Perceval Less Invasive Aortic Replacement Register: multicentric Spanish experience with the Perceval S bioprosthesis in moderate-high-risk aortic surgery.

OBJECTIVES: The development of new percutaneous and surgical techniques has reduced the risk associated with aortic valve replacement procedures. We present the results of a Spanish register after initiating a programme for sutureless prostheses in moderate-high-risk patients. METHODS: This prospective multicentre study was carried out from November 2013 to November 2016. Data were obtained from 448 patients in whom a Perceval S prosthesis was implanted. RESULTS: The mean age was 79.24 (standard deviation [SD] 4.1) years, and 61.2% were women. The estimated EuroSCORE I log risk was 11.15% (SD 7.6), with an observed mortality of 4.4% (20 patients). Isolated aortic valve replacement was performed on 69.26% of patients, with 64% involving ministernotomy. The incidence of neurological events was 2%, with 2 permanent cerebrovascular accidents, and 41 (9.2%) patients were implanted with a permanent endocavitary pacemaker. At discharge, 12 (2.6%) patients presented minimal periprosthetic leakage, and 4 (0.89%) patients had moderate leakage. There were 3 reinterventions during follow-up (2 endocarditis and 1 dysfunction due to periprosthetic leak progression). The mean gradient at discharge, 6 months and 1 year was 12.94 (SD 5.3) mmHg, 12.19 (SD 4.7) mmHg and 11.77 (SD 4.7) mmHg, respectively; 59.4% of the patients were octogenarians, with a survival rate of 98% at both 6 months and 1 year at discharge. There was neither valve migration nor early structural degeneration. The mean follow-up was 12 ± 3 months. The 6-month and 1-year mortality was 1.4% and 2.1%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This is a prospective multicentric study on the largest cohort of patients with sutureless valves conducted in Spain to date. It is a reproducible procedure that has enabled surgery on patients with a moderate-high risk with low morbidity and mortality, providing good haemodynamic results.

International Expert Consensus on Sutureless and Rapid Deployment Valves in Aortic Valve Replacement Using Minimally Invasive Approaches.

OBJECTIVE: To define the benefit of sutureless and rapid deployment valves in current minimally invasive approaches in isolated aortic valve replacement. METHODS: A panel of 28 international experts with expertise in both minimally invasive aortic valve replacement and rapid deployment valves was constituted. After thorough literature review, the experts rated evidence-based recommendations in a modified Delphi approach. RESULTS: No guideline could be retrieved. Thirty-three clinical trials and 9 systematic reviews could be identified for detailed text analysis to obtain a total of 24 recommendations. After rating by the experts 12, final recommendations were identified: preoperative computed tomographic scan as well as intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography are highly recommended. Suitable annular sizes are 19 to 27 mm. There is a contraindication for bicuspid valves only for type 0 and for annular abscess or destruction due to infective endocarditis. The use of sutureless and rapid deployment valves reduces extracorporeal circulation and aortic cross-clamp time and leads to less early complications as prolonged ventilation, blood transfusion, atrial fibrillation, pleural effusions, paravalvular leakages and aortic regurgitation, and renal replacement therapy, respectively. These clinical outcomes result in reduced intensive care unit and hospital stay and reduced costs. The use of sutureless and rapid deployment valves will lead to a higher adoption rate of minimally invasive approaches in aortic valve replacement. Respect should be taken to a necessary short learning curve for both sutureless and minimally invasive programs. CONCLUSIONS: Sutureless and rapid deployment aortic valve replacement together with minimally invasive approaches offers an attractive option in aortic valve placement for patients requiring biological valve replacement.

Sutureless, rapid deployment valves and stented bioprosthesis in aortic valve replacement: recommendations of an International Expert Consensus Panel.

OBJECTIVES: After a panel process, recommendations on the use of sutureless and rapid deployment valves in aortic valve replacement were given with special respect as an alternative to stented valves. METHODS: Thirty-one international experts in both sutureless, rapid deployment valves and stented bioprostheses constituted the panel. After a thorough literature review, evidence-based recommendations were rated in a three-step modified Delphi approach by the experts. RESULTS: Literature research could identify 67 clinical trials, 4 guidelines and 10 systematic reviews for detailed text analysis to obtain a total of 28 recommendations. After rating by the experts, 12 recommendations were identified and degree of consensus for each was determined. Proctoring and education are necessary for the introduction of sutureless valves on an institutional basis as well as for the individual training of surgeons. Sutureless and rapid deployment should be considered as the valve prosthesis of first choice for isolated procedures in patients with comorbidities, old age, delicate aortic wall conditions such as calcified root, porcelain aorta or prior implantation of aortic homograft and stentless valves as well as for concomitant procedures and small aortic roots to reduce cross-clamp time. Intraoperative transoesophageal echocardiography is highly recommended, and in case of right anterior thoracotomy, preoperative computer tomography is strongly recommended. Suitable annular sizes are 19-27 mm. There is a contraindication for bicuspid valves only for Type 0 and for annular abscess or destruction due to infective endocarditis. Careful but complete decalcification of the aortic root is recommended to avoid paravalvular leakage; extensive decalcification should be avoided not to create annular defects. Proximal anastomoses of concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting should be placed during a single aortic cross-clamp period or alternatively with careful side clamping. Available evidence suggests that the use of sutureless and rapid deployment valve is associated with (can translate into) reduced early complications such as prolonged ventilation, blood transfusion, atrial fibrillation, pleural effusions and renal replacement therapy, respectively, and may result in reduced intensive care unit and hospital stay in comparison with traditional valves. CONCLUSION: The international experts recommend various benefits of sutureless and rapid deployment technology, which may represent a helpful tool in aortic valve replacement for patients requiring a biological valve. However, further evidence will be needed to reaffirm the benefit of sutureless and rapid deployment valves.

Preliminary experience with the no prolapse system. A new device for ensuring the proper length of artificial chordae in mitral valve repair.

Mitral valve repair is the procedure of choice to treat mitral valve regurgitation. However, the feasibility and durability of repair are influenced strongly by the valve pathology. The classic features of degenerative mitral valve disease include leaflet prolapse and annular dilatation. Risk of repair failure is increased by isolated anterior leaflet prolapse or bileaflet prolapse. A variety of techniques have been used to treat this pathology. The most popular include partial leaflet resection, chordal shortening, chordal transfer and chordal replacement. Use of artificial chordae with expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (e-PTFE) sutures is a well-known technique for mitral valve repair and long-term data validate this approach. The primary challenges with this technique are judging the proper length of the neochordae and tying the PTFE. Several different techniques have been proposed to solve these items but none of the established are very satisfactory. I describe a preliminary experience with a new device to determine the correct length of the neo-chordae and tying the knots without sliding in ten patients with severe mitral insufficiency referred for mitral valve repair.