Sutureless aortic valve prostheses

First experiences with automated annular suturing device in totally endoscopic aortic and mitral valve replacement

OBJECTIVES

To overcome some of the challenges of endoscopic minimally invasive valve surgery, an automated annular suturing device has been used in aortic and mitral valve replacement surgeries. The current study investigates early clinical outcomes of patients who received aortic or mitral valve replacement with the help of the RAM® device as first experiences in minimally invasive valve surgery.

METHODS

Between September 2020 and June 2023, 66 consecutive patients (mean age 61.8 ± 11 years) underwent endoscopic minimally invasive aortic or mitral valve replacement through right anterior mini-thoracotomy at 2 cardiac surgery referral centres in Germany. The RAM® device was used in all Patients. 3.5 and 5.0 sizes were used in 16.7% and 83.3% of patients, respectively. Aortic, mitral and double valve surgery was performed in 81.8%, 15.2% and 1.5% of patients, respectively. Clinical data were prospectively entered into our institutional database.

RESULTS

Cardiopulmonary bypass time and cross-clamping time were 97.9 ± 20.9 and 66 ± 15.7 min, respectively. Intensive care unit and hospital stays were 1 [1-2] and 9 [7-13] days, respectively. No paravalvular leak and no other intraoperative complications occurred. 30-day and in-hospital mortality were zero. Conversion to sternotomy occurred in 1 (1.5%) patient due to bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

The usage of the RAM® device is a safe, feasible and effective approach to the endoscopic implantation of aortic or mitral valves and yield excellent early outcomes. Larger size studies are needed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of RAM® device.

The frail patient undergoing cardiac surgery: lessons learned and future perspectives

Frailty is a geriatric condition characterized by the reduction of the individual's homeostatic reserves. It determines an increased vulnerability to endogenous and exogenous stressors and can lead to poor outcomes. It is an emerging concept in perioperative medicine, since an increasing number of patients undergoing surgical interventions are older and the traditional models of care seem to be inadequate to satisfy these patients' emerging clinical needs. Nowadays, the progressive technical and clinical improvements allow to offer cardiac operations to an older, sicker and frail population. For these reasons, a multidisciplinary team involving cardiac surgeons, clinical cardiologists, anesthesiologists, and geriatricians, is often needed to assess, select and provide tailored care to these high-risk frail patients to optimize clinical outcomes. There is unanimous agreement that frailty assessment may capture the individual's biological decline and the heterogeneity in risk profile for poor health-related outcomes among people of the same age. However, since commonly used preoperative scores for cardiac surgery fail to capture frailty, a specific preoperative assessment with dedicated tools is warranted to correctly recognize, measure and quantify frailty in these patients. On the contrary, pre-operative and post-operative interventions can reduce the risk of complications and support patient recovery promoting surgical resilience. Minimally invasive cardiac procedures aim to reduce surgical trauma and may be associated with better clinical outcome in this specific sub-group of high-risk patients. Among postoperative adverse events, the occurrence of delirium represents a risk factor for several unfavorable outcomes including mortality and subsequent cognitive decline. Its presence should be carefully recognized, triggering an adequate, evidence based, treatment. There is evidence, from several cross-section and longitudinal studies, that frailty and delirium may frequently overlap, with frailty serving both as a predisposing factor and as an outcome of delirium and delirium being a marker of a latent condition of frailty. In conclusion, frail patients are at increased risk to experience poor outcome after cardiac surgery. A multidisciplinary approach aimed to recognize more vulnerable individuals, optimize pre-operative conditions, reduce surgical invasivity and improve post-operative recovery is required to obtain optimal long-term outcome.

Conventional vs. Sutureless Aortic Valve Bioprosthesis: Is Faster Better?

