Comparative Analysis of Basal vs. Apical Left Ventricular Aneurysms: Impact on Ejection Fraction and Cardiac Function.

Background and Objectives: Left ventricular aneurysm (LVA) is associated with a decline in cardiac function, evidenced by a lower ejection fraction (EF), due to the reduction in the proportion of functional myocardium. The left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDV), the left ventricular aneurysm volume (LVAV), and the LVAV/LVEDV ratio show a strong correlation with the EF. The aim of this study was to determine LVA characteristics post-myocardial infarction (basal vs. apical) and to evaluate the impact of aneurysm volume in diastole (LVAVd), aneurysm area in diastole (LVAAd), and their respective ratios with LVEDV and area (LVEDA) on the EF, in order to identify the most critical predictive factors for assessing and managing the negative impact of aneurysms on cardiac function. Materials and Methods: This observational study included post-infarction LVA patients at the "Dedinje" Cardiovascular Institute in Belgrade, Serbia, undergoing routine transthoracic echocardiography. Echocardiography assessed volumes (LVEDV, LVESV, LVAVd, LVAVs) and areas (LVAAd, LVAAs, LVEDA, LVESA) using the area-length method. The ratios (LVAVd/LVEDV, LVAVs/LVESV, LVAAd/LVEDA, LVAAs/LVESA) were derived from these measures. The left ventricular EF was calculated using Simpson's method. Results: Basal aneurysms showed a significantly smaller LVAVd (p = 0.016), LVAAd (p = 0.003), and LVAAs (p = 0.029) compared to apical aneurysms, indicating that basal aneurysms are smaller in size. However, there was no significant difference in the EF and overall LV volumes between the groups, although the basal aneurysm group had a slightly higher EF and end-diastolic volume, with a slightly lower end-systolic volume. Furthermore, when comparing the correlation between the EF and the LVAVd, the LVEDV, and the LVAVd/LVEDV ratio, the results indicate that the LVAVd had the greatest impact on the EF (-0.695), followed by the LVAVd/LVEDV ratio (-0.637), and the lowest correlation is between the EF and LVEDV. A similar relationship is observed when comparing the EF with the LVESV, the LVAVs, and the LVAVs/LVESV ratio. Conclusions: Basal aneurysms are significantly smaller than apical ones, yet EF and LV volumes remain similar between the groups, with the EF being slightly higher in the basal group. In cases of LVA, LVAVd shows the strongest negative correlation with the EF, indicating its significant impact on systolic function, followed by the LVAVd/LVEDV ratio, with the weakest correlation seen between the EF and LVEDV.

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.

Initial experience with the Perceval S sutureless aortic valve.

INTRODUCTION: Surgical treatment of the aortic valve represents the gold standard, and thus aortic valve replacement (AVR) is one of the most commonly performed cardiac operations. AIM: To evaluate the early outcome of aortic valve replacement with the Perceval S sutureless aortic bioprosthesis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of 24 patients (mean age: 71 ±5 years), who underwent aortic valve replacement with a Perceval S valve. Concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) was performed in 9 patients. Patients were evaluated preoperatively, at hospital discharge, and once during follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 15 of 24 patients underwent isolated sutureless aortic valve replacement (mean aortic cross-clamp time: 60 ±14 minutes; mean bypass time: 90 ±23 minutes). Coronary bypass grafting was performed in 9 patients (mean aortic cross-clamp time: 78 ±23 minutes; mean bypass time: 111 ±31 minutes). Hospital mortality was nil. Mean and peak transvalvular pressure gradients were 10 ±2 mm Hg and 21 ±3 mm Hg at follow-up, respectively. Moderate or severe aortic regurgitation did not develop in any patients during the follow-up period. No valve thrombosis, thromboembolic events, or structural valve deterioration were observed. CONCLUSIONS: In our experience with sutureless aortic valve replacement, the surgical procedure is shown to be safe. The early haemodynamic performance seems favourable. By shortening the aortic cross-clamp and bypass times we can notice advantages, especially in high-risk patients. Minimally invasive access seems to be facilitated. Larger studies are needed to confirm our data and determine the long-term durability of the Perceval S sutureless bioprosthesis.