Sutureless Perceval Aortic Valve Versus Conventional Stented Bioprostheses: Meta-Analysis of Postoperative and Midterm Results in Isolated Aortic Valve Replacement.
J Am Heart Assoc
; 7(4)2018 02 16.
Article
in En
| MEDLINE
| ID: mdl-29453309
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND:
Aortic stenosis is the most common valvular disease and has a dismal prognosis without surgical treatment. The aim of this meta-analysis was to quantitatively assess the comparative effectiveness of the Perceval (LivaNova) valve versus conventional aortic bioprostheses. METHODS ANDRESULTS:
A total of 6 comparative studies were identified, including 639 and 760 patients who underwent, respectively, aortic valve replacement with the Perceval sutureless valve (P group) and with a conventional bioprosthesis (C group). Aortic cross-clamping and cardiopulmonary bypass duration were significantly lower in the P group. No difference in postoperative mortality was shown for the P and C groups (2.8% versus 2.7%, respectively; odds ratio [OR] 0.99 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.52-1.88]; P=0.98). Incidence of postoperative renal failure was lower in the P group compared with the C group (2.7% versus 5.5%; OR 0.45 [95% CI, 0.25-0.80]; P=0.007). Incidence of stroke (2.3% versus 1.7%; OR 1.34 [95% CI, 0.56-3.21]; P=0.51) and paravalvular leak (3.1% versus 1.6%; OR 2.52 [95% CI, 0.60-1.06]; P=0.21) was similar, whereas P group patients received fewer blood transfusions than C group patients (1.16±1.2 versus 2.13±2.2; mean difference 0.99 [95% CI, -1.22 to -0.75]; P=0.001). The incidence of pacemaker implantation was higher in the P than the C group (7.9% versus 3.1%; OR 2.45 [95% CI, 1.44-4.17]; P=0.001), whereas hemodynamic Perceval performance was better (transvalvular gradient 23.42±1.73 versus 22.8±1.86; mean difference 0.90 [95% CI, 0.62-1.18]; P=0.001), even during follow-up (10.98±5.7 versus 13.06±6.2; mean difference -2.08 [95% CI, -3.96 to -0.21]; P=0.030). We found no difference in 1-year mortality.CONCLUSIONS:
The Perceval bioprosthesis improves the postoperative course compared with conventional bioprostheses and is an option for high-risk patients.Key words
Full text:
1
Collection:
01-internacional
Database:
MEDLINE
Main subject:
Aortic Valve
/
Aortic Valve Stenosis
/
Bioprosthesis
/
Heart Valve Prosthesis
/
Stents
/
Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation
/
Sutureless Surgical Procedures
Type of study:
Etiology_studies
/
Prognostic_studies
/
Risk_factors_studies
/
Systematic_reviews
Limits:
Aged
/
Aged80
/
Female
/
Humans
/
Male
Language:
En
Journal:
J Am Heart Assoc
Year:
2018
Document type:
Article
Affiliation country: