M. Robich, K. Ohlrich, Catherine Raymer, D. Robaczewski, J. Rabb, D. Radziszewski, A. Iribarne, S. Seshasayee, C. Ross, R. Quinn, R. Kramer
{"title":"无缝合快速展开主动脉瓣人工瓣膜的单中心、多手术经验:美国临床分析","authors":"M. Robich, K. Ohlrich, Catherine Raymer, D. Robaczewski, J. Rabb, D. Radziszewski, A. Iribarne, S. Seshasayee, C. Ross, R. Quinn, R. Kramer","doi":"10.1155/2023/4827516","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background. The Perceval S is a sutureless, bovine pericardial aortic prosthesis on a nitinol stent, which has limited data on outcomes, as well as cost, from the United States. Methods. We performed a retrospective review of Perceval S implantation at a single center between 2015 and 2018. After exclusion criteria, we compared 234 patients who underwent sutureless aortic valve (SLV) implantation with 370 patients who underwent standard sutured aortic valves (SAVR). Hospital cost data were reviewed, and risk adjustment, done by propensity score and inverse probability weighting, was used to compare outcomes. Results. Compared to those undergoing SAVR, the SLV group was older and had a higher proportion of multicomponent operations, higher preoperative white blood cell count, higher rate of previous percutaneous coronary interventions, more comorbid conditions (diabetes, renal insufficiency, and dialysis), and more three-vessel coronary disease. For isolated AVR, partial upper hemisternotomy was more frequent in SLV. The mean cardiopulmonary bypass and cross-clamp times for isolated SLV were significantly lower than SAVR. After adjustment, the cohort was balanced. Operative differences for SLV were lower cross-clamp and pump time, larger valve size, more minimally invasive approaches, and shorter operating room times. There were no differences in other postoperative complications (postoperative atrial fibrillation, stroke, renal failure, prolonged ventilation, and in-hospital mortality; \n \n p\n >\n 0.05\n \n for all). Mean and median hospital costs were higher in the SLV group, largely due to the cost of the implant. Conclusion. Sutureless tissue aortic valves can be used safely with lower cardiopulmonary bypass and clamp times than sutured prostheses and facilitate use of minimally invasive approaches. This valve may be advantageous in older, higher risk patients requiring more complex operations.","PeriodicalId":15367,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cardiac Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Single-Center, Multisurgeon Experience with a Sutureless Rapid Deployment Aortic Valve Prosthesis: A Clinical Analysis in the United States\",\"authors\":\"M. Robich, K. Ohlrich, Catherine Raymer, D. Robaczewski, J. Rabb, D. Radziszewski, A. Iribarne, S. Seshasayee, C. Ross, R. Quinn, R. Kramer\",\"doi\":\"10.1155/2023/4827516\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background. The Perceval S is a sutureless, bovine pericardial aortic prosthesis on a nitinol stent, which has limited data on outcomes, as well as cost, from the United States. Methods. We performed a retrospective review of Perceval S implantation at a single center between 2015 and 2018. After exclusion criteria, we compared 234 patients who underwent sutureless aortic valve (SLV) implantation with 370 patients who underwent standard sutured aortic valves (SAVR). Hospital cost data were reviewed, and risk adjustment, done by propensity score and inverse probability weighting, was used to compare outcomes. Results. Compared to those undergoing SAVR, the SLV group was older and had a higher proportion of multicomponent operations, higher preoperative white blood cell count, higher rate of previous percutaneous coronary interventions, more comorbid conditions (diabetes, renal insufficiency, and dialysis), and more three-vessel coronary disease. For isolated AVR, partial upper hemisternotomy was more frequent in SLV. The mean cardiopulmonary bypass and cross-clamp times for isolated SLV were significantly lower than SAVR. After adjustment, the cohort was balanced. Operative differences for SLV were lower cross-clamp and pump time, larger valve size, more minimally invasive approaches, and shorter operating room times. There were no differences in other postoperative complications (postoperative atrial fibrillation, stroke, renal failure, prolonged ventilation, and in-hospital mortality; \\n \\n p\\n >\\n 0.05\\n \\n for all). Mean and median hospital costs were higher in the SLV group, largely due to the cost of the implant. Conclusion. Sutureless tissue aortic valves can be used safely with lower cardiopulmonary bypass and clamp times than sutured prostheses and facilitate use of minimally invasive approaches. This valve may be advantageous in older, higher risk patients requiring more complex operations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":15367,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Cardiac Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Cardiac Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/4827516\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cardiac Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/4827516","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Single-Center, Multisurgeon Experience with a Sutureless Rapid Deployment Aortic Valve Prosthesis: A Clinical Analysis in the United States
Background. The Perceval S is a sutureless, bovine pericardial aortic prosthesis on a nitinol stent, which has limited data on outcomes, as well as cost, from the United States. Methods. We performed a retrospective review of Perceval S implantation at a single center between 2015 and 2018. After exclusion criteria, we compared 234 patients who underwent sutureless aortic valve (SLV) implantation with 370 patients who underwent standard sutured aortic valves (SAVR). Hospital cost data were reviewed, and risk adjustment, done by propensity score and inverse probability weighting, was used to compare outcomes. Results. Compared to those undergoing SAVR, the SLV group was older and had a higher proportion of multicomponent operations, higher preoperative white blood cell count, higher rate of previous percutaneous coronary interventions, more comorbid conditions (diabetes, renal insufficiency, and dialysis), and more three-vessel coronary disease. For isolated AVR, partial upper hemisternotomy was more frequent in SLV. The mean cardiopulmonary bypass and cross-clamp times for isolated SLV were significantly lower than SAVR. After adjustment, the cohort was balanced. Operative differences for SLV were lower cross-clamp and pump time, larger valve size, more minimally invasive approaches, and shorter operating room times. There were no differences in other postoperative complications (postoperative atrial fibrillation, stroke, renal failure, prolonged ventilation, and in-hospital mortality;
p
>
0.05
for all). Mean and median hospital costs were higher in the SLV group, largely due to the cost of the implant. Conclusion. Sutureless tissue aortic valves can be used safely with lower cardiopulmonary bypass and clamp times than sutured prostheses and facilitate use of minimally invasive approaches. This valve may be advantageous in older, higher risk patients requiring more complex operations.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Cardiac Surgery (JCS) is a peer-reviewed journal devoted to contemporary surgical treatment of cardiac disease. Renown for its detailed "how to" methods, JCS''s well-illustrated, concise technical articles, critical reviews and commentaries are highly valued by dedicated readers worldwide.
With Editor-in-Chief Harold Lazar, MD and an internationally prominent editorial board, JCS continues its 20-year history as an important professional resource. Editorial coverage includes biologic support, mechanical cardiac assist and/or replacement and surgical techniques, and features current material on topics such as OPCAB surgery, stented and stentless valves, endovascular stent placement, atrial fibrillation, transplantation, percutaneous valve repair/replacement, left ventricular restoration surgery, immunobiology, and bridges to transplant and recovery.
In addition, special sections (Images in Cardiac Surgery, Cardiac Regeneration) and historical reviews stimulate reader interest. The journal also routinely publishes proceedings of important international symposia in a timely manner.