Purpose: The benefits of sutureless compared to conventional aortic valve prosthesis replacement remain controversial. Supposed advantages of sutureless aortic valve replacement include shortened cross-clamp and implantation time, as well as improved overall safety and good post-operative performance. We aimed to compare the early outcomes and performance of sutureless aortic valve replacement (su-AVR) with the sutureless Perceval (Corcym, Milan, Italy) vs. the conventional AVR with a conventional counterpart, in this case, the Labcor Dokimos Plus (LDP) aortic bioprosthesis. Methods: We compared two types of aortic valve prostheses, the sutureless (Corcym, Milan, Italy) and the conventional valve Labcor Dokimos Plus (LDP), implanted between August 2014 and May 2019 in our Department of Cardiac Surgery at RWTH Aachen University Hospital. Data were collected from 141 patients who received the Perceval (Corcym, Milan, Italy) and 138 who received the Labcor Dokimos Plus (LDP) aortic bioprosthesis. After matching the two groups considering STS mortality risk and pre-operative LDH levels, 201 patients were included in our final study cohort. Seventy-one patients (17 from the Perceval group and 54 from the Dokimos group) were excluded due to the lack of complete data, particularly standardized echocardiographic data (n = 71). Primary endpoints were 30-day mortality, length of hospital stay, and pacemaker implantation. Secondary endpoints were echocardiographic parameters, major adverse cardiovascular events, and prosthesis failure (grade II aortic regurgitation, paravalvular leak with reintervention). Results: Bypass and cross-clamp time proved to be shorter in the Perceval group, while hospital stays were longer. The faster implantation had no effect on the 30-day mortality primary endpoint. Transvalvular gradients were significantly higher in the Perceval group, in addition to a smaller effective orifice area. The LDH values were remarkably higher post-operatively in the Perceval group. Conclusions: Regarding the clinical outcomes, Perceval was equivalent and not superior to the Dokimus bioprosthesis. The suitability of a Perceval prosthesis implantation must be determined on a case-by-case basis and reserved for elderly patients with increased comorbidity.

Minimal Access Aortic Valve Surgery

Minimally invasive approaches to the aortic valve have been described since 1993, with great hopes that they would become universal and facilitate day-case cardiac surgery. The literature has shown that these procedures can be undertaken with equivalent mortality rates, similar operative times, comparable costs, and some benefits regarding hospital length of stay. The competing efforts of transcatheter aortic valve implantation for these same outcomes have provided an excellent range of treatment options for patients from cardiology teams. We describe the current state of the art, including technical considerations, caveats, and complications of minimal access aortic surgery and predict future directions in this space.

Sutureless vs. rapid-deployment valve: a systemic review and meta-analysis for a direct comparison of intraoperative performance and clinical outcomes

Background

Sutureless and rapid-deployment valves are bioprostheses anchoring within the aortic annulus with few sutures, and they act as a hybrid of conventional surgical and transcatheter valves under aortic valve replacement. Considering that the 3F Enable valve is now off-market, the only two sutureless and rapid-deployment valves available on the world marketplace are the Perceval and Intuity valves. However, a direct comparison of the function of these two valves eludes researchers.

Purpose

Against this background, we performed this systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the intraoperative performance and early clinical outcomes between the Perceval valve and the Intuity valve under sutureless and rapid-deployment aortic valve replacement.

Methods

We systematically searched electronic databases through PubMed/MEDLINE, OvidWeb, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (from the establishment of the database to November 17, 2022, without language restriction) for studies comparing the sutureless valve (the Perceval) and the rapid-deployment valve (the Intuity) under aortic valve replacement. Our primary outcomes were early mortality and postoperative transvalvular pressure gradients. The secondary outcomes were defined to include aortic cross-clamp and cardiopulmonary bypass time, paravalvular leak (any paravalvular leak, moderate-to-severe paravalvular leak) after aortic valve replacement, need for pacemaker implantation, postoperative neurological events (stroke), and intensive care unit stay.

Results

This meta-analysis included ten non-randomized trials with 3,526 patients enrolled (sutureless group = 1,772 and rapid-deployment group = 1,754). Quality assessments were performed, with the mean scores of the studies reading 6.90 (SD = 0.99) out of 9 according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Compared with rapid-deployment aortic valve replacement, sutureless aortic valve replacement was associated with higher mean and peak transvalvular pressure gradients postoperatively. In contrast, aortic cross-clamp and cardiopulmonary time were needed less in sutureless aortic valve replacement vs. rapid-deployment aortic valve replacement. There was no evidence of significant publication bias observed by the funnel plot and Egger's test.

