Perceval S Sutureless Prosthesis in Aortic Valve Replacement

 BACKGROUND In 12–47% of patients, there is a need to repeat the aortic valve replacement due to various valve-related complications in the immediate and late postoperative period. The standard operation of repeated aortic valve replacement is a complex procedure and it is associated with an increased risk due to adhesions in the pericardial cavity, previously performed coronary bybass surgery, diffculties of excision of the previously implanted prosthesis, narrow fbrous aortic valve ring and aorta. In 2007, the sutureless Perceval S aortic valve bioprosthesis (Sorin Group, Italy) was introduced into clinical practice. One of the advantages of such a prosthesis is the convenience of its anatomical positioning during repeated operations and the absence of the need to fx the prosthesis with sutures. The aim of study was to summarize the experience of sutureless implantation of the aortic valve prosthesis during repeated replacement.

MATERIAL AND METHODS We report the results of treatment in 3 patients with valve-associated complications, who underwent aortic valve repeated replacement with the Perceval S sutureless prosthesis.

RESULTS There were no hospital mortality and paraprosthetic regurgitation in the repeated replacement of the aortic valve with the Perceval S sutureless prosthesis. Two patients required implantation of a permanent pacemaker due to the development of a complete atrioventricular block, which was not related to the model of the prosthesis used.

CONCLUSION The use of aortic valve prosthesis in cardiac surgery, which does not require fxation with sutures, allows non-standard decisions to be made in the surgical treatment of patients with various complications of previously performed aortic valve replacement and provides good immediate results if repeated replacement is necessary.

1. Bokeriya L.A., Gudkova R.G., Miliyevskaya E.B., et al. Cardiovascular surgery-2016: Diseases and congenital anomalies of the circulatory system. Moscow: Nauchnyy tsentr serdechno-sosudistoy khirurgii im AN Bakuleva Publ., 2017. 227 p. (In Russain).

2. Santarpino G., Pfeiffer S., Concistrè G., Fischlein T. REDO aortic valve replacement: the sutureless approach. J Heart Valve Dis. 2013; 22(5): 615–620. PMID: 24383371.

3. LaPar D.J., Yang Z., Stukenborg G.J., et al. Outcomes of reoperative aortic valve replacement after previous sternotomy. J Thoracic Cardiovasc. Surg. 2010; 139(2): 263–272. PMID: 20006357. DOI:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2009.09.006.

4. Chan V., Lam B-Kh., Rubens F.D., et al. Long-term evaluation of biological versus mechanical prosthesis use at reoperative aortic valve replacement. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2012; 144(1): 1146–151. PMID: 21962842. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2011.08.041.

5. Schnittman S.R., Adams D.H., Itagaki Sh., et al. Bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement: Revisiting prosthesis choice in patients younger than 50 years old. J Thoracic Cardiovasc Surg. 2018; 155(2): 539–547. PMID: 29110948. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2017.08.121.

6. Oxenham H., Bloomfield P., Wheatley D.J., et al. Twenty year comparison of a Bjork-Shiley mechanical heart valve with porcine bioprostheses. Heart. 2003; 89(7): 715–721. PMCID: PMC1767737.

7. Lehmann S., Leontjev S., Kempfert J., et al. Mid-term results after Epic xenograft implantation for aortic, mitral, and double valve replacement. J Heart Valve Dis. 2007; 16(6): 641–648. PMID: 18095514.

8. Brown M.L., Schaff H.V., Lahr B.D., et al. Aortic valve replacement in patients aged 50 to 70 years: improved outcome with mechanical versus biologic prostheses. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2008; 135(4): 878–884. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2007.10.065.

9. Davierwala P.M., Borger M.A., David T.E., et al. Reoperation is not an independent predictor of mortality during aortic valve surgery. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2006; 131(2): 329–335. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2005.09.022.

10. Kumar P., Athanasiou T., Ali A., et al. Redo aortic valve replacement: does a previous homograft influence the operative outcome? J Heart Valve Dis. 2004; 13(6): 904–913. PMID: 15597580.

11. Kirsch E.W., Radu N.C., Mekontso-Dessap A., et al. Aortic root replacement after previous surgical intervention on the aortic valve, aortic root, or ascending aorta. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2006; 131(3): 601–608. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2005.11.007.

12. Sokolov V.V., Parkhomenko M.V., Kovalyov A.I., Vladimirov V.V., Shiryayeva O.L., Bikbova N.M., Timerbayev V.K. Comparative Evaluation of Aortic Valve Replacement Methods in Patients Over 70 with Aortic Stenosis. Russian Sklifosovsky Journal Emergency Medical Care. 2018; 7(3): 227–233. DOI: 10.23934/2223-9022-2018-7-3-227-233. (In Russian).

13. Chandola R., Teoh K., Elhenawy A., Christakis G. Perceval Sutureless valve — are Sutureless valves here. Curr Cardiol Rev. 2015; 11(3): 220–228. PMID: 25394851.

14. Phan K., Tsai Y.-C., Niranjan N., et al. Sutureless aortic valve replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Cardiothorac Surg. 2014; 4(2): 100–111. DOI: 10.3978/j.issn.2225-319X.2014.06.01.

15. Molchanov A. N., Idov E. M., Kondrashov K. V., et al. Clinical and hemodynamic outcomes of Perceval S sutureless bioprostheses implanted through a mini-approach in the aortic position. Patologiya krovoobrashcheniya i kardiokhirurgiya. 2017; (3): 32–39. (In Russain).

16. Dedeilias P., Baikoussis N.G., Prappa E., et al. Aortic valve replacement in elderly with small aortic root and low body surface area; the Perceval S valve and its impact in effective orifice area. J Cardiothoracic Surg. 2016; 11(1): 54. PMID: 27066903. DOI: 10.1186/s13019-016-0438-7.

17. Hirose H., Gill I.S., Lytle B.W. Redo-aortic valve replacement after previous bilateral internal thoracic artery bypass grafting. Ann Thorac Surg. 2004; 78(3): 782–785. PMID: 15336991. DOI:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2004.02.035.

18. Pineda A.M., Santana O., Reyna J., et al. Outcomes of reoperative aortic valve replacement via right mini-thoracotomy versus median sternotomy. J Heart Valve Dis. 2013; 22(1): 50–55. PMID: 23610989.

19. Aymard T., Eckstein F., Englberger L., et al. The Sorin Freedom SOLO stentless aortic valve: Technique of implantation and operative results in 109 patients. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2010; 139(3): 775–777. PMID: 19818458. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2009.01.011.

20. Ferraria E., Franciosia G., Clivio S., et al. Stent valve implantation in conventional redo aortic valve surgery to prevent patient-prosthesis mismatch. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2017; 24(3): 319–323. PMID: 28040758. DOI: 10.1093/icvts/ivw397.