G/l, Sapien 126(105-170)G/l, p < 0.0001] and at discharge [Perceval 150(83-257)G/l, Intuity 239(200-343)G/l, Sapien 232(179-284)G/l, p = 0.001]. There was no significant between-group difference regarding red blood cell transfusions (p = 0.242), platelet transfusions (p = 0.656), and rethoracotomy for bleeding (p = 0.847).

CONCLUSION

We found a significant platelet count reduction in all three bioprostheses which was more marked in the Perceval group. The platelet count reduction was transient and fully recovered in the Intuity and Sapien groups, whereas the Perceval group showed only a partial platelet count recovery. However, bleeding complications were not different between the three bioprostheses.

Risk predictors that impact long-term prognosis in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement with the Perceval sutureless bioprosthesis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to identify risk predictors that impact long-term prognosis in patients undergoing isolated aortic valve replacement (AVR) with Perceval sutureless bioprosthesis aortic valve implantation.

METHODS

From 2013 to 2020, 101 consecutive participants who underwent isolated AVR with the Perceval sutureless bioprosthesis were included. Primary endpoint was analysis of all-cause mortality. We performed a propensity-adjusted analysis of patients undergoing redo sutureless vs redo sutured AVR to understand the impact of sutureless valves in redo operations.

RESULTS

Pre-operative characteristics included a mean age of 71.2-years, mean EuroScore II of 3.51 (±4.48), mean body mass index of 30.2 (±6.8). Mean follow-up was 1.5 years. Intraoperatively, mean cardiopulmonary bypass time and aortic cross-clamp time were 65 ± 29.6 and 47.3 ± 21.3 min, respectively. Valve redeployment was necessary in 9.9 % of cases and there was one intraoperative death. There were two hospital deaths (including the operative death) while only one was cardiac related. Postoperatively, mean ejection fraction was 55.5 % (±4.1 %), mean effective orifice was 1.5 (±0.3) cm2, and mean transvalvular gradient was 14.7 (±4) mmHg. At 7-years follow-up, 87.9 % of patients were alive. Risk predictors for all-cause death were female sex and left ventricular diastolic dysfunction (LVDD) grade ≥ 2. After matching, aortic cross-clamp time, inotrope use, blood product transfusions, respiratory failure, and post-operative arrhythmias were higher in the redo sutured group compared to the sutureless redo group.

CONCLUSIONS

Sutureless aortic valve implantations have good clinical outcomes. Risk predictors for all-cause death included female sex and LVDD grade ≥ 2.

An Analysis of Early Results after Valve Replacement in Isolated Aortic Valve Stenosis by Using Sutureless vs. Stented Bioprostheses: A Single-Center Middle-Income Country Experience

Background and Objectives: There is a lack of data about the survival of patients after the implantation of sutureless relative to stented bioprostheses in middle-income settings. The objective of this study was to compare the survival of people with isolated severe aortic stenosis after the implantation of sutureless and stented bioprostheses in a tertiary referral center in Serbia. Materials and Methods: This retrospective cohort study included all people treated for isolated severe aortic stenosis with sutureless and stented bioprostheses from 1 January 2018 to 1 July 2021 at the Institute for Cardiovascular Diseases "Dedinje". Demographic, clinical, perioperative and postoperative data were extracted from the medical records. The follow-up lasted for a median of 2 years. Results: The study sample comprised a total of 238 people with a stented (conventional) bioprosthesis and 101 people with a sutureless bioprosthesis (Perceval). Over the follow-up, 13.9% of people who received the conventional and 10.9% of people who received the Perceval valve died (p = 0.400). No difference in the overall survival was observed (p = 0.797). The multivariate Cox proportional hazard model suggested that being older, having a higher preoperative EuroScore II, having a stroke over the follow-up period and having valve-related complications were independently associated with all-cause mortality over a median of 2 years after the bioprosthesis implantation. Conclusions: This research conducted in a middle-income country supports previous findings in high-income countries regarding the survival of people with sutureless and stented valves. Survival after bioprosthesis implantation should be monitored long-term to ensure optimum postoperative outcomes.