Conclusions

For postoperative hemodynamics, sutureless aortic valve replacement was associated with increased mean and peak transvalvular pressure gradients compared with rapid-deployment aortic valve replacement. In sharp contrast, sutureless aortic valve replacement significantly reduced the amount of time needed for fixing the aortic cross-clamp and the cardiopulmonary bypass procedure.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42022343884.

Mitral Annulus Geometry and Dynamic Motion Changes in Patients With Aortic Regurgitation: A Three-Dimensional Transesophageal Echocardiographic Study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present study was to investigate the mitral annulus (MA) geometry and dynamic motion changes in patients with aortic regurgitation (AR) before and after aortic valve replacement (AVR). Moreover, the difference in the effect of the type of prosthetic aortic valve on MA was compared.

DESIGN

Prospective observational study.

SETTING

Cardiac operating room at a single hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Eighty-two patients with isolated moderate-to-severe AR who underwent AVR. Forty patients with normal valves were enrolled as controls.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The MA geometry and dynamic motion throughout the cardiac cycle were evaluated semiautomatically by three-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography. The severity of functional mitral regurgitation was intraoperatively evaluated. All patients were divided into 2 groups depending on the type of prosthetic valve (mechanical valve and bioprosthetic valve groups). Before AVR, compared with the control group without AR, the AR group demonstrated larger MA dimensions and the MA geometry was flatter. The contraction fraction of the MA area, perimeter, and height during the whole cardiac cycle were larger in the AR group (p < 0.05 for all). After AVR, most MA geometric and dynamic parameters decreased and functional mitral regurgitation also improved. In the postoperative subset analyses, the mechanical valve group showed a larger contraction fraction of the MA area and perimeter than the bioprosthetic valve group (p < 0.05 for both).

CONCLUSIONS

The MA geometry and dynamic motion changed markedly in patients with AR. These spatial and dynamic changes were restored to a certain extent after surgical correction of the aortic valve. However, the effects produced by mechanical and bioprosthetic valves on MA were different.

Comparison of Sutureless Bioprosthetic Valve With Surgical or TAVR for Severe Aortic Stenosis

Background

Clinical advantages of sutureless rapid-deployment (RD) aortic valve replacement (AVR) for severe aortic valve stenosis (AS) have not been elucidated compared with surgical (SAVR) or transcatheter (TAVR) aortic valve replacement.

Objectives

This study sought to investigate comparative effectiveness and safety of RD-AVR compared with SAVR and TAVR in a prospective cohort of patients with severe AS.

Methods

The primary outcome was a composite of death, stroke, or rehospitalization at 12 months. Propensity score matching was used to assemble a cohort of patients with similar baseline characteristics.

Results

Among 1,020 eligible patients, 107 (10.5%) underwent RD-AVR, 437 (42.8%) underwent SAVR, and 476 (46.7%) underwent TAVR. In the matched cohorts of RD-AVR and SAVR (n = 107), the incidence of primary composite outcome at 12 months was similar between the 2 groups (8.0% vs 10.8%, respectively; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.30-1.84; P = 0.52). In the matched cohorts of RD and TAVR (n = 58), the incidence of primary composite outcome at 12 months did not statistically differ between the 2 groups (9.4% vs 16.2%, respectively; HR: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.18-1.57; P = 0.25).

Conclusions

In this propensity-matched cohort of patients who underwent AVR for severe AS, we did not detect significant differences in the rates of the primary composite of death, stroke, or rehospitalization at 12 months when comparing RD-AVR with SAVR and TAVR. Because the study was underpowered, the results should be considered as hypothesis generating highlighting the need for further research. (ASAN Medical Center Aortic Valve Replacement Registry [ASAN-AVR]; NCT03298178)

3-Dimensional computed tomographic assessment predicts conduction block and paravalvular leakage after rapid-deployment aortic valve replacement

OBJECTIVES

Complications like complete atrioventricular block (CAVB) and paravalvular leakage (PVL) following rapid deployment aortic valve (AV) replacement (RDAVR) remain unresolved. Selecting an optimal size of the valve might be important to minimize the incidence of these complications. We sought to determine the impact of prosthesis size relative to the anatomic profile of the AV on the occurrence of CAVB or PVL after RDAVR.

