Sutureless Bioprostheses for Aortic Valve Replacement: An Updated Systematic Review with Long-Term Results.

Autor: Chiariello, Giovanni Alfonso, Di Mauro, Michele, Villa, Emmanuel, Koulouroudias, Marinos, Bruno, Piergiorgio, Mazza, Andrea, Pasquini, Annalisa, D'Avino, Serena, De Angelis, Gaia, Corigliano, Kiara, Marcolini, Alberta, Zancanaro, Edoardo, Saitto, Guglielmo, Meani, Paolo, Massetti, Massimo, Lorusso, Roberto
Zdroj: Journal of Clinical Medicine; Nov2024, Vol. 13 Issue 22, p6829, 12p
Abstrakt: Background: In recent years, in case of aortic valve replacement (AVR), a significant increase in the use of bioprostheses has been observed. The Perceval sutureless bioprosthesis has proven to be safe and reliable in the short and mid-term, with limited but promising long-term results. An updated systematic review with the long-term results of patients who underwent a sutureless bioprosthesis implantation with a Perceval biological valve is herewith presented. Methods: Studies published between 2015 and 2024, including the long-term outcomes—with clinical as well as echocardiographic information for up to five years—of patients who underwent a Perceval implantation for AVR were selected from the published literature. The Cochrane GRADE system was used to assess the study quality, and the risk of bias in non-randomized studies (ROBINS-I) tool was used to evaluate studies. Results: Ten studies were selected with an overall number of 5221 patients. The long-term survival ranged from 64.8 to 87.9%, freedom from structural valve degeneration (SVD) from 96.1 to 100%, freedom from significant paravalvular leak from 98.5 to 100%, freedom from prosthetic endocarditis from 90.7 to 99%, and freedom from reintervention from 94 to 100%. The long-term mortality ranged from 6.5 to 27.4%. SVD was observed in 0–4.8% patients. Significant paravalvular leak was observed in 0–3.4% patients, and infective endocarditis was observed in 0–3.4%. A bioprosthesis-related reintervention at long-term follow-up was required for 0–4.3% of patients, and 1.7–7.1% of patients required a late new pacemaker implantation. The transprosthetic mean pressure gradient ranged from 9 to 14.7 mmHg, peak pressure gradient ranged from 17.8 to 26.5 mmHg, and EOA ranged from 1.5 to 1.7 cm2. Conclusions: This systematic review shows that there is still a paucity of data about sutureless bioprostheses. Nevertheless, the clinical results from prospective studies or retrospective series are encouraging. Medium- and long-term results seem to support the increasing use of this type of prosthesis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Databáze: Complementary Index