Rapid-Deployment Aortic Valve Replacement: Patient Selection and Special Considerations

Sutureless or rapid deployment valves in the setting of aortic valve replacement (AVR) is an emerging surgical technique using the transcatheter valve technology, which may lead to reduction in cross-clamp time and potentially better hemodynamics compared to a stented bioprosthetic valve. The absence of subannular pledgets results to excellent hemodynamic performance with reduced turbulent flow and larger effective orifice area. However, complications from both surgical and transcatheter AVR may still occur and impact survival. The incidence of paravalvular leakage and permanent pacemaker implantation are not low. Although technical modifications can improve these outcomes, there is a learning curve effect. Therefore, technical and anatomical considerations as well as better patient selection are paramount for better outcomes. In this review, we discuss the use of sutureless or rapid deployment valves in setting of (1) complex procedures, (2) minimally invasive AVR, and (3) small aortic annulus. The advantage of sutureless or rapid deployment valves in terms of mortality remains to be clarified; therefore, it is necessary to accumulate long-term outcomes in an appropriate patient cohort.

A New Definition of Thrombocytopenia Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: Incidence, Outcome, and Predictors

Background: The aim of this study was to assess the incidence, outcomes, and risk factors associated with thrombocytopenia following TAVI according to a corrected platelet count (CPC), to avoid the bias of hemodilution/concentration. Methods: We analyzed patients who underwent TAVI in our center between 2009 and 2018. The study population were divided into three groups: none (NT), mild (MT), and severe (ST) postoperative thrombocytopenia. Primary outcomes were bleedings, length of hospital stay, and mortality. A multivariate logistic regression was performed to assess risk factors for ST. Results: A total of 907 patients were included in the analysis. MT was observed in 28.1% and ST in 2.6% of all patients. The following clinical outcomes were recorded: incidence of life-threatening and major bleeding (NT = 14.2%, MT = 20.8%, ST = 58.3%), the median length of hospital stay (NT = 8, MT = 10, ST = 14 days), in-hospital mortality (NT = 3.9%, MT = 6.3%, ST = 16.7%), and the overall significance in comparison with NT (p < 0.05). The logistic regression showed ST was associated with preoperative CPC, transapical access, diabetes mellitus, and the critical preoperative state. Conclusions: Worse clinical outcomes are associated with both MT and ST after TAVI. In particular, ST is associated with higher in-hospital and 30-day mortality. Management of modifiable baseline and procedural variables may improve this outcome.

Benefits and Pitfalls of the Perceval Sutureless Bioprosthesis

Objective: To highlight the main target points covered by clinical studies on the Perceval sutureless valve for surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and raise a point of discussion for further expansion of its use when compared with stented bioprostheses (SB) and transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

Methods: We reviewed clinical trials and retrospective studies published up to date and compared the outcomes in terms of mortality, myocardial infarction (MI) stroke, paravalvular leak (PVL), permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI), bleeding and long-term outcomes.

Results: Clinical studies showed that 30-day mortality ranged from 0–4% for Perceval and 2.9–7% for TAVR. The incidence of PVL (Perceval 1.9–19.4 vs. TAVR 9–53.5%), PPI (Perceval 2–11.2 vs. TAVR 4.9–25.5%), stroke (Perceval 0 vs. TAVR 0–2.8%), MI (Perceval 0 vs. TAVR 0–3.5%), were all higher in the TAVR group. Compared to other SB, mortality ranged from 0–6.4% for Perceval and 0–5.9% for SB. The incidence of PVR (Perceval 1–19.4 vs. SB 0–1%), PPI (Perceval 2–10.7 vs. SB 1.8–8.5%), stroke (Perceval 0–3.7 vs. SB 1.8–7.3%) and MI (Perceval 0–7.8 vs. SB 0–4.3%) were comparable among the groups. In patients with a bicuspid aortic valve, mortality rate was (0–4%) and PVL incidence was (0–2.3%). However, there was a high incidence of PPI (0–20%), and stroke (0–8%). Long-term survival ranged between 96.7–98.6%.

Conclusions: The Perceval bioprosthesis has proved to be a reliable prosthesis for surgical aortic valve replacement due to its implantation speed, the reduced cardiopulmonary bypass time, the reduced aortic cross-clamp time and the shorter intensive care unit and hospital length of stay.

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.

Stent deformation in a sutureless aortic valve bioprosthesis: a pilot observational analysis using imaging and three-dimensional modelling

OBJECTIVES

The goal of this analysis of the Perceval aortic bioprosthesis was to investigate the ovalization/deformation of the Perceval prosthesis stent after implantation and its propensity for cusp dysfunction, fluttering, fibrosis and blockage.