METHODS

Preoperative computed tomographic (CT) images were evaluated in patients receiving RDAVR (INTUITY ELITE) between February 2016 and December 2019. The occurrence of CAVB requiring permanent pacemaker implantation and PVL (≥ mild) was evaluated. The relative size of implants against the cross-sectional dimensions of recipients' AV annulus and left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) were calculated.

RESULTS

Among 187 eligible patients, CAVB and PVL (≥ mild) occurred in 12 (6.4%) and 11 patients (5.9%), respectively. CAVB was associated with oversized RDAVR (RDAVR frame width minus average diameter of LVOT calculated from the cross-sectional area [ΔLVOTarea]: odds ratio, 2.05; 95% confidence interval, 1.28-3.30): this was with an area under the curve of 0.78 (P = 0.005). The projected probability of CAVB was <3% when the ΔLVOTarea was <1.3. In contrast, PVL was associated with under-sized RDAVR (RDAVR size divided by the longest diameter of AV annulus [index Annlong]: odds ratio, 0.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.51-0.79): This was with an area under curve of 0.94 (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

CT parameters of the AV annulus and LVOT are highly reliable in the prediction of CAVB or PVL after RDAVR. Our data might justify CT-based sizing of prosthesis for RDAVR.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement versus Sutureless Aortic Valve Replacement: A Single Center Retrospective Cohort Study

PURPOSE

This study sought to compare clinical outcomes between transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and sutureless aortic valve replacement (SU-AVR).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In total, 320 patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis who underwent TAVR (n=254) or SU-AVR (n=66) at Severance Cardiovascular Hospital between July 2011 and September 2019 were included for analysis. Propensity score matching and inverse probability weighted adjustment were performed to adjust for confounding baseline characteristics. Outcomes defined by the Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 in 62 patients pairs were compared.

RESULTS

Device success (79.0% vs. 79.0%, p>0.999) and 30-day mortality (4.8% vs. 0.0%, p=0.244) did not differ between the TAVR and SU-AVR groups. The TAVR group developed more frequent mild or moderate paravalvular leakage (59.7% vs. 8.1%, p<0.001), whereas SU-AVR was associated with higher rates of major or life-threatening bleeding (9.7% vs. 22.6%, p=0.040), acute kidney injury (8.1% vs. 21.0%, p=0.041), and new-onset atrial fibrillation (4.8% vs. 32.3%. p<0.001) at 30 days, along with longer stays in the intensive care unit (ICU) (1.9±1.6 days vs. 5.9±9.2 days, p=0.009) and hospital (7.1±7.9 days vs. 13.1±8.8 days, p<0.001). The TAVR group showed a trend towards a higher 1-year all-cause mortality, compared with the SU-AVR group (7.0% vs 1.7%, p=0.149). Cardiovascular mortality, however, did not differ significantly (1.6% vs 1.7%, p=0.960).

CONCLUSION

TAVR achieved a similar 1-year survival rate free from cardiovascular mortality as SU-AVR and was associated with a lower incidence of complications, except for paravalvular leakage, and shorter stays in the ICU and hospital.

Early conduction disorders after aortic valve replacement with the sutureless Perceval prosthesis

BACKGROUND

To determine the incidence of postoperative conduction disorders and need for pacemaker implantation after aortic valve replacement(AVR) with the Perceval prosthesis.

METHODS

From January 2007 to December 2017, 908 patients underwent AVR with Perceval S in 5 participating centers. Study endpoints focused on electrocardiographic changes after AVR and the incidence of new pacemaker(PM) implantation in 801 patients after exclusion of patients with previous PM(n=48) or patients undergoing tricuspid(n=28) and/or AF ablation(n=31) surgery. Logistic regression analysis was performed to determine risk factors for PM need.

