Outcomes of a Rapid Deployment Aortic Valve Versus Its Conventional Counterpart: A Propensity-Matched Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare outcomes after rapid-deployment aortic valve replacement (RDAVR) and conventional aortic valve replacement (AVR) from two studies. METHODS: Patients who underwent RDAVR (INTUITY valve) in the prospective, 5-year, single-arm multicenter TRITON study, or conventional AVR (Perimount Magna Ease valve) in the prospective Perimount Magna Ease postmarket study, were propensity score matched and compared for procedural, hemodynamic, safety, and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Matched RDAVR (n = 106) and conventional AVR (n = 106) patients had similar baseline characteristics (mean ± SD age, 72.8 ± 7.6 vs 72.5 ± 7.4 years; male 59.4% vs 61.3%) and procedures (concomitant procedures: 41.5% vs 50.9%). Mean ± SD aortic cross-clamp time was significantly shorter in RDAVR than AVR patients (51.8 ± 20.9 vs 73.9 ± 33.2 minutes; P < 0.001), as was mean cardiopulmonary bypass time (82.8 ± 34.2 vs 102.4 ± 41.7 minutes; P < 0.001). At 1 year, RDAVR patients showed significantly lower mean ± SD and peak aortic valve gradients (9.0 ± 3.4 and 17.0 ± 6.2 mm Hg, respectively) than conventional AVR patients (13.4 ± 5.5 and 24.2 ± 10.8 mm Hg, respectively; all P < 0.001). Patient-prosthesis mismatch was significantly less common with RDAVR than with AVR [overall: 16/66 (24.2%) vs 46/76 (60.5%); P = 0.007; severe: 2/66 (3.0%) vs 13/76 (17.1%)]. There were no significant differences between the RDAVR and AVR groups regarding 30-day safety endpoints. Survival rates in the RDAVR and conventional AVR groups were, respectively, 99.1% and 100.0% at 30 days, 97.1% and 95.1% at 1 year, and 93.3% and 94.1% at 3 years (P = nonsignificant). CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective study with matched populations, the RDAVR with the INTUITY valve system provided superior procedural and hemodynamic outcomes than a standard bioprosthesis without compromising safety.

A core set of microsatellite markers for conservation genetics studies of Korean goral (Naemorhedus caudatus) and its cross-species amplification in Caprinae species.

In order to screen microsatellites for conservation genetics studies of the species, a total of 23 microsatellite loci from Korean goral (Naemorhedus caudatus), including 15 previously developed loci and 8 new loci in this study, were tested. Eleven microsatellites were screened and subjected to cross-species amplification using a test panel of four Caprinae species, Japanese serows (Capricornis crispus), Chinese gorals (Naemorhedus goral), Northern chamois (Rupicapra rupicapra) and domestic goats (Capra hircus). In addition, all eleven microsatellites (SY3A, SY12A, SY12B, SY48, SY58, SY71, SY76, SY84, SY84B, SY112, and SY129) satisfied the criteria to be a core set of microsatellites. This core set of microsatellites and cross-species amplification of Korean goral microsatellites were found to be helpful for high-resolution studies for conservation and management of Korean goral and other endangered Caprinae species.