METHODS

Between August 2014 and May 2019, a total of 134 patients (52% female) underwent aortic valve replacement with the Perceval bioprosthesis. We reconstructed three-dimensional models of the Perceval stent using thorax computed tomography scans for 16 patients employing the software Mimics (Materialise NV, Leuven, Belgium) and analysed the ovality of the stents. Radial force (RF) measurements were performed to compare the stiffness of the Perceval bioprosthesis to that of other valves.

RESULTS

The three-dimensional reconstructions showed that all Perceval stents exhibited some degree of deformation and ovalization. Ovality in the annulus and commissure section of the Perceval stents ranged from 6.8% to 45% with mean values of 13.6% and 21.9%, respectively. The RF of the Perceval prosthesis was noticeably lower than that of the Edwards Intuity and several transcatheter aortic valve implantation devices. The stent adopted the preoperative shape of the aorta in the 2 patients for whom pre- and postoperative computed tomography data existed.

CONCLUSIONS

The Perceval bioprostheses were deformed to different degrees in all analysed cases. The comparably low RFs might be an explanation for the propensity towards this deformation, which can lead to fluttering, a reduction of the cusps' mobility. This condition could potentially result in fibrosis as well as increased transvalvular pressure gradients and might be the cause for the increase in lactate dehydrogenase and the decrease in platelet count.

Perioperative platelet reduction after sutureless or stented valve implantation: results from the PERSIST-AVR controlled randomized trial

OBJECTIVES

Platelet count reduction is a common but not fully understood phenomenon after aortic valve replacement (AVR) with bioprosthesis implantation. The aim of the present study was to investigate the occurrence and the clinical impact of platelet count reduction in patients receiving the Perceval bioprosthesis compared to those receiving standard sutured stented bioprosthetic aortic valve in a randomized, controlled AVR study.

METHODS

PERceval Sutureless Implant versus STandard Aortic Valve Replacement is a prospective, randomized, adaptive, open-label trial. Patients were randomized (March 2016-September 2018) to AVR with a sutureless or stented valve. Ad hoc analyses have been performed to evaluate the occurrence of platelet count reduction and the clinical impact of the platelet variations in the 2 groups.

RESULTS

The Perceval group showed a higher platelet reduction than the control group (46% vs 32%). The phenomenon was transient in both groups, with a slow recovery of the platelet count by hospital discharge. No differences were observed between groups regarding need of transfusions, blood loss, major bleeding and stroke events.

CONCLUSIONS

The Perceval sutureless aortic bioprosthesis implantation is associated with higher rate of transient platelet reduction as compared to stented bioprostheses for AVR. However, the platelet count reduction is transient and the decline does not affect the patient's clinical outcomes. Current explanations for this phenomenon are speculative, and further investigations are required to elucidate it.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02673697-ClinicalTrials.gov-4 February 2016.

Successful redo aortic valve replacement using Perceval valve in a patient with prosthetic valve endocarditis complicated by acute cerebral infarction

Introduction

and importance: For treatment of prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE), redo-aortic valve replacement (AVR) is usually required. However, the recurrence of PVE continues to be a serious problem that needs a solution.

Case presentation

An 83-year-old woman who had undergone AVR for aortic infective endocarditis 12 years ago was diagnosed with PVE complicated with acute cerebral infarction. Urgent redo-AVR was performed. After complete removal of the prosthesis, Perceval S valve was implanted successfully. There were no postoperative neurological deteriorations, and the echocardiogram showed no recurrence of PVE.

Clinical discussion

Theoretically, the fewer prostheses left in the heart, the lower the risk of PVE recurrence.

Conclusion

In patients with PVE, redo-AVR using the Perceval valve may be a suitable option since Perceval reduces the prosthesis in the heart compared with conventional redo-AVR.

•

We performed a redo-aortic valve replacement (AVR) using the Perceval valve.

•

The patient had prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE) and acute cerebral infarction.

•

Postoperative thrombocytopenia did not lead to any cerebral complications in this case.

•

Perceval reduces the prosthesis in the heart compared with conventional redo-AVR.

•

Redo-AVR using Perceval will be beneficial in controlling recurrence of PVE.

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.

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.