RESULTS

Mean age was 79.7±5.2 years, 476(59.4%) were females. Median logistic Euroscore II was 4.1%(IQR 2.6-6.0). Isolated AVR was performed in 441(55.1%) patients. Associated procedures were CABG(n=309, 38.6%) and mitral valve surgery(n=51, 6.4%). Overall 30d-mortality was 3.9%, and 2.8% for isolated AVR. Electrocardiographic changes included a significant increase of LBBB (7.4 to 23.7%, p<0.001) and development of complete AV block, requiring PM implantation in 9.5%. Multivariable analysis revealed independent of a learning period(OR 1.91, 95%CI 1.16-3.13, p=0.011), pre-existing RBBB(OR 2.77, 95%CI 1.40-5.48, p=0.003), intra-operative prosthesis repositioning(OR 6.70, 95%CI 1.89-24.40, p=0.003) and size XL(OR 6.81, 95%CI 1.55-29.96, p=0.011) as significant predictors of PM implantation.

CONCLUSIONS

In a challenging elderly population, use of the Perceval S for AVR provides low operative mortality, but at the risk of an increased PM implantation rate. Besides to pre-existing right-bundle branch block, the significant effect of size XL, an increased valve size/BSA ratio and need for intra-operative repositioning on PM rate are underscoring the reappraisal of the annular sizing policy.

Increased utilization of bioprosthetic aortic valve technology:Trends, drivers, controversies and future directions

Introduction: Bioprosthetic valves (BPV) implanted surgically or by transcatheter valve implantation (TAVI) comprise an overwhelming majority of substitute aortic valves implanted worldwide.Areas Covered: Prominent drivers of this trend are: 1) BPV patients have generally better outcomes than those with a mechanical valve, and remain largely free of anticoagulation and its consequences; 2) BPV durability has improved over the years; and 3) the expanding use of TAVI and valve-in-valve (VIV) procedures permitting interventional management of structural valve degeneration (SVD). Nevertheless, key controversies exist: 1) optimal anticoagulation regimens for surgical and TAVI BPVs; 2) the incidence, mechanisms and mitigation strategies for SVD; 3) the use of VIV for treatment of SVD, and 4) valve selection recommendations for difficult cohorts, (e.g. patients 50-70 years, patients <50, childbearing age women). This communication reviews trends in and drivers of BPV utilization, current controversies, and future directions affecting BPV use.Expert Opinion: Long-term data are needed in several areas related to aortic BPV use, including anticoagulation/antiplatelet therapy, especially following TAVI. TAVI and especially VIV durability and optimal use warrant will benefit greatly from long-term data. Certain populations may benefit from such high-quality data on multi-year outcomes, particularly younger patients.

Next-generation tissue-engineered heart valves with repair, remodelling and regeneration capacity

Valvular heart disease is a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Surgical valve repair or replacement has been the standard of care for patients with valvular heart disease for many decades, but transcatheter heart valve therapy has revolutionized the field in the past 15 years. However, despite the tremendous technical evolution of transcatheter heart valves, to date, the clinically available heart valve prostheses for surgical and transcatheter replacement have considerable limitations. The design of next-generation tissue-engineered heart valves (TEHVs) with repair, remodelling and regenerative capacity can address these limitations, and TEHVs could become a promising therapeutic alternative for patients with valvular disease. In this Review, we present a comprehensive overview of current clinically adopted heart valve replacement options, with a focus on transcatheter prostheses. We discuss the various concepts of heart valve tissue engineering underlying the design of next-generation TEHVs, focusing on off-the-shelf technologies. We also summarize the latest preclinical and clinical evidence for the use of these TEHVs and describe the current scientific, regulatory and clinical challenges associated with the safe and broad clinical translation of this technology.

New Insights into Valve Hemodynamics

Heart valve diseases are common disorders with five million annual diagnoses being made in the United States alone. All heart valve disorders alter cardiac hemodynamic performance; therefore, treatments aim to restore normal flow. This paper reviews the state-of-the-art clinical and engineering advancements in heart valve treatments with a focus on hemodynamics. We review engineering studies and clinical literature on the experience with devices for aortic valve treatment, as well as the latest advancements in mitral valve treatments and the pulmonic and tricuspid valves on the right side of the heart. Upcoming innovations will potentially revolutionize treatment of heart valve disorders. These advancements, and more gradual enhancements in the procedural techniques and imaging modalities, could improve the quality of life of patients suffering from valvular disease who currently cannot